skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Hello Mr Kgnao

> I think you may be confusing the intellectual right-wing with the, e.g. evolution/climate change-denying right wing.

Not at all Mr Kgnao. Formerly I came from a Christian cult, with double emphasis on the word 'cult'.

So as a right wing person (probably an evil mutant: http://lesswrong.com/lw/i0/are_your_enemies_innately_evil/) I am familiar with both the Right that has thrown out rationality altogether, and the secular, more intellectual Right. I must hasten to add that there are good scientists who are Christians and belong to a scientific tradition in the second camp, but that they are a rare breed when compared to the past three centuries.

> There is a lot to be said for the need for differing opinions on, say, social mores, finance, healthcare, government, and philosophies of life in general. That is to say, I agree that the intellectual/philosophical right-wing is indeed not at all similar to the caricatures we see.

Yes, and it is most unfortunate because when I have broached right wing positions to left wing partisans in the past, they have often been quite interested in the oppositional view even if they didn't agree with it. Steelmanning arguments leads to more interesting places and new ideas. (Ctrl-F for 'steel man' http://lesswrong.com/lw/85h/better_disagreement/)

I would hate to live in a world where everything I believed to be true, was actually so, because then there would be nothing new to discover.

> I have a hunch, though, that highly religious and closeted people (of the "Do not be educated lest you lose your humility" kind) are almost tautologically biased against evidential "scientific method" models of the world, as opposed to one where all truth flows from $HOLY_BOOK. And if you'll look closely, it is this part that is ridiculed, largely for the unquestioning nature of its beliefs and worldviews.

Agreed. There's always a danger of this on the Left too, I'm sure you remember the Little Red Book. Different thing, same insanity.

> Aside: I have a feeling I'm stepping on the wrong side of the Slate Star Codex "outgroup" essay with this. If there are any logical fallacies in this, or anything similar, I would appreciate comments. I'm not a seasoned observer of politics or society :)

Not to worry, I'm from SSC too so really we're in the same in-group ;-)

Best Tribe Forever!
The recipe we've used for Scottish macaroons involves roughly an entire bag of icing sugar, about the same amount of coconut, and one small boiled potato :)
I was once talking to Dougald O'Reilly, an archaeologist from Australian National University who's done a lot of research at Angkor Wat. He was talking about having just published a paper about a dig and centuries-old skulls they'd found, and a lot of technical data. He ended with a quip that it was a lot of head trauma, and, me not being a science guy at all, I thought he meant the paper was academically rigrous. No, every skull had had their heads bashed in.
Delusions are a sign of mental illness - if a person honestly believes this stuff they are delusional.
But you can be a professor and also start a company simultaneously
The Chinese have the Shanzai model, which almost embraces the 'copycat' phenomenon to drive innovation. It's a very very open culture where everyone publishes their bill of materials and design specs, and any other company can use them. No patents.

> http://www.strategyand.pwc.com/media/file/Shan_Zhai_AChinese...
I've seen many of these ring-road simulations over the years. They are great for pitching lower speed limits, but I fault their assumptions. Traffic does not feed on itself in this manner. Aberrant drivers and situations are constantly being inserted and removed from the system. A slowdown at point A does flow up/down to point B like a wave, but it doesn't wrap around back to point A to be amplified again.

I do credit this particular simulation for modeling acceleration/deceleration. Playing around with it leads to the conclusion that many congestion problems can be addressed by increasing the performance numbers for cars, and by encouraging people to use their brakes/engines to their full potential. We should all drive as if in nascar,
minimizing gaps to fully utilize the available road. Clarkson would be proud.

I would like to see a simulation of cars+trucks+motorcyles. Two-wheeled vehicles are common everywhere and in some countries are dominant on the roads, yet they are never included in these models. And toss in a few bicycles just for kicks.

