skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That's okay, when autonomous cars are mature, most people who ride in them won't own them. They'll use a device to signal a ride service which will send the car.

And driving a manual car will be an expensive luxury, comparatively, because once autonomous cars are mature (which includes being significantly safer to operate), the total cost of riding an autonomous car vs. the total cost (including insurance) of driving will heavily favor the former.
That description, and your example, are in no way "left-wing."
The Development Story Behind the Loudest Speaker on the Market
My own experience has been that engaged patients get the best outcomes and that healthcare is so complex that only the patient can really control what is going on. This is no different from my clients in technology consulting - only the truly engaged clients get what they want.
Closed source? Decompile the fker.
The real reason I shop on Amazon? Every other website spams those damn surveys when all I want to do is browse products.
What part of what I said are you disagreeing with? EDIT: ...or replying to?
Best Web Publishing Platforms and Tools Small Business Owners Can Use
Because discussion was not substantive enough.
Software Engineering is more about methodically solving software problems than it is about which problems are being solved. A web developer who writes rigorous formal tests for a new page is engineering just as hard as an embedded developer writing rigorous acceptance tests for a board-support package. The engineering comes from the rigor and the fact that there is a controlled process for how software features get implemented.
No because tech havent been cheap enough now it is while wages are potentially going up. You are basically arguing against the numbers here.
>Or 1000 years from now terrorists dirty-bomb everyone.

...Well, on a more optimistic note, a dirty-bombs, while they may destroy property values and cause cleanup issues, don't really kill any more than a conventional/kinetic bomb. I think they may be one of the best-case scenarios when it comes to a terrorist strike, since the causalities will be low, but there will be a lot of "frenzy" about the invisible radiation. (I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, or if there are silent aerosolized short-half-life "bombs" in existence that are "detonated" secretly inside of buildings so that people are accumulating long term exposures unknowingly).

Also, I wouldn't be surprised if room-ish temperature superconductors appear much sooner than 1,000 years from now. And it will definitively be interesting to see how high of energy densities SMES (Superconducting Magnetic Energy Storage) will get to in the next 20 years with existing cryogenic superconductors.

http://snf.ieeecsc.org/abstracts/stp443-high-field-hts-smes-...
Sorry if this is a little bit off topic
This is a startup with employees that is making a non-commercial open source database system. How will they make a financial return on such a product?
Not disagreeing with that, just that the more general comment I was responding to was an overgeneralization.
For the purposes of proving that a document exists no, you really couldn't go back in time, if this were to happen it would be a monumental time for bitcoin, and the old blockchain would be well known & referenced.

So for the purposes of proving that you wrote that document it really doesn't matter if that were to happen.
Yeah, and the world would be better off without that, but it's incredibly hard to detect.

My point however, is that it is already factored into the price. When a TV station says this show has 10 million viewers, the advertisers understand that it's actually only 5 million who are going to be watching their ad, because of channel flipping, fast-forwarding, cups of tea, etc. It is already an understood factor in the pricing. Whereas online, they don't appear to want to make the same concession towards bots/iframes and so on.

You could argue, particularly for free-to-air TV channels, that anyone not watching the ads is breaking the "social contract" and defrauding the station. That's the exact same argument that Wired makes when they block adblocking readers.

There's always a percentage of your ad buy that will go completely unseen offline. It's no different online.
>The evidence supporting this hypothesis was nonexistent

The rational evidence was nonexistent. I don't think this theory is necessarily built on the idea that humans evaluate evidence rationally.
He meant "reddit"
Handling of medicines has check-lists; surgery is moving that way too. Diagnosis is complex but also amenable to check-lists.
Hybrid logical and physical clocks.
http://muratbuffalo.blogspot.com/2014/07/hybrid-logical-cloc...
Thanks for the feedback. We do not have any immediate plans to change the call limit for the preview offering. We've seen from our data that 1K calls / month are sufficient for most developers who want to get started using the APIs. We we will certainly consider revising this in the future if there's strong demand. I encourage you to file this as a request here: https://cognitive.uservoice.com. We review user ideas and feedback there on a regular basis to improve our services. Thanks again!
You should probably read 18 USC 1001 [1]. Your example doesn't work for several reasons.

