skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I agree, but here's their reasoning: https://github.com/reenhanced/gitreflow/issues/52

> When it really comes down to it, the only place we care about enforcing a particular style of commit is in the master branch. We don't care if you make a thousand commits to get there, the only thing we care about is the individual features that come in from each (small) pull request.

> And while the history is nice, the biggest advantage of using the squash merge is that over time, git blame becomes way more useful. You get to see for every line of code in your project, not only the person who changed it, but their commit in the full context of why that change was made, including an easy-to-reference link to the pull request and ideally (through the pull request description), a link to the ticket tracker. So we can tie any line of code all the way back to the ticket that caused it's creation.

> And over time, that's all we really care about in the history. Who made this change and why was it made. Squash merging allows us to do that while still giving all of our developers the individual freedom to develop in the way that suits them best. To try and enforce commit styles in branches owned by other devs is to me, micromanagement that will go against the best results.
The definition you've offered is an abstract definition, but it's not the one used in experiments and in everyday life.

What these experiments with animals are designed for is to check which animals can do things in a similar way to humans.

Why are ravens intelligent? Is it because they can quickly process information? No, that is not what experiments are checking. They are labelled as intelligent because they can use tools to unlock their food.

Why are dolphins intelligent? Is it because they process complex information quickly? No, it's because they have large brains and exhibit empathy towards humans plus they seem to be able to communicate with each other.

People don't say "Well, that system can process complex information quickly, therefore it's intelligent". Instead, what you'll hear is "WOW, animal X can use tools, can communicate, organize in groups! They are more intelligent that we thought". Using tools or communicating is just one way of processing information. There are many other ways. For example, an animal might not be able to use tools in a cage to unlock their food, but they could be a terrific fighter in the jungle. Fighting in a jungle is a process that demands quick information processing, but those animals are somehow below in intelligence than revens or dogs. That is because people aren't using the definition you've provided.

> You are correct that the tests we use incorporate human traits. But that's as much because we are mainly testing humans as because we use humans as our reference.

There is no need to incorporate human traits, because you've already defined the term in a good way. Why do you need humans for reference? You have the definition, you can provide measurement for speed (X per second) and you're good to go. You don't use humans to measure acceleration of objects, so why would you use humans to measure intelligence?
Assuming it's an ergodic process, which is likely an unwarranted assumption.
Probably, though I'd guess the additional gear would be at odds with what I suspect is an appreciation of minimalism in the product.
Decriminalising sex work is better for everyone
There are pieces of data that I store in some manner (and that would be easier stored in a computer). I'm thinking about phone numbers, addresses, and such. The fact that I can accurately reproduce those pieces of information on demand has to mean that I'm storing them in some way. Are there literally a string of neurons with numbers stamped into them? Certainly not. Is there a cloud of neurons that (along with other, connected information), connects to the clouds representing "me", the concept of a "phone", image and tactile checksum-like data allowing me to recognize my current mobile phone, and a ton of other information? Absolutely. And somewhere in that mess, there's a strong link to a numerical sequence that "feels right" when I access those other neural clouds of concepts.

There's something in the physical structure of my brain that encodes various data in a probabilistic, fuzzy, emotionally-connected way, and in a way that will be virtually impossible to identify and understand. The information's still stored.
Very good critical reply. Anecdata - what a perfect word :)
I've seen interest on the lists for modifying the model to allow a single failure type to be specified. I hope someone will write up a proposal once August rolls around and the lists are open again to new feature ideas.
I/O 2016 Codelabs
Would love to see an analysis predating the Renaissance and the Black Death I imagine these had a big impact but analyses of China and England have shown even revolutions fail to displace entrenched power blocs:

http://qz.com/314720/heres-the-surprising-social-trait-that-...

https://medium.com/@blackbitcoiners/bitcoin-has-failed-cdad9...

http://www.lse.ac.uk/economicHistory/workingPapers/2013/WP18...

I'd love for pg to way in too as a former florentine, an expert of the Renaissance, a promulgator of a contemporary renaissance(through YC [hackers==painters]), and thereby, a wealth transfer/creation expert.
I'd say it's inevitable. The actual important question is when.
I wonder how many of the engineers at this weeks Google I/O or the next Apple Dev conference went to bootcamps.
Many cable TV providers put leakage detection equipment on their trucks. RF leaks are also a point of noise ingress on the cable plant so they want to fix it to improve the cable plant.
I have relegated myself to thinking this is another generational shift.

I see it across the board with my nephew, his friends and the young people I talk to everyday. At first I really felt like I was just being the "old guy" and thought my parents probably said the same thing about me. Now, I just accept this as the new normal for this generation.