Realworld "simulation":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wm-pZp_mi0
Good luck, William. You have my full support! Thank you for all the great work on Sage and associated tools!
> Clojure is not a community-driven language

> The bugs that will be fixed and the features that will be added are the ones Hickey cares about

Those two statements do not compute. A community driven language, or any technology that wishes to attract and retain users, really, should care about the things that its users care about. I can understand that the significance of these bugs might not be well understood by Clojure's maintainers, but that is the problem here. It is the task of technical maintainers to care about the problems of their users (speaking as the maintainer of several projects).

It's also worth answering that argument that Clojure is opinionated and therefore the maintainers don't need to fix certain things, because... opinions. This is bogus. Opinions are what lead you to build certain features, like transducers. Caring about quality is what should lead you to make sure they work in a way that is expected (based on how others parts of the technology work, what is least surprising to users, what is documented, etc.)
This has nothing to do with physics. He's saying if a first self replicator requires a very specific sequence (of something like RNA) to form by chance, then it can easily be incredibly unlikely to happen.

As an analogy, if I make a huge number of random files on my computer and execute them, the probability of getting a self replicating computer virus is really low. And one that successfully spreads itself to other computers over the internet should never happen.

If the first successful computer virus is 100 bits long, then probability of finding it in a single random search is 1/2^100. Which is just incredibly small and should never ever happen.
It really depends on so many different factors. The javascript ecosystem is at least 100x the size of clojure's, but as a consequence, the average quality of what's available is much lower. If the pre-existing libraries and services will work for your use case, javascript is going to be faster, simply because most of the code you need has already been written.

Another important consideration is your familiarity with both. If you have a deep knowledge of javascript and its ecosystem, many of the architectural wins you get from clojure out of the box are fairly trivial to port over. I suspect the reverse is not as true, because a clojure expert dipping their toes into javascript doesn't have as clear a picture of what the limitations are and how to overcome them.

As we can already see in this thread, there's a tendency for people who use clojure to believe that some architectural concepts are literally impossible for all other languages, rather than merely less common or requiring some pre-configuration.
If clients access the database directly, then the database is now the server. You haven't removed the server, you've just moved it.
They might be referring to the fact that the room might not have photo-resistive materials or the fact that they have not investigated other methods that could allow them to use white light in the room.
> That's a ... very small difference. And again, probably due to implementation differences.

735 / 618 = 1.19 So Rust is at least 19% slower than C even without involving SIMD intrinsics. You wrote "your rust code shouldn't have any more overhead" but in all the benchmarks it has!

> You have been belting out claims that Rust is 2x slower -- clearly false.

Clearly not, since it is on all the SIMD-using benchmarks.

> Look at wycats' talk on fast_blank. That's a real world example that's faster than C. Rust used to be faster than c on the regex benchmark at one point, as burntsushi pointed out.

Because it is comparing different regex engines, not language performance. I said you should apply "common sense" to The Benchmark Game's numbers.

Here's the thing, you guys can easily prove me wrong. Prove that Rust has zero cost abstractions by taking any small C benchmark, transliterate it to Rust code and profile it. If it is as fast, I'm proven wrong. If it is slower you are proven wrong.
I took his article and the analogies to point out that these studies must get approval before engaging subjects. He also states that the law requires explicit permission unless it is on or using company property.

Idk the legal requirements, but I thin, to underscore my previous point (and how I interpreted zsfa) that the issue is in how counterparties agree and the obligations they owe to one another.

I also find myself agreeing that it would be difficult to charchterize snarky. Although, I suspect that they say snarky but mean using racial slurs and other threatening language. Clearly, saying horrible things to people is not positive but free speech is more important. I find in super reasonable that someone with a tagged Riot employee un shouting racial epithets gets fired. However, a private personal account without explicit consent should probably enjoy the expectation of privacy.

super complicated issue, however, I believe many people would look at this differently if it came out that every employee was told, signed paperwork, and was aware that it would be company policy to monitor and enforce known etiquette with known repetcussions

edit: also there have been studies that show people behave differently when watched. It seems reasonable simply telling everyone about this policy would bring about the desired results.
My left hand is clumsy, at least in comparison to my right hand. If commonly-used functions have to all be under one hand, left is bad for me.
Understanding AMQP RabbitMQ in a Microservice Environment
Setting up a company can help because it will let other researchers support the project by buying the software on research grants. A grant can also pay for consultant-style improvements to software. It doesn't really matter if the software is also being given away for free. The important thing is to have an invoice to give to the university financial services staff.