* The statement is about your belief, not the facts. If you actually believed that, it's not a false statement.

* Even if the statement is a statement of fact and not belief (e.g. "The closing stock price for GOOG was 500 yesterday."), the statement has to be materially false. 500 vs 505? Close enough.

* Even if the statement is materially false or fraudulent, (e.g. the stock price was really 50,000), the falsehood has to be given "knowingly and willfully."

[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001
DSVM 4/5 proposal[1], where it lists "Panic Attacks"/"Panic Disorder".

A person is not healthy if they're responding to an event by having panic attacks.

Before we go any further, do you believe a person can have an unhealthy thought, and if so, do you believe part of having unhealthy thoughts is drawing conclusions based on little/no evidence?

[1] http://www.dsm5.org/Research/Documents/Craske_PD%20Review.pd...
There is the actual complexity, and then there is the accidental complexity lamented by the poster to whom you responded to. I would claim both are a thing. Especially in projects where the true complexity is not that great and the theoretical basis of the solution is not that well documented people have a tendency to create these onion layered monstrosities (the mudball effect).

If we look just traditional CRUD-kin (i.e. database, view, domain logic) programs these seem to be the most in danger of becoming a mudballs. Which is really strange, given that they are the oldest types of programs out there and closely mimic the second use computers came used for (accounting) just after military applications.
It seems that "UI builder" words totally disqualify any tool which was named so.
No, don't do this, ever. Never think you are going to outsmart a professional doing his/her job - be it feds or police, you are going to lose. Imagine this happening in your line of work, it'd be absurd thing to happen, right?

In general, don't take health or legal advice from HN. There are other places for that, and there is money to spent well.
Blame HN's short title limits, or an insufficiently creative submitter - the Reddit title actually explains who they are.
Is it really so dismal? Let's run some numbers:

The accident rate is around 74 per 100 million miles (and fatalities is 1.13).

It's unclear exactly how to turn that into a percentage, but no matter how you do it it's quite high.

Say an accident takes 5 minutes, and people drive 30 miles/hour. Then that works out to 99.999% for humans. If you use the numbers for fatalities then it's 99.99999%.

So the human track record for fatalities is a failure rate of 0.00001% - driverless cars are going to have a VERY hard time beating that.

Would you like to calculate what that works out to for the reliability of each individual computer, or order to have such good results in aggregate?
Visible shockwave of an exploding star
It's far more likely that for many people it will just mean working on your commute to work. Personally I would rather be driving.
You're not the "they" my comment was referring to.
Is there large environmental impact from mining steel ores, like there is from say fracking?
People do not do that, but at least it is a model that one can improve. For example, as other commenters indicate, one can argument that occurrences within threads will be correlated (that will happen in discussions about World War Two, for example) but others indicated that "Godwin's law" occurrences may follow the model better.

In contrast, the OP just presented a bare number, implying that it was high, but without any evidence for that claim.

And yes, there's lots of room for improvement. The model is very simple, the guesses at the Reddit thread sizes are 100% guesses (how long is the average comment? What's the distribution of thread lengths? Etc), I did some serious rounding here and there, trusted Google to do the math right (it is not that hard, but IEEE may be insufficient to get results that are somewhat correct, and I don't know what Google does), etc.