To me, it's sad when you see kids with no sense of responsibility and have no drive to earn anything in their life.

EDIT: Yes, I know most generations usually give off an air of irresponsibility (baby boomers, hippies, Gen X, Gen Y) but this generation is so inwardly focused and lacks any kind of responsibility, it's borderline alarming.
The laptop I'm using doesn't have a page-down key. I have to contort my hand to press two buttons to hit page down. I can feel the difference in my wrists. It's not laziness, I'm avoiding RSI.
I think you might be attacking a straw man. I'm a strong believer in the traditional CS path, but when I argue for it in the context of a 4-year degree, I'm really just using shorthand to describe the most obvious way to get there.

Will Hunting was right about a library card, but many -- I think most -- people require the discipline imposed on them by a university setting to actually do the work. Obviously -- obviously! -- you can learn this stuff on your own. But I doubt there are many self-taught programmers who've actually spent hours drawing out trees and solving recurrences and so on. To the extent that you've done that, then hooray for you!
Did they ever compare it to an analog computer? Do they even know what one is? Because analog experts have and there's so many similarities. See my main comment to OP for links.
These keyboards are so unpleasant. At one point I wished I could get keycaps printed for a different keyboard, but now it doesn't matter as I've memorized the keys anyway.
Just the kind of thing GS seems to get fined for on an annual basis...
Just like you have the option of not taking on medical debt by getting out of the ambulance while you're having a heart attack?

No. You don't have the option to not take on student debt unless a) employers stop requiring it for an entry level job or b) the US government sees enough social progress to remove the need to take out loans for education.
Let's see if a deep learning system outperforms OECD economists on this question.
Are there advantages to sticking with such small wheels on a powered board like this? I'd think that something like this [1] but with a motor would be way more usable on real-world streets.

In general though, I really do think that these kinds of "personal transportation" devices are the way of the future. I ride my self-balancing electric unicycle [2] from the light-rail to the office any time it's nice out and I'm not hauling anything in. It's the best way to get around in the city as far as I'm concerned.

I feel like it's a better solution because of the big, pneumatic tire. I can ride it up a bump of about an inch without even thinking. I feel like it'd be quite a challenge to ride something with wheels that small on the roads/sidewalks/trails around here (Minnesota).

[1] http://imgur.com/jm5NoCJ.jpg

[2] http://i.imgur.com/lHoVGQ3.jpg

Edit: I will say, the one thing I'm really jealous at with the boosted board is that it's half the weight of my wheel and apparently has the same range. Carrying this thing around for extended periods of time can get tiring.
Then why don't student use a credit or personal loan to pay for their education?
Seems land taxation + basic income would be a great combo to spread wealth around.
So it's taken seriously by universities? Like CalTech really put its best foot forward and got smoked by UCF? And American Universities really are doing this poorly in CS competitions relative to the rest of the world?
>Had it been for a trucker position you'd be asking for "driving license, laws and regulations, engine design and car physics".

There nothing wrong with a trucker just knowing "driving license, laws and regulations", ... as long as they don't mind being laid off when there's no longer a need for that skill.

You're essentially arguing that it's okay to be a one-trick pony. It's not.

1) IT and the software industry change too fast for that to be anything other than career suicide. What do you do when your tricks become out of date?

2) You're competing with all the other one-trick ponies out there. There are a whole lot of them and that makes one-trick ponies an easily replaceable commodity. Yes, yes, everyone's replaceable in theory but its best to minimize that as much as possible.
Lactobacillus Rhamnosis - supposedly stimulates the nerve in the gut that then triggers GABA production.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21876150

I get it here: http://www.customprobiotics.com/custom-probiotics-l-rhamnosu...
I found it odd how he noted rooting and nursing instincts in infants, then said that we aren't born with rules or software. That seems self-contradictory.
"final" allows the compiler to strictly enforce that "don't break things" idea, instead of delegating it to fallible humans. (it also lets the compiler make your code faster)

By using the tools that Swift provides - preferring value types, and falling back on final classes, I can much more easily deduce what my changes will do.

Non-final classes create an additional public API that framework authors need to support - the ability to change any behavior. Reducing the surface for potential errors makes frameworks and their clients more robust.
Well, afaik we can't easily record individual neurons inside the brain, although there are some studies towards that goal. Most brain studies work on areas of activity. Even MRI is not that precise, to be frank. But for studying human perception, a technique often used is called microneurography, which involves sticking a probe into the nerve fibers along a known neural pathway and recording the electrical stimulations.

