skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes, it's all I use, but still, we have foreign keys on various models to the user, predictably called "user", so removing or renaming one of them is hell, and the grep tool can't tell you which lines are the one you care about with certainty...

Vim-jedi is pretty good, but not perfect either, unfortunately...
Bitcoin  $520 as the entire digital currency economy races towards a $10bn cap
The study cited by the original post does not consider "a thoughtful choice". It considers the number of books measured by shelf space. Studying the consideration of material by their parents would, IMHO, be a worthwhile, albeit, much more difficult thing to study.
>> Nah, if you can't handle the huge amount of data, it's possible to just switch to a sparse model or do MC-like sampling... That way the network doesn't scale linearly with the size of the domain being learned.

That's useful when your domain is finite, like in your example, Go. If you're dealing with a non-finite domain, like language, MC won't save you. When you sample from a huge domain, you eventually get something manageable. When you sample from an infinite domain - you get back an infinite domain.

That's why approximating infinite processes is hard: because you can only approximate infinity with itself. And all the computing power in the world will not save you.

>> It's been demonstrated that when a good benchmark appears, a lot of papers follow and top results improve massively.

Mnyeah, I don't know about that. It's useful to have a motivator but on the other hand the competitions become self-fulfilling prophecies, the datasets come with biases that the real world has no obligation to abide by and the competitors tend to optimise for beating the competition rather than solving the problem per se.

So you read about near-perfect results on a staple dataset, so good that it's meaningless to improve on them - 98.6% or something. Then you wait and wait to see the same results in everyday use, but when the systems are deployed in the real world their performance goes way down, so you have a system that got 99 ish in the staple dataset but 60 ish in production, as many others did before it. What have we gained, in practice? We learned how to beat a competition. That's just a waste of time.

And it's even worse because it distracts everyone, just like you say: the press, researchers, grant money...

Well, OK, I'm not saying the competitions are a waste of time, as such. But overfitting to them is a big problem in practice.

>> A promising direction is extending neural networks with memory and attention

That's what I'm talking about, isn't it? Just raw computing power won't do anything. We need to get smarter. So I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm disagreeing with the tendency to throw a bunch of data at a bunch of GPUs and say we've made progress because the whole thing runs faster. You may run faster on a bike, but you won't outrun a horse.

(Oh dear, now someone's gonna point me to a video of a man on a bike outrunning a horse. Fine, internets. You win).
Not the concept itself, but the aforementioned simple and clear definition.
A game about hacking an imaginary device using a real assembly instruction set
Ruby Wrapper for BMTC Its Intelligent Transport System (ITS) API
Except that's not what is happening. If you state that the source is not verifiable or reliable (even if it is) then it will likely get removed. Often the admin will block the editor who readds the material without even checking the source. If that doesn't work then the next tactic is to accuse the editor of violating [[WP:UNDUE]] and create an unbalanced article. An admin will then come along and see that because the editor used a citation template via a named <ref> tag that the number of characters rapidly increases, and just assume that the material added is causing the article to become unbalanced.

Alternatively, another tactic is to remove the entire section, not just the bit that is disputed. After the editor reverts 3 times, no matter if they object in the talk page they will be blocked.

The ultimate way to keep material removed, however, is to claim that it violates BLP. Due to the paranoia around this area (which is admittedly somewhat justified) no admin will look into it further and the default position is that the material is forbidden no matter how absurd or invalid the claim.

After you've been reverted, incidentally, it appears that the end run around discussion and consensus is to switch the archival boy tag to about 7 days and add a collapse template on the discussion thread, which prevents it from being seen by default and effectively silences the one who was blocked - which means appeals and review of the discussion become largely meaningless.
BMTC Intelligent Transport Solution API
A properly configured firewall wouldn't allow anything except, for example, inbound traffic on port 80. If you wanted to start some kind of reverse shell, you would first need a hole in the firewall.
OpenID Connect supports discoverability, which enables a protocol like Mozilla Persona to work over it. That's exactly what some others and I are working on, hopefully we will make some headway and greatly increase the usability of authentication again.
conversations is really nice. thanks for making it.
one problem i have with it, that gchat solves really well, is how it behaves when you have a desktop client and conversations open at the same time.

when someone using conversations writes to me, what i expect is that i get the message on my desktop, as well as on my mobile client. but conversations will ALWAYS ask the user where he wants to send the message, if on my phone or on my desktop client. this should not happen. it should just send it without the resource set, and let the xmpp server figure it out.
Divorced Italian allowed to pay his child support in pizzas, court rules
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11795373 and marked it off-topic.
This is similar to the older TRIPS system which Doug Burger also worked on:

https://www.cs.utexas.edu/~trips/
I spent time inside UCSB's AlloSphere this weekend.

http://www.allosphere.ucsb.edu/

In VR headset terminology it has full field of view, zero latency head tracking, very high resolution, group experience, no fatigue, etc.

