skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My biggest complaint with reddit and hn is that there is a down-vote button. It serves no purpose the way I consume and participate in discussions. If I don't agree or vehemently disagree with something I pass over it and that's it. I've had the opportunity to downvote and even when I had a strong opinions against what's stated in a comment I never once downvoted. In fact, I've never used the downvoting link at all. Also, I find it enlightening to read opinions of people who are on the opposite end of some belief spectrum. It broadens my view and helps me better formulate what I think.

Hence, you either ban accounts for disturbing discussions repeatedly or just let everyone say whatever they think. A voting system that tries to hide comments is a bad idea.

I guess my issue is with what JBReefer calls groupthink and brigading. I personally would have called stuff-people-don't-like-to-hear.

Slashdot's systems used to work very well, but it's fallen apart due to the current occupants of their comment sections.

HN already is an echo chamber of sorts, so trying to filter that even more is wrong.
That's the Apollo 68k accelerator right? If so, that could be great, though I wonder if it'd result in too much data travelling through the A500 expansion port.
Clang emits memcpy for std::swap, which can introduce undefined behavior
Nasca Puquios and Aqueducts [pdf]
It would literally need just one frame to see and store all available information in said frame. This means that in just a few frames, it could jump around the entire map and get a complete overview of what's available. It could easily be abstracted away, meaning the AI has access to a complete view of the map from its point of view, provided by a relatively simple conventional piece of software which just now and then jumps across the entire map and processes the images. It's thus not really an interesting problem to solve in this context, just a minor annoyance.
I agree.

There's no good reason why a web browser would make its own network layer connection to support non-HTTP sessions. Session layer proxies have forever been how this is done.
Banning media is not exactly banning an ideology -- and even if the films were released, Nazism would still be banned in Germany.

The banning of ideologies is connected, more or less, to banning movements. In the 1870s, for example, the KKK was declared to be a terrorist organization and disbanded. (Though this change was not permanent.) Was their ideology banned? At least in practice it was, since any demonstration of affiliation with the KKK was essentially painting a target on oneself.

The government in practice is often corrupt; yet it often does what is in people's best interests. It contributes to public safety in many ways even as it undermines and confuses it in others -- we'll have a lot of trouble to find a government that is so clearly in either of the forms you outline. The question of whether a government should ban certain ideologies does come down, in part, to the ideologies themselves. Nazism isn't banned because it is merely "bad" but because its followers did bad things: acts of utter moral depravity. No one wants to see that organization re-emerge.
Appears to be a technical design document from 2 years ago, although I can't tell if anyone ever used it to create his/her own board (let alone use it for mass production). Shame, if I'm right.
And the paper, which that page links to:

https://www.cs.unm.edu/~dlchao/papers/p152-chao.pdf
The answer is not a command economy or giving more control to a state that has a monopoly on force.

The big issue is centralization. Technologies that facilitate decentralization can help combat the negative effects of centralization. Better technology integration into society in general is also necessary.

Look at things like Bitcoin or Ethereum, decentralized autonomous organizations, etc. We have and can continue to develop better ways to cooperatively regulate our society while avoiding concentration of power and allowing systems to evolve freely.

Money is very powerful but it's a type of technology that needs to be updated.
The demo is broken :/
> Or about the 34 to 49 million deaths at Stalin's hands? Ban Communism?

No, but the Russians did go through their own cultural reaction to Stalin's tyranny; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De-Stalinization.

Beyond that, by naming the entity doing the banning as "we" you're eliding a key point, which is that in this case it's the people who were responsible for the terrible thing doing the banning, not some outside entity.

Germans decided, through a democratically elected government, to pursue this course. It wasn't forced on them by anybody. It has remained in law over many decades, across numerous changes of government and the reunification of East and West Germany, so it's hard to argue that it's somehow unrepresentative of the general desire of the German people. That's a very different thing than it would be if "we" (which on HN will mean primarily Westerners, mostly Americans) were to, say, tell the Islamic world which parts of Islam they should keep and which they should discard.
Turning Ocean Waves into Electricity
Funny that they say america (but wrap it in the language of economic determinism) because flying is cheaper and more pleasant everywhere else.
It feels like this is mostly a disagreement over language. We all agree that determinism and "predictability" are independent questions. You've equated "free will" with non-determinism and therefore see predictability to be orthogonal, whereas Aaronson equates "free will" with non-predictability, making determinism orthogonal though I imagine he'd argue for it on other grounds. It's not clear that there's an actual disagreement over anything except which words to use for which concepts.