As to your "I never wrote nasi goreng in 500,000 words" argument: let's take my simple/flawed model. It predicts

(1-1/125000)^500000 ~= 0.018

as the probability that 500,000 words do not contain "taboo". So, that simple/rough/flawed model predicts that, out of 1000 people writing 500,000 words, 18 wouldn't mention "Voldemort". You could easily be one of them. It's about as likely as somebody flipping 6 heads in a row. So, I don't think that single data point invalidates the model (no, I haven't done the proper statistics)
Being questioned by the FBI is not analogous to being shot in the head.
I think you're using a definition of 'evidence' that is too narrow or perhaps too logical, although I agree with pretty much everything you're saying.

I think that the statistical theory is possible but certainly couldn't be objective (one big reason being the cognitive biases you mentioned). Meaning a person will do the necessary mental gymnastics to assign the necessary value to the variable 'evidence' that their brain uses.

In your example, I think some combination of religious belief, regret avoidance, and herd thinking all added up to equal the requisite 'evidence' needed to express confidence in the cattle killing hypothesis.
Nope, that's not what I said. What I said was people should have the right to speak among themselves in a space that doesn't include people who are being aggressive (aka being a jerk). It doesn't matter if it's a minority group's safe space or your friend's mancave. You got a right not to associate with people who are either inherently antisocial or easily agitated by the fact that you exist (like LGBT people). It has nothing to do with "subjective truth" or any other such nonsense. It has to do with the fact that people's rights of association should be fundamentally respected. If you think this is too much to ask then I suggest you move to another country (yes I'm going to use the love it or leave it meme) where the freedom of association is limited and/or prohibited because we Americans love to control how we associate and with whom we associate. And as for 'retreating', too bad if you demand everyone to live on your terms but until you PAY for everyone's time in kind then you have no say in what people can and will do for themselves.
Article refuting the authoritarian correlation:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/03/0...

Trump's foreign policy speech:
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-...
"I will not hesitate to deploy military force when there is no alternative. But if America fights, it must fight to win. I will never send our finest into battle unless necessary – and will only do so if we have a plan for victory ... Our friends and enemies must know that if I draw a line in the sand, I will enforce it. However, unlike other candidates for the presidency, war and aggression will not be my first instinct. You cannot have a foreign policy without diplomacy. A superpower understands that caution and restraint are signs of strength ... I was totally against the War in Iraq ... The world must know that we do not go abroad in search of enemies, that we are always happy when old enemies become friends, and when old friends become allies."
Trump and Sanders are the most isolationist, and least "war mongering" candidates.

What about mass deportion? Hitler promised to deport the Jews, then killed them when nobody else wanted to take them.
Trump promises to deport about 11 million people from the USA. How do you think that will work in practice?

Not even sure how to respond to this. No matter what, the illegal immigrants won't be deported, because they have the American right to due process, and 12 million court cases will take a while to get through. If you think Trump will systematically execute them, please explain how you envisage that happening. Illegal immigration currently costs American taxpayers between 88 and 100 billion dollars per year and many people are upset about that. Those people are not Nazis.

Finally, Hitler was a socialist who campaigned for universal health care and unemployment insurance, increased education spending, the plunder of a traditionally wealthy class of society, and economic protectionism.

If that reminds you of anyone, please consider that drawing parallels to Nazi Germany is not always meaningful or conclusive.
> Doctors already spend tons of money on private malpractice insurance

In Ontario Canada, the government reimburses most of their malpractice insurance fees. As a result, they're currently paying 1986 rates:

http://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/pro/programs/ohip/mlp/announc...
> For example, the time that the prophecy of a teenage girl convinced a tribe of people in present-day South Africa to kill 300,000 - 400,000 of their own cattle, leading to the starvation and death of 20,000 - 40,000 people. How does a brain built on statistics decide that this is the most rational course of action?

That's actually a really good example of statistics deciding a course of action.

Ask yourself this? Why did they believe it? It's most likely that group of people were repeatedly told stories that belongs to a larger framework of belief. What you might not understand is good literature has a tendency to fire parts of the brain related to sight, sound and touch in an fMRI. For so many people, a good story creates a parallel quasi-reality, and I wouldn't be surprised their brain is basically chalking up those stories as real experiences.