Obviously, everyone can't have one in their house but it's a great experience.
Bullshit fighting
We should fix it for them.
Awesome, thanks for posting this, i have been searching for exactly this...!
Great theory. Except that outside the US people who are FB friends tell each other "I want to chat, give me your number so I can add you on WhatsApp". Outside the US, WhatsApp is winning because of network effects.
Rorschach.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0409459/
I doubt the decision to close up their protocols was taking lightly. You can bet that user lock-in is part of their current strategy.

Did any Google engineers ever reveal Google's true intentions for shutting down their XMPP offerings?
Sydney's works fine. London's too, not the special one the regular tube one. Also Tokyo Narita and Schipol. What they've all got in common is that they're well connected to a good public transport system.
I may live in a nerd specific environment but gchat was our goto product for a long while. We had our notifications build in trough XMPP just like people do with slack now. Some of us used their own XMPP servers, and pretty much everyone was reachable trough it beeing google and everybody having a gmail and/or android phone at least. There were also several cool mobile and web apps that worked very well for XMPP, though not with high load thats true.

When you removed XMPP and forced to hangout it died off pretty fast, no API and the Hangout thingy was not even working on Linux (not sure if it does these days, i never tried).

I see your points, but i cant stop to think about this as the probably most evil step google did to my workflow.

Edit:// I use hangout now to transport links from phone to desktop and the other way around. It totally lost its purpose :/
Few people back up these assertions with links to their reverted changes.

Can you?
Flask 0.11 Released
I don't know if you know this, but every article has a history of changes. Admins look at the diffs of these changes and can see exactly what was added or removed. And about edit-warring and BLP violations, again, the best way to resolve those are using the talk page. For the former the alternative is a game of attritions, and for the latter the possible harm is too great to not arrive at a consensus for the change first. You sure do seem to have something personal against Wikipedia admins, but they don't even get involved unless you've been vandalizing or editing very disruptively. Even then, they are not arbitrators of content, but behavior.
It was a "sure, in principle".
Except of course copyright law. That gets a pass because media companies have enough money to make people ignore the constitution.
Deploy Kubernetes on Aliyun
> * White Female Actor: People walk by, mostly ignoring her; one guy offers to help her steal the bike.
That last one had me dying of laughter. If that video doesn't convey a direct, obvious example of white privilege, then I'm perfectly confident in saying you're the one who's got the closed mind -- or a political agenda to promote. That video is one indisputable example of white privilege.

Actually, it's a good example of female privilege. As proven by the first experiment, a white male got very different treatment, so no skin color involved here. Interesting that there is no example of a black female.
The US would seem to counterpoint that, esp. with tons of people participating in voluntary work and civic engagement (compared to other countries).
Wasn't open chat already solved by Jabber decades ago?
Ultimately slack is just a proprietary IRC, with a solution for message persistence falling out its centralized design. IRCCloud and ZNC both solve the same problem. Its slick as hell, but still a walled garden.
For this gadgethead, the HTC Vive may force my Oculus Rift to collect dust
Disney Interactive 3D robotic motion simulator
Microsoft Turns Billion Dollar Write-Off into Strategic Success with Nokia
Bad link, I'm afraid... It's about a box-shadow glitch.
Döner is a traditional Turkish meal. It is sold as a dish on rice, on a bread, or in a wrap. However, the Döner Kebab as it is known in Germany today originated with immigrants in Berlin.

I don't think it's easy to say what culture it is. The German Döner is still very similar to the traditional meal, but "Eating a Döner" has engrained itself deeply into German culture.

Normally, when eating foreign food, you'd call it by the country it comes from. If you order a burrito, you're "Eating Mexican", if you order a Pasta you're "eating Italian" and if you are having sushi you are "eating Asian". But you don't "eat Turkish" when eating a Döner.

I don't have an Answer, I just thought I'd share my thoughts.
EuroScience Open Forum 2016
Surely any measure of ability is a better filter than just blindly trusting age as a selector?

Even an utterly unfit for purpose metric like "how fast can you type?" would be a better filter than just age for a software engineer job?
Sydney's is great. I don't mind paying the $34 return like I do in Melbourne.
I'm in general anti benefits myself, but I think the payments received by a minor on death of a parent are one of the most fair, and best investment for society. They're pretty hard to game (you'd have to kill your own parent to get that money) and they prevent a child from slipping into desperate poverty and crime.
"Only".
What I think: Thiel saw an opening in both Gawker's reputation and the legal system, and made a deadly move.

And to clarify, I am not equating this case to censorship, but rather to setup some context that we have seen much worse :)

But what troubles me is really how SV response to this case:

- There are no better ways and so be it.