I'd prefer it if the granting agencies supported this sort of software infrastructure directly, but, lacking that, a company is a way to hire people to tackle some of the weaknesses of Sage, whether they be in its core functionality or its UI.
I remember the first time I visited Tokyo. The subway to Shinjuku station was packed. People seemed annoyed by my bags. We were really crammed in. Someone remarked to me that it was "rush hour" for people going home from their offices.

It was 10pm on a weeknight.
> And the namespace is completely riddled with bugs. union returns duplicates if some of the inputs are lists instead of sets depending on their length.

to be clear I assume he is taking about this:

```
try-spec.core=> (clojure.set/union [1,2] [1,2])
[1 2 1 2]
```

Though im not sure what "depending on their length means".

> for the above bugs there are two possible fixes: raise an IllegalArgumentException if anything other than sets are provided

Isn't this an argument for types? Wont this type of problem be prolific in any dynamic language? What is the union of anything besides sets?

> coerce lists and vectors to sets before continuing

This only works for very similar data. How do you coerce a map into a set? Is it based on keys or values? What about a string? is it based on the whole string or the characters. I loaded up python3 to see how it was handled...

```
In [7]: set(["hello"]).union(["hello"])
Out[7]: {'hello'}```

is that what you would expect? Maybe. But honestly it should have thrown an error imo. Python is just skirting the issue. A set needs a hashable type. A list isn't one because its mutable. So python knew you "meant" a set of the items in the list... It throws up its hands if you force the issue further:

```
In [8]: x = [1,2,3]

In [9]: set(x)
Out[9]: {1, 2, 3}

In [10]: set([x])
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TypeError Traceback (most recent call last)
<ipython-input-10-0b079714f02c> in <module>()
----> 1 set([x])

TypeError: unhashable type: 'list'```

The problem is that we have handed the union function the wrong type of arguments. That it fails in further down stream is the trade off we make with dynamic languages. The community seems to admit the trade off and alleviate it with things like clojure.spec. Im not mental equipped to argue type theory here. But i suppose i feel this is an _ancient_ argument and saying its a "bug" seems simplistic.

> How you define getting the wrong type with nonsense values counts as “working” is beyond me. Is it just because it doesn’t throw an Exception? Anyone here prefer bad data instead of exceptions when dealing with functions like this? I doubt it.

This is maybe the deeper problem. You would expect union to fail given the wrong types. Sure the failure wont be a type error but it will be contained inside the function. Leaking out the wrong data means its harder to debug. I'm generally curious how and why set would work on lists at all.

As to the rest of the arguments made here. I don't know enough to hazard a guess. But i would appreciate any feedback on my interoperation of the above situation.
The Erlangelist – Low Latency in Phoenix
Uh, how so? A quick search turned up webpages with about as many different font sizes and colors as Timecube.
Even if they were, why is it socially acceptable to just write a person off as "mentally ill" when they could just be very poorly educated? Or, are those two things equivalent in your opinion?
But you can't be a professor and work full-time on another project, which is what he wants to do.
EPCOT
Does make sense - academia is about theory, businesses are part of implementing end user solutions. most of academia runs on a tech stack delivered by commercial entities anyway. Building products is not as much about creativity as delivering a fixed product with a service plan and support chain in addition to product development. Companies have various operations to create full fledged products - academia can supply only the r&d part. And this is a good divisionoflabour, IMO.
Maybe. AH doesn't appear to roll that way.
There used to be a company that offered something like this in MacWorld and PCMagazine in the early 90's.
Duff (who was Davis's post-doc advisor IIRC) also deserves credit for MA57, which is used in MATLAB's sparse symmetric indefinite solvers [1]. And the giant BLAS and LAPACK crew (as well as the previous LINPACK authors) deserve some credit for dense systems.