I was just listening to a story on This American Life about some kids whose prom was interrupted by a tornado. What shocked me was how many of these kids created internal narratives that they somehow caused the storm, or the storm was manifested as a personal lesson for them. If you think about the garbage plot lines and religious upbringing people absorb, this sort of narcissistic outlook makes a tremendous amount of sense.

I'll add this one point. Modern public relations and politics feeds on the principle that you can manufacture reality by constantly bombarding people with the same shallow message. It doesn't matter what you say as much as how loud and frequent you're saying it.
I am sorry you have panic attacks, but having panic attacks is not a healthy response to stress.

Furthermore, this is not "constant harassment", or anywhere near the level of what the FBI did to Aaron Swartz. In addition, Aaron Swartz was absolutely not a healthy human being.
And it is a beautiful name. Too bad the name got marked with a bad reference pretty much forever now.

I remember elementary OS wanting to name their 0.3 version Isis. Unfortunately, they had to change it because that was the time when ISIS was all over the news. All of their releases so far got named after ancient god: Jupiter, Luna, Isis (that got renamed to Freya) and the next edition is going to be named Loki.

I got really sad when they announced the change of the name because elementary OS is my primary operating system and I really liked the name Isis before all of this happened.
The situation caused her anxiety, yes, but resolving it was still on the onus of the FBI, by way of talking to her lawyer.
I don't want a first generation autonomous car...but around generation three I'll probably all in.

* First Generation: expensive, mostly working, in very few cars

* Second Generation: bug fixes, slightly less expensive, in more cars

* Third Generation: an add-on option for the vast majority of cars, work 99.9% of the time.

* Forth Generation: politicians stop complaining about all the people having sex in cars.
1000 Angels Launches Startup Return Calculator
Does this work with uvloop?
hm, here the story is clear, as presented by the self declared "harassment victim": the FBI politely asked for a meeting (without making a time consuming investigation before that), several time, but still politely, and the "target" never was interested, had some anxiety attacks, and eventually made a paranoid blog post.

I would kindly advise some rest.
This isn't about outsmarting anyone.
... this would not be it.
Yup. It's impossible to be overly paranoid about any government. Too bad the people who didn't realize this when it mattered are no longer with us because they're imprisoned, dead, or missing. Maybe growing up in the US where such occurrences are rare only because of the humongous population but still happen with regularity makes people soft or stupid or both. Seems to me like parents who fail to teach their children this are doing them a disservice.
The Angry Birds Movie may turn Rovio from a games company into a film studio
Wouldn't this lead to a lot of mobile-first developers as well, though?
> Google is by far the most serious about fraud prevention.

I agree - they've had 'Verification' in DFA > DCM > DDM and the associated tools and reports keep getting better. And if you have ReportBuilder skills, you can really ID and find discrepant/fraudulent data.
you both work at the same company and you didn't know the answer?
The relationship between the military and piloting actually may explain why standard procedures, checklists, and Crew Resource Management were more natural than in medicine, despite both being hierarchical and conservative.

I mean, the military is itself a hierarchical and conservative organization in which standard procedures, checklists, etc. are not exactly out-of-norm.
Average US life expectancy: 79

Average Cuban life expectancy: 78

High priced and highly available medical care doesn't always buy the outcomes one would expect.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expe...
The stories he describes with the Google algorithm impacting his traffic (and subsequently, bottom line) is pretty scary.

A rephrased quote from Matt Cutts on an algorithm change cutting MetaFilter's traffic:

"Oh yeah, it never reversed. It should have. You were accidentally put in the bad pile."
The FBI only has to do that if they really care about resolving it. If the FBI doesn't care too much about resolving it (and obviously they don't care enough to actually talk to her lawyer about it), then it'll just stay unresolved and continue to cause anxiety to the woman involved.
Thanks! Found it: http://cs61.seas.harvard.edu/wiki/2015/Shell

This looks pretty comprehensive for an undergrad project actually... they have a grammar and everything, with pipes and redirects, which are definitely the most Unix-y concepts. And they talk about interrupts, although no user-defined signal handlers or anything.