From this we can often find things like:

- frequency of impulses increases as stimulus increases

- different numbers of neurons in a similar area fire simultaneously

Things like that. The wikipedia articles linked by wickedagain contain a good summary. I won't link specific sources, since there are thousands, but here's one for instance:

http://jn.physiology.org/content/85/4/1561

There in fig 6 for example you can see that the frequency of nerve firing increases in the tibial nerve as heat is applied to the paw. (Yes, a lot of information comes from horrible animal studies. It's part of the reason I didn't continue in this domain of work -- although rest assured, this technique is possible with humans, without harm.)

So, do impulses in the perceptual nervous system reflect how brains work, how we think? It's hard to say for sure, but it's clear that information is coded according to certain possibilities related to how neurons work, and this information must be combined and processed somehow to create what we call perceptions. Is it such a stretch to imagine that these perceptions become their own codes, abstract reductions of correlations of perceptual information, that are evaluated, compared, and combined in the much, much more nerve-dense central cortex to produce what we call "thought"?
Where is information lost? Delivered branches aren't deleted, so full history information is available - it just doesn't clutter trunk by merging in every commit.
I get close to the milestone-ish commit by opening feature branches and then merging with no fast forward. All commits in the main branch are merges, and all of those are features. The feature incremental commits go in the branch.

It's ok, I'd just like to be able to apply this structure to stuff like bisect or blame.
Because they don't have enough credit history to do so. You can get a credit card for a few thousand dollars with no credit history. Not tens of thousands of dollars.

The problem isn't the debt type. The problem is the government needs to use its regulatory authority to enable cost controls on education.
Climate change doubters really aren’t going to like this study
I personally like this animated gif that SpaceX tweeted better than the static image the photographer created:

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/733072013858738176
Sure, and doing figure drawing is a lot of work for something that can be done with a camera.

But "a picture of a naked person" is as much the goal of figure drawing as I suspect "a model of this street" was of this project; the real goal is the knowledge it puts in your head, both of your tools and of your subject, which you can then use in making stuff up from scratch.
Phil Mickelson to pay SEC for profit he made on inside stock tip
Agreed, I'd much rather have the context of the commit message than the context of an entire PR, which could be a combination of 20 discrete changes, each with their own reason for existing which is explained by the commit message. If I need more context, which almost never happens, I'll just go check out the PR on GitHub.
> This keyboard has been out for ages, unless I am missing something here?

Not everyone works in finance and/or is familiar with Bloomberg terminals (like me). I think this is pretty interesting since Bloomberg, unlike most application developers, has taken their UX to the point where they're building application-specific hardware (though I understand a lot of that is basically legacy inertia).

Also, programmers seem to be far more interested in keyboards as a subject that most people.

I also thought the B-unit is interesting, it's different than any other authentication device I've used.

http://www.bbhub.io/professional/sites/4/2015/03/b-unit_3_us...
Uber's self-driving cars hits Pittsburgh's roads
I can definitely see that distinction. We've never interviewed from anyone excluding the three you mentioned and fullstack academy, which all have the same general process.
So, like the olympics, the important member organizations put a reasonable enough amount of effort into it to ensure they're represented well? Like, I really should be looking at UCF as a college that produces some of the best programmers in the US?
ah, no, its not just twiddling bits. You can make analogies to that if it makes it easier to describe a process, but all analogies break down. One may create a mathematical model of the processes but unless that model mimics and predicts the biology so closely as to be indistinguishable from the reality, its still just a model.

Your second assertion is simply wrong. Asserting that what the brain does isn't the same as what a computer does simply doesn't imply that a computer designed to mimic some aspects of biological neural nets is not a computer.
Is "it's the first thing that came to mind" an acceptable answer?
Comment below you makes powerful counter that there's storage that allows faithful reproduction of stored data. To add to it, I lost most of my memory to a brain injury that destroyed physical elements and reduced interconnections. Result is no recall on all sorts of things. Implies those memories were stored in those connections and physical spaces.

The brain has storage for data. It just works differently, is lossy, and connects with other data for compression or reinforcement. This is still storage.
This is great!!! I wonder if it will be possible to install the Play Store in Chromium OS. I know that Chromium has some support for installing Android .apk files.
"I think what's going on is that the people with CS degrees invested a significant chunk of their life and a significant amount of money into getting a CS degree."

A few people have made a similar claim in this thread. I think that's a pretty lazy argument for which no real evidence exists. A big clue is that you could say that about literally anything.

Oh, sure, of course you'd think cooking classes were a big help in learning to cook. You paid all that money for them and spent all that time attending, so you feel the need to justify the expense.

It explains everything and nothing.
Same here, I have dealt with this since I was 13 years old, and it's total bs.

my first job in computers was 13 at a local college and I got so much crap from the it team there for being too young and not having enough experience even though I was hired because nobody there could write code well enough to parse dirty data from spreadsheets to pass into spss.

most of my family has a degree and some even teach, but I found it tedious and uninformative and always ended up the teachers pet, helping fellow students, which was fun, but I wanted answers to My questions.