FWIW, I think Scott has read more of the philosophical literature on free will than probably anyone else in the world with a comparable level of quantum-physical expertise. If he's too confused to be allowed to discuss these issues, then what is the path by which philosophers expect to stay relevant and up-to-date with new knowledge? A field whose currency of legitimacy is "you must have devoted your life to understanding every detail of dispute in the existing literature" is not a living field that hopes to learn from outsiders and grow with new scientific inquiry. I think the best philosophers recognize this, and are willing to engage more broadly.
Musicians sometimes talk about freeing themselves from their instruments.
Is the card view on your website the actual assignment for the student? What if students do not have access to a computer.
Finding Love Again, This Time with a Man
I think that the point of the downvote button on HN is to reduce the visibility of comments that don't contribute to the discourse, not to dismiss dissenting opinions.

This is helped by the fact that it's used sparingly and is only available to people with a certain karma threshold (an imperfect metric, but one that's worked reasonably well so far)
It does leak via WebRTC unless you install a 3rd party plugin and configure it a specific way.
> So the real question in the article boils down to a moral dilema: Should a government ban ideologies which it considers could lead to detrimental outcomes for society, when said ideologies do not directly cause physical damage on anyone or thing? I think the critical part of that question is how you define goverment.

We need to recognize that social media is now a form of government. Every day Twitter, Facebook, and other arms of social make moderation decisions not based on imminent harm but ideology. They censor based on what is liable to cause offense within their worldview and what will reduce the amount of blowback. This moderation is largely silent. Social media is neither transparent nor a democracy.
JSONB type performance in PostgreSQL 9.4
I think people react differently to man made disasters compared to how they react to natural disasters, people seem to band together when facing a natural disaster.
GitHub PRs only show you changes (unless you dig deeper) and not the grand scheme of things.

IMHO this is inadequate for code reviews...
Miss Hathaway had as a lover
That infamous son of a glover
Whatever Will said
In their second-best bed
She edited cover to cover

A sort of rambling article from NYT whose most notable feature was a beautiful sidenote style and the lack of a scrollbar. For those interested in Shakespeare and new media, here's a thing I've been working on http://gavinpc.com/project_willshake.pdf
Several reasons, including effects of scale on both sides (someone popular retweets a tweet of yours they don't like, and all their followers challenge you at the same time, or you are popular enough to get a constant stream of negativity), lack of moderation (no filter for low-effort flames from people who don't actually want a discussion), difficulty of having a debate in 140-character bites (the format in fact encourages aforementioned low-effort posts), etc.

But the main one is the blurred line between public and private. Posting here definitely comes with the expectation of a public debate and so people who aren't in the mood for it will not post. But on Twitter everyone is encouraged to publicly post everything from random status updates to highly personal matters to idle chatter that is meant to only circulate among friends (and may not be fully thought through). You can avoid this by setting your account to private, and many do, but this blocks the spontaneous spread of posts through the social graph by means of retweets and replies, which is IMO the best thing about Twitter. There is no granularity, either: only one account toggle between all your tweets being visible to the entire world or to just your direct followers. (Including replies, which makes private accounts an imperfect shield: if you have a private account but chat with a public account, people can still see their replies to you and infer the content of the conversation, plus your username.) Also, whereas you can easily leave HN or Reddit or some forum altogether if you get fed up with it, leaving Twitter may be tantamount to losing contact with friends; you can make your account private but it's not the same sort of mental break.
I’ve read the Murphy translation and according to Wikipedia it was the only translation approved by Nazi Germany. So if it was good for them I guess should be good for us. Although there have been controversial translations where the translator deliberately left-out some of the more anti-Semitic statements (Alan Cranston translation). But even that would make the book more bearable, not worsen it.

I think the book is badly written because the guy was so full of anger. If you take it at face value the book is a road-map of all the monstrosities that happened once the Nazi party took the power. Every atrocity that took place, from the Holocaust to invading half of Europe and especially the severity of their attacks against Russia is more or less mentioned in the book.

For me the $64.000 question is why leaders of the era weren't alarmed from the writings. Haven't they read the book? They didn't take it at face value? The book was written 15 years before the war erupted. They'd surely have time to prevent it. And then nothing happened.
Okay honestly am I the only one who reads "in front of a hundred million people" and thinks it actually means he was in front of a hundred million people? I don't see it as an ambiguity, it's simply a wrong statement. I'm okay with people being uninterested in (and even downvoting) a correction, but I'm baffled that anyone could read the sentence as anything other than incorrect. I mean, they even describe the weather of the event as if to make it sound even more impressive that all these people showed up!
This raises some really good points! Though I think there is something to be said for a language that is so easy for newcomers to learn and see results.
This is like asking what basketball would be like if you weren't required to dribble.