[1] http://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/ref/ldl.html?requestedD...
I'm impressed that the reporter did a whois search and tried various domains. That's not something I would expect from a standard US reporter now-a-days.
>They are simply the same thing.

This is not the accepted wisdom on the subject. The accepted wisdom is: "we don't have any evidence that these things are separate, so for now, while the jury is still out, we consider psychological and physical well-being to be equivalent".
http://www.videojots.com/davos/state_of_ai.html#2181

Apparently, robots still struggle to pick up things?
Oh goodness, we're so far from this it isn't even funny. The amount of very careful plumbing and constant human assistance in plumbing between the crawling and the machine learning alone is huge. The ML is in little boxes used for handling specific tasks. Heck, even things like RankBrain are only one of many signals input into the search ranking algorithm. It's a very useful but very constrained tool that is good at solving problems in a very specific, constrained domain.

(I'm a visiting scientist at the google brain team this year.)
What's changed since 2007? I'm under the impression that interviewing standards are much higher than they used to be. (Sometimes terrifyingly arbitrary, but higher.)
Bizarre Story of VRL Logistics:Will Its Airline Idea Prove Deadly? – NC Airways
Funny how more and more application are becoming game-like rendering system.
thats my point. executing a hostile takeover of soneones phone could end poorly. im sure they calculated this, but i think they could have over estimated their leverage
> Different races within the US have different intelligence levels, and that intelligence is highly predictive of adult outcomes

I think tying this to race is a mistake. The data shows such correlations, but there are also correlations between race and socioeconomic status, and socioeconomic status and intelligence. The way you phrase this implies a premature conclusion about race when in reality it's likely not about race at all.
The Ungraspable Value of the World's Largest Diamond
I'm glad to see skepticism on this claim, and I don't have any good modern UX studies to point to. Anecdotally, I was going home with scary numbness on the backs of my hands and fingers at the ends of days of heavy shell interaction, despite touch-typing. Switching to Dvorak's layout cleared that problem up immediately and it hasn't returned in 24 years.
It's also what happens when the implementation becomes the specification that others depend on, rather than having the implementation depend on a specification.

In the former, any deviation, including bugfixes, from the existing implementation is a breaking change. Indeed, without a specification, it's debatable whether any behavior is actually a bug or not.
AWS is inappropriate for small teams because its complexity demands a specialist
where can I get these and share? please let me know
> Another way to make a chip faster is to add special circuits that only do one thing, but do it extremely quickly. Roughly 25 percent of the E5’s circuits are specialized for, among other tasks, compressing video and encrypting data. There are other special circuits on the E5, but Intel can’t talk about those because they’re created for its largest customers, the so-called Super 7: Google, Amazon, Facebook, Microsoft, Baidu, Alibaba, and Tencent. ... If you buy an off-the-shelf Xeon server from Dell or HP, the Xeon inside will contain technology that’s off-limits to you. “We’ll integrate [a cloud customer’s] unique feature into the product, as long as it doesn’t make the die so much bigger that it becomes a cost burden for everyone else,” says Bryant. “When we ship it to Customer A, he’ll see it. Customer B has no idea that feature is there.”

This is something I've never heard of before. Anyone have some insight into this? Is it a relatively recent phenomenon?
> I went ahead and tried it out and soon enough after doing “ls -latr” on the terminal, I had to shake my head and sadly walk away from it. I didnt like the way Dvorak was laid out especially for the weak fingers of the right hand.

Of course it's going to feel awkward. The name "ls" was picked because it was easy to type on qwerty keyboards. Many Dvorak users get around this issue by creating an alias.