This is what Chinese call: the limit of democracy and freedom.

And Thiel get VCs to agree with him in this case. Even though I believe many VCs hold different view on democracy and liberty.

So I am personally troubled by their reactions.
You may disagree with this comment, but how is that off-topic?
I think you're projecting a little here. It was so far from "politicized moderation" that I have no idea what politics you're even accusing me of.
Do you have the last Oculus headset or one of the alpha version for developers?
> Would wildcard support in hosts files be too heavy for the performance needed?

Can anyone explain me why wildcard support for blocklists would require more performance?

Assuming it's just basic wildcards, not full regex.

Seems to me that 1) with wildcards you need to check less bytes per entry and 2) since the list itself will be shorter you need to check less entries.

Do any of these filtering tools compile the list (offline) to a minimal state machine or a trie? That would probably max performance (and benefits from wildcards too).
Taxation-is-theft is the quintessence of the generic ideological tangent. Those are off topic on HN.
Redesigning a notification system using PostgreSQL
I not only know it, but it's what I used to do on a regular basis. But please, have a look at the [[Salim Mehajer]] article's talk page, and tell me if it's reasonable that extensive discussions have been collapsed. Or perhaps maybe the edit comment that the character limit increased from about 15,000 to 30,000 characters, but that 8,500 or so characters were references to verifiable or reliable sources. Or that an entire section was constantly removed, even though I asked what the specific issue was repeatedly.

It's funny how many journalists have contacted me about this and commented that the situation is ridiculous. They can see it, but it appears admins cannot.
Chriswarbo: not that simple. Neither "Wikipedia-sized proof", nor the last 200TB proof take their size from just "variable assignment for a SAT solver". The size comes from "proof certificates" that SAT problem has no solution == effectively you need to provide a verifiable evidence that search did not find a solution. In positive cases, when solution exists, all the evidence you need, is indeed just an assignment for the variables.
I wasn't commenting on the specifics, just on the general line of attack. I'm inclined to agree with you.
Yeah, it's basically a laser without the mirrors (or more transparent mirrors)

Or, telling it the other way, a laser is like a sound amplifier that has mic feedback. (high gain and return causes feedback)
I'm using https://github.com/tmuxinator/tmuxinator for quite some time and find it very convenient. Are there any advantages of Tmuxp?
Running Go on a Chromebook in Developer Mode (without Installing Linux)
I like new technologies but I never got excited about VR. Same for the general public in my opinion.

It reminds me the Google glass (as "futuristic" product). Everyone in the tech community was obsessed about it but it made a big flop.
Three ways to solve hard programming problems
It's either disingenuous or just plain ignorant to set the bar at objectively wrong

The bar for what? If you mean the bar for a good explanation of what morality is, then the conclusion that it's an objective feature of the world is certainly not necessary.

or to imply that everyone thinks it's fine to have pets/eat animals

Come on, there is obviously a tiny minority of people who don't think that. Just like in the Muslim countries, there is a tiny percentage of non-muslims. Majority, however, have conformed to what is accepted by people around them. Same with views on slavery of non-human animals today.

or that aliens would follow our ethical guidelines.

Hmm, what is 'our ethical guidelines'? If emotivism is true and if you look around you and throughout the history, there are no 'our (human) guidelines'. For almost any moral issue, there will be people who like it and those that don't like it.

Neither moral universalism nor realism have a dominance in the philosophy of ethics.

I don't care what is currently popular in academic philosophy. There are many views in ethical philosophy, so it's unlikely that any of them will be the dominant view. Emotivism seems to be a good description of what moral sentences actually are. You have to differentiate between 'what moral sentences actually are' and 'what people think they are'. So, it's possible to say that emotivism/nihilism is true, while at the same time say that most people think that moral realism is true.

It's like you worked out that the emotivism that most people use for their moral compass isn't exactly well thought out, googled some phrase sceptical of ethics as a whole, found nihilism, potentially with a detour through scientism, and then burrowed down that rabbit hole without considering any other established school of thought.

People don't use 'emotivism' for their moral compass, since most people don't even know what it is! How can ethical views and theories influence moral compass of regular people?

Your reference to nihilism is very typical. Most people use it almost as an insult. There are strong religious and political interests in society and nihilism bursts their bubbles and questions fundamental assumptions, so the way they cope is by contaminating the word and using it as an insult.

Any response short enough for anybody to bother writing is going to need to take a whole bunch of premises as givens and rely on definitions for words you don't agree with.

haha then there is no point in replying. If you're going to redefine words and make arbitrary assumptions, then why bother talking about anything with anyone?

It'll just keep leading to chains of posts like this where you just keep asking stupid comparison questions like you're some form of internet Socrates, and being pleased when people don't reply adequately, or at all, because you're the one with the negative claim and consider anything other than a full argument from them as a default win for yourself.