Not really. The "physical" aspect of Starcraft is an information input/output feat. It's still arguably the same abstract game. Arguably, it's no longer a sport however. (And maybe it wouldn't be a "game" in the sense that basketball and football are "games" for people.)
The video just shows that the AI can perfect attack mechanics - it's still a simple AI. If deepmind was thrown at the game, it could learn to deceive/cheese/micro/drop and really do some serious damage.
Conversational Slack Bots 101
You could as easily say that snails' brains are better than human brains because some humans try to save snails. It doesn't mean anything about the snails or elephants, it just means the human brains don't all agree on this one topic.
What to look for in a non-tech cofounder (AKA what to do before finding a dev)
Ah, that makes sense. Still, is 2m rps within the realm of possibility for BEAM with a high-end server grade processor and heavy use of actors/concurrency?
Yeah I'm using both Ghostery and uBlock Origin and can totally read the article. :P
Without evidence beyond 'I don't like this person's views', which is just about all of them, I think they're reliably flagworthy.
Weird. This explains a lot of my abilities much better than hightened IQ or something like that. The test, which basically asks you multiple versions of "how clear can you picture X", told me I'm in the top 20% of people with Hyperphantasia, although I might misjudge my experience greatly.

Being able to quickly and accurately create mental models is essential to most of my workflows.

Now I really regret not having learned drawing.
No less than three popups appeared up as soon as I scrolled. Insta-close.
I think you need to have a better understanding of how evolution works. It's not the Victorian model where the human is more evolved much less more perfect than any other animal. In fact animals that reproduce faster have more opportunity for evolutionary impact -- the cockroach is far "more evolved" than a human. Consider it a big parallel hill-climbing problem with each animal being a local optimum for its environment.

A human, including its brain, is the best general-purpose device for transmitting genes, but the human brain lacks structures that would be useful to an elephant, and vice versa. Brains are not general-purpose devices.

Consider my dog: the surface area of his nose is probably about the size of a football field and I would bet his olfactory cortex is about the size of his visual cortex (in some breeds, it's probably even larger). Of course our visual system is more dominant than our olfactory system. So that's a simple example...would you really call one of them "inferior" to the other?

[Edit: fixed the amusing typo "hill-sliming" -- we are not snails!]
I just created a page where people who are interested can enter their email addresses and be notified when we launch. So go here if you're interested: http://greenrobot-adserver.launchrock.com/
If you consider Reddit as a whole, with millions of users, I don't think there's any behavioral change you can institute that will lead to high quality, informed discourse. High quality discussions take hard work, not just in the discussion process, but in all the things that come before it. Also, the information gathered by hard work is often gated.

If you are looking for high-signal discussion, then most people in or out of Reddit don't have anything good to say on most subjects. Reddit is the wrong place to look for that kind of talk. Reddit is the right place to listen for community temperature about a narrow range of subjects which communities would be good for, such as user reviews or product discovery.

Groupthink is also not the main problem. How are you supposed to have your own individual opinion on a wide range of phenomena -- unless, of course, you make yourself informed via hard work and gated access? So these people cannot be expected to have their own opinion.

If you want elite opinion, then join an institution with institutional access to elite literature, and join an academic or professional community.

Reddit is fine as it is. It's not supposed to be an elite source of information on a variety of phenomena. It's a place for humor and community discussion. I actually dislike the segment of Reddit users asking for "citations" because unless you have institutional access, then I think that this call for citations is a dishonest way of shutting down conversations.
And what would be the channel for that feedback? Surely any such system would risk detection of the user, particularly for a non-technical user who may make a mistake in the (needed) security/privacy software/access needed for such a back channel?

As for a more complex data transmission scheme, do all satellite receivers support it?
I am wondering.. how about logging? I don't see anything about logging.. VPN is useless if the VPN service provider hands out all logs to anyone who ask for it.. anonymity goes bye-bye
I guess might makes right, eh? "Nature red in tooth and claw." Hmm.
You're correct. Spray is being deprecated for akka-http and is really "spray 2.0."
I wouldn’t equate free will with physicalism. It’s possible that physicalism might entail the absence of free will (I don’t claim to know the answer to this question), but it’s pretty clear that the entailment doesn’t go in the other direction.

I’m a bit frustrated here, because physicists often seem to retreat to this position that it’s all just a question of terminology once people start pushing back against their philosophical claims. If Aaronson actually is using terms in such a weird way as you suggest, then I just have no idea what he is on about. We already have a perfectly fine word that means unpredictable; there’s no need to repurpose “free”.

I admit that I have no way of knowing what he has or hasn’t read, and my comment on that was snarky. But he doesn’t refer to any philosophical work in the interview, and I couldn’t find much published work by him that really engages with the current literature.
The one that surprised me the most was the inability to replay music in your head. Probably because I do that a lot.

Here's a series of things you could try.

- Sing "Twinkle Twinkle Little Star" out loud.