I found the best way for me to learn is complete immersion in a subject, 24/7, read about it, write about it, if it's a language write in it, if it's a technology use it for everything possible and potentially possible.
at the outset if you can get answers to the starting questions then that is useful (like training), but once you move out of the basics, in my experience, you will only progress to higher levels by answering your own hard to answer questions, and if it's easy to find answers to your questions, you're not there yet.

break things all day long and then fix them has been my learning mantra for many many years and like the parent poster, I've surpassed pretty much everyone who I've known with a degree in CS.
No, they don't breed the capacity for abstract thought in college. But they do teach it. That the typical student could learn as much in a short bootcamp as someone learns in a CS program over four years is wishful thinking.

Of course, it may well be that much of what you learn in all that extra time in a CS department is not that important to the typical working programmer. And many people pick up a knack for abstract thought somewhere other than a CS program.

I'm sure it's also true that a CS education often fails in instilling the deep knowledge of the topic that it is designed to. Lots of students are just not that bright, or don't do the work. And sure, selection bias surely has some effect. But it doesn't change the basic fact that you can learn more stuff in four years than you can in three months.

The fact that you consider yourself to be superior to most of the CS grads you've met is just the worst kind of anecdotal evidence. (Did you also do a lot better than the bootcamp grads you worked alongside? How do you know you aren't just more competent than the average student in either program? How do you know that the CS grads you've worked with are representative.) Meanwhile, the very post you're commenting on presents real data to suggest that, whole bootcamp students are just as good as CS students for most practical purposes, they typically lag far behind on knowledge/understanding of algorithms and data structures.

I really don't mean any of this as an insult. I have no doubt that you really are more talented than most CS grads. And in your case (and perhaps in many other cases!) perhaps it really was a smart move to save your money and skip college. But you've given the rest of us very little reason to think that your experience generalizes.

And by the way...

> Four years of school + the associated debt creates a big incentive to believe that you got a square deal out of college.

You could say the same thing about not going to college.

(I myself do not have a CS degree.)
FA and I think Flatiron School are also in the "alright" category. All of these mentioned are just "alright".

I don't think any of them are really excellent.

I have just met a high percentage of GA grads who aren't successful in their search and give up after a few months.
Yeah, it's in this article too, higher resolution as well if you want to take a look.
I agree, I wish some VCS would figure out how to do a "history of history". I hate every time in git I destroy history (delete a branch, do a force push / update), but it is almost impossible to use git without doing these things, particularly when committing to another project.
And that is the difference between a credit card/personal loan and a education loan. The student doesn't have enough history. Nothing stops anyone from forming a business that gives students a loan with is dischargable in bankruptcy except that business may have a tough time staying solvent.
Questions to address other than whether the article used the word "animal" in the correct sense:

- how will the affect the propagation of diseases from other species to humans?

- How will intellectual property concerns play into this research?

- How do we prevent chimeras from having severe health issues as a result of incompatible physiology?

- Are there health concerns from chimeras mixing with livestock?

- What is the likelihood of creating "sentient" chimeras (for some value of sentience)?

- How might sentience work differently in chimeras ("If a lion could talk, we would not be able to understand him" as the old quote goes) and how could we detect sentience?

edit: list formatting
Yeah exactly -- if git knew about a milestone point, then "git bisect" could tie into it. That in and of itself would be fantastic.
If you seriously think you can learn, with any amount of rigor and understanding, algorithms in a week you're absolutely delusional. I think that you would struggle to teach recursion including time complexity and practical applications in a week, and that's not even getting into simplex, dynamic programming, minimax, flow, etc...
Indeed, because the lower classes tended to die.
I didn't say it wasn't computation. I said it wasn't a computer.
> because they do impose a constant and non-trivial burden on everyone else (especially in cases like backspace which are relatively easy to hit on accident).

So make them an option and stop taking the Chrome route of stripping out everything that more advanced users use regularly.

Of course, this is why I run Firefox. I can do things like force OCSP enabled and get error pages when it fails - Chrome's solution was to call OCSP useless because their less technical users couldn't understand it.

Even Firefox has buried the option behind about:config and the scariest thing for me now is that we'll lose the control we get with current FF options and extensions as they "modernize" the browser.

Advanced users want this level of control.
Woo, I created my LinkedIn profile in 2015, so I should be safe since the leak is supposedly from 2012. If anyone else isn't sure when they made their LinkedIn, you can see your join date here (ctrl+f "Member since"): https://www.linkedin.com/psettings/