The author then shows off some metrics attesting to the superiority of his keyboard layout. The stats are put in a ridiculous light. A 2.3% reduction in finger travel is touted as "69,600 cm" or "34,000 less keystrokes".

Keyboard layouts are full of trade-offs. I don't know if the author realizes which trade-offs he's made, but it looks to me that he's optimized for finger travel distance at the expense of overall comfort and typing speed. Let me explain.

Compared to Colemak and Dvorak, the Workman layout reduces hand alternation. The idea behind hand alternation is to maximize typing speed. A finger on the left hand can strike a key while the right hand moves into position for the next key. If a keyboard layout doesn't encourage hand alternation, then one hand will sit idle while the other types multiple letters. Unless the letters are a rollover combo, such one-handed typing will be slower. Also: Compared to Colemak and Dvorak, the Workman layout increases keystrokes on the bottom row. The more you have to use the bottom row, the slower and less comfortable typing becomes.

Lastly, the improvements are negligible. Workman is 2-5% better than Dvorak and Colemak in the metrics that the author strove to optimize. If there are any important metrics that he didn't consider (and I think that's the case), his layout is almost certainly not better.

The lesson to draw from all this is: Use whatever keyboard layout you like, with the exception of qwerty. Qwerty is objectively terrible.
For me personally, it has gone away. I used to own Moto g ( 1 gb ram version) so there was no way i could afford to have messenger and facebook app installed on my phone. I budged and installed messenger when i bought nexus 6P though.
The Problem with A/B Testing Success Stories (2014)
SkyMall too.
For Sony, Android 6.0’s Doze Mode Marks a Battery Life Regression
The Next Generation of Scratch
Can you enumerate "enthusiast" chipsets?

I'd like to know what chipset to choose in the future.

Thanks.
thanks to that MOOC I was able to get a machine learning job building recommender systems for a Canadian company straight out of high school

This amazes me. Are you leaving out more significant details? I cannot begin to imagine this happening where I live, in London. Being hired based on a MOOC? Did you go on to do some impressive projects which got you the job?
A couple of weeks ago, the boy said he was going to buy a computer. He'd been looking on Amazon. Technolust for keyboards giving him a rationale for ditching the i3 based Vostro I picked up from the Dell Outlet four and a half years ago -- in fairness it's been waiting on an SSD I already bought and a Windows reinstall for a couple of months.

Inspired by this article [1] and my experience with what is now an eight year old dual E5405 Xeon workstation that given enough RAM is simply never insufficiently powerful, I suggested we build a used Xeon system that kicks ass and takes names. Amazingly he acted as if he didn't know everything.[0]

After discovering the vageries of LGA 2011 sockets and the price of version 1 motherboards versus version 3 and the problems of C1 versus C2 stepping I gave up and priced out a new AMD FX 8350 system. But before pulling the trigger, I did some Ebay.

Yesterday, it came: a used buy-it-now Dell Precision T7500. If the hyperthreading hexacore Xeon 5660 doesn't meet all of the boy's computing needs through the rest of high-school and some college (technolust aside), adding a pair of PCIe 16X GPU cards and bumping up to 96gigs of RAM might help.

It all cost less than a used 1100 power supply and quality tower case are likely to fetch on Ebay, not to mention leass than a budget level new assemble it myself AMD box. As a bonus it came with a Winows Product Key sticker [not part of the listing] and it was running a Windows 10 upgrade [2] within a couple of hours of hauling all forty or so pounds of it in from the front door.

For me, it's not that the extra bit of performance isn't worth the money. It is more performance for the dollar. And I'd be that a used workstation is going to be more reliable than a bunch of new consumer components: it's passed several years of burn in under warranty.

[0]: Sometimes, it happens.

[1]: http://www.techspot.com/review/1155-affordable-dual-xeon-pc/

[2]: I pitched Linux. Sometimes, it [0] doesn't happen.