- Do it again silently -- don't vocalize -- but keep moving your mouth, lips and tongue. If you're like me, you'll also still feel your throat and vocal chords moving.

- Do it again silently, without moving your lips, but still move your tongue and vocal chords.

- Do it again silently, but keep your tongue still, just move your vocal chords silently.

- Do it again, entirely silently, in your head.

I'd be interested to learn which steps are hard for you. When I'm singing a song "in my head" I'm actually doing any one of the latter three actions.

Relatedly, when I'm talking to myself in my head -- which I do often, usually while reliving an old conversation or anticipating a new one -- I often do the throat and tongue motions. Occasionally I even do the mouth motions, which is a good way to get people to look at you strangely :)
It's a huge difference between clicking on a random facebook.com.totallynotphishing.com link, and being on the legitimate facebook.com and having that tab automatically go to a phishing site while you're not looking.
SPOILER ALERT: "But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother." - 1984
Haunting last line. All struggle is futile; acceptance is inevitable. So yeah, pretty bleak, but favorite book nonetheless.
I also love Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse 5, which while not classically dystopian, still manages to elicit dystopian stoic despair against the backdrop of a seemingly normal world (our very own time and age). It automatically coaxs readers to draw parallels..maybe dystopia is not something imagined. Maybe it's more familiar than we think.
Lastly, Robert A. Heinlein needs to be mentioned at least once in this thread; Farnham's Freehold and a Stranger in a Strange Land.
It's not a tip, it's a bounty. And it only applies to taxi drivers, AFAIK. Ridesharing drivers are on the same surge pricing style system that uber uses.
Repl.it – Interactive programming environment and API
I don't know how reliably to test WebRCT thus can't comment on that particular case. For http/https DNS queries are not leaked.
All the special pages of Hacker News
>the awful behaviour of many editors / admins

Do you have any recent examples of this?
The test seems nearly useless. What's the difference between "moderately clear" and "reasonably clear"? Seems like a test subject would need to be prepared quite thoroughly with image and video examples to define the available options.
This is why I every time I install something that uses NPM, I create a dedicated user account for it.

Although even if NPM scripts only have access to files they need to access, the damage is bad enough (e.g. if some malicious dependency of a dependency of a dependency checks if it can find a DOM and if so siphon off a copy of every password field to the attacker, every user of your website has just been compromised even if your server's /usr/bin directory is safe).
تحميل برنامج نمبر بوك 2016 مجاناً لجميع أنواع الهواتف Number Book
Infocom's All-Time Sales Numbers Revealed (2008)
Part 2 is "Designing the Conversational UI" http://alistapart.com/article/designing-the-conversational-u...
I used to work with Boost.Python, until I discovered Cython, which works like a charm for me. What are the reasons to use Pybind11 over Cython?
Yeah, I see what you're saying. I wonder what would help? An entirely new name? It's been on my mind quite a bit, thinking about what can simultaneously convey community, prototyping, making, and growing. It's difficult.
I took the test and apparently I fall into the lowest five percent for richness of mental imagery.

I recall being frustrated by exhortations to "close [my] eyes and imagine" things as a child, as if I was being asked to do something evidently impossible.

And I always assumed that the counting sheep thing was mostly about the counting and that nobody could actually see sheep when they did it. Do people really see sheep?

Notwithstanding my apparently poorly functioning mind's eye, I've never had any problem with spatial reasoning, and have scored +2sd in tests with a spatial ability component. I find myself able to "feel" the forms in a way that seems to have nothing to do with vision.

Does anybody else recognize this experience?
Not really questions, but two facts I think you should know:

I read your inability to use Morgan Freeman's voice in Morgan Freeman's voice.

When you mentioned you were unable to hear the Star Wars theme my first reaction was how badly it clashed with the song in my mind's ear already.

I have a much stronger mind's ear than average. The loss of my mind's eye I would not notice much; sure it would make fiction less fun and dreams less vivid, but eh. But losing my mind's ear would be like going deaf. I have what amounts to a built-in iPod that can call up any sound I've ever heard, and many more sounds that I haven't. Going without a mind's eye would be a curiosity to me, but losing the ear would be like losing an arm.
Absolutely, sadly. But it nudged me into trying to find a real test, so in that sense it served its purpose fully.
Yeah, I get that. I normally use they/them/their. But then I'm stuck in plural. That does generally flow better, but sometimes... Anyway, I used to like s/he, but there's nothing elegant for him/her and his/hers.

Edit: Oops, this was in the wrong subthread, so now I have maybe a duplicate. Damn.
(author here) Actually I had that wrong. data.table uses its own notation at the command line and switches behavior to imitate data frames in other contexts (such as library) code. I've apologized to the team and retracted the article.
Reminded me of George Carlin. Despite the glaringly flippant attitude, there is an argument to be made there.