FWIW I ported the POSIX shell grammar to ANTLR, though I'm writing it in C++ (and prototyping the architecture in Python). ANTLR is actually incapable of expressing the lexer AFAICT...

http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/V3...
[It's embarrassing to the gas car guys that Tesla's family sedan has a better 0-60 time than everything except a few supercars.]

I think the term "embarrassing" may be a little excessive here since you are singling out only a single aspect of a car's performance (0-60 time in this case).

Sure, the Tesla beats many (family) cars of a similar price range at short-burst/short-term acceleration, but it falls really short when you need that kind of power over longer periods of time [1], such as around an actual race track with turns. For example, a GTR is known to be a few 10th's slower in terms of 0-60 times, but would destroy any Tesla in nearly all other forms of racing. The GTR is also a 4 seater Nissan, which can arguably be considered just as practical as an electric car of today.

When you compare overall performance to other sport oriented family cars (such as the M3 or M4), the Tesla isn't embarassing anyone.

That being said, I realize the Tesla isn't a purpose built track car, and for what it is, it's one hell of a performer, but I constantly see people bringing up the 0-60 time, saying how it destroys so many gas cars, but it's really more complicated than that.

EDIT: Just to add (in reference to your "you have to get into electric cars" comment), a CTS-V with under $10,000 of modifications will beat the Tesla P90D in a drag race, and still be ~$10,000 cheaper all said and done. I don't think it's possible to add performance modifications to the Tesla at all, so this is another area where gas cars have the advantage.

[1] http://insideevs.com/expected-tesla-model-s-fails-lap-nurbur...
The moment that a weapon crosses the threshold of a building that was, moments before, weapon free, the odds of a pet dog, or a person, getting shot go from 0 to non-zero.

Personally, cops make me nervous. Whenever I'm on the subway and a pair of cops end up in the same car I'm in, my odds of catching a stray bullet go up. Before the cops got on the train there were (very likely) 0 guns in the car with me, after they got on, there are (at least) 2.

You can't get shot if there aren't any guns within range. Call it irrational, but the only place where I can be reasonably comfortable with guns is at a well managed shooting range.
It doesn't this year, but they say it will every 10 years.
My point is that it DOES. My single statement assertion was making that implicit assertion...
Bitcoin expert: It was a mistake to blog about 'creator'
Being told "the FBI has decided to talk to you without a lawyer present" has a small but entirely real chance of resulting in personal or professional harm.

Also, I don't know where you got "in the head" from.
Obviously, whenever someone responds to you, they're ALWAYS against you. Because people never agree with you. Never ever ever in the history of communication.
It's common in the industry to build an open source product and then do paid support, hosting, etc with it.

Joyent/Node
Sonatype Nexus
Modules and Monoliths
Perhaps it would be more accurate to say "humans have an innate means of determining confidence in a particular hypothesis based on perceived evidence".

From an objective standpoint, evidence is either black or white. But for our brains, beliefs and biases may be given equal weight with objective truth. Whether or not those beliefs are rooted in truth is a question ultimately controlled by each person's worldview and their understanding of scientific reasoning. The underlying algorithms may still be based on statistics, albeit statistics with unreliable data.

Or, in the example provided, perhaps the tribe's statistical models were warped enough by cultural/religious/conventional wisdom (unreliable data) that they really did express a high level of confidence in an otherwise outlandish idea - a confidence based on statistically sound evaluation, only fed with bad data.
Power Management Heats Up
Oh good, so all you have to do is be a prodigy!

Sure, maybe the top 1% is self-taught (probably not, though, you're just selecting for your point). How about the next 15%?
Depends who you're proving it to; if you can isolate them, it still works.