This really ends with insults. You're labeling what I wrote as 'silly' and 'stupid' and trying to insult me by saying I'm wanna be internet Socrates. You've hit rock bottom with the insults.
Wow, it is indeed slow on Firefox! Thanks for letting us know, we both test on Chrome so we didn't notice the problem. We'll look into it.
The problems you list (if they even are problems) are nothing to do with robotics. They're AI problems. And that's AI in the sci-fi novel sense, not the oh so hip "let's build a cluster of 10000 GPUs running a convolution network to recognise cat pictures" sense.
> Because DEP aka W^X...

DEP is just how Microsoft calls executable space protection. That's not industry standard terminology for it.
Nonsense, this is of huge interest to any startups and other tech companies using RFC 2549 [1] in their tech stack.

[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2549
Charging your smartphone is enough to get you HACKED, thanks to this new ATTACK
Build a legacy. The Muse (YC W12) is hiring fullstack engineers
I somehow didn't process the "it's a smartphone part" and completely misunderstood his question as a result. I'll edit my original reply to correct that. Edit: Apparently I can't edit it anymore. :{
Self awareness is present in many mammals. Not just humans.

I'm not really sure how we can think of giant leaps in cognition when evolution never works like that.
It's a lot easier for HTC to update the Vive hardware than for the Oculus to get a whole new stack.

Vive has already been a hit with the early adopters. But HTC needs to concentrate on making the hardware better and cheaper if it wants to break into the mainstream commodity market.

The biggest problem is pitching VR as gaming++, because gaming on its own is not a killer app - especially at the current price point.

I won't be surprised if a killer app emerges from a different sector. But I also won't be surprised if no killer app appears, and VR is stuck in the gaming ghetto for another five years or so.
>> your comment about runtime complexity does not make much sense when there exist problems which provably cannot be solved in linear time.

Look, it's obvious the human mind manages to solve such problems in sub-linear time. We can do language, image processing and a bunch of other things, still much better than our algorithms. And that's because our algorithms are going the dumb way and trying to learn approximations of probably infinite process from data when that's impossible to do in linear time or best. In the short term, sure, throwing lots of computing power at that kind of problem speeds things up. In the long term it just bogs everything down.

Take vision, for instance (my knowledge of image processing is very shaky but). CNNs have made huge strides in image recognition etc, and they're wonderful and magickal, but the human mind still does all that a CNN does, in a fraction of the time and with added context and meaning on top. I look at an image of a cat and I know what a cat is. A CNN identifies an image as being the image of a cat and... that's it. It just maps a bunch of pixels to a string. And it takes the CNN a month or two to train at the cost of a few thousand dollars, it takes me a split second at the cost of a few calories.

It would take me less than a second to learn to identify a new animal, or any thing, from an image and you wouldn't have to show me fifteen hundred different images of the same thing in different contexts, different lighting conditions or different poses. If you show me an image of an aardvark, even a bad ish drawing of one, I'll know an aardvark when I see it _in the flesh_ with very high probability and very high confidence. Hell- case in point. I know what an aardvark is because I saw one in a Pink Panther cartoon once.

What we do when we train with huge datasets and thousands of GPUs is just wasteful, it's brute forcing and it's dumb. We're only progressing because the state of the art is primitive and we can make baby steps that look like huge strides.

>> It is dangerous to discourage research on that simplistic basis

It's more dangerous to focus all research efforts on a dead end.
But most of robotics is about AI. The electric and hydraulic aspects are old technologies.
The problem is that these devices limit your field of view a lot. So, like when wearing a mask, you have to turn your head quite a lot to get stuff into the center of vision field, which quickly gets very annoying and tiring.
CPU support is required.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NX_bit
Honestly I do not think it is the problem with a patent holder, but rather USPTO for giving patents to whatever. Maybe the problem is (or was) that staff were not knowledgeable about the subject enough. What are you saying sounds much like "People majoring in nose picking at college of Eastern Nowhere should not be allowed to run for President", or "people who won the lottery with random numbers should not be allowed to claim full reward".

Patents are much like little pieces of law. And we can either believe in law in its entirety or ignore it whatsoever. I choose the former. If someone uses and abuses exceptions and loopholes in the law, the problem is with the law, not person using that to their advantage.
I haven't figured how they measure the speed. If its done via wheel sensors - of course it powerslides, b/c the algo will "think" the speed is up...
And yes, the point is not to construct theorems with ridiculously long proofs, the point is to proof the statements posed by mathematicians which attracted the interest of mathematicians. From this perspective, the proofs for the bounds found in both cases are the only available proofs and that is why the size is an interesting aspect. Notice that in EDP case, remarkable Tao's proof for the general case does not give an explicit bound close enough to computed using SAT proofs for a particular case (C=2).