skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Maybe we're agreeing?

The ENTIRE POINT of the paper is that there are inappropriate assumptions baked into the defaults of FSL and SPM. (AFNI has an actual code-does-the-wrong-thing bug). These errors result in cluster-wise tests being inappropriately sized: when thresholds are set to p<0.001, there are more than 0.1% false positives.

They tested this by dividing a single stream of "off" data into segments of "ON" and "OFF" data. They do this in four different ways (two block paradigms and two event-related paradigms). Most fMRI experiments use a paradigm that is close to one of these, so this isn't a fishing attempt--it's meant to make the results broadly applicable .

They argue that, by construction, no ON data is present in this pseudo-data. Therefore, any ON calls must be spurious/false alarms/type I errors/etc, which lets you calculate the actual FWER and compare it with its nominal size.

You seem to be arguing that this step is not true--some other assumption, which they knew about(?), causes it. The NeuroImage paper says that different assumed activity paradigms have different false positive rates because the assumed model is dumb. The event-related paradigms alternate between on and off rapidly (and at random), which washes out the effects of unmodelled low frequencies. The much slower block designs, on the other hand, are especially susceptible to this problem because they spend a long time in each condition.

The current work extends that to look at other ways in which the default assumptions might be dumb in SPM, while adding in more data, different tests, and other packages.

I am open to the argument that the Block Design data (e.g., in Figure 2 in PNAS) does not add much because the NeuroImage paper already suggests those designs are screwed. However, it also says that the event-related designs are actually in pretty good shape: the voxel-based familywise error rates in the NeuroImage paper are about right (Figure 2), but the cluster FWER for the same design is through the roof in the PNAS paper.

Otherwise though, I don't see many unwarranted/undiscussed assumptions in the paper. If you want to keep claiming that the authors (and I) are making wild assumptions, it would be nice to have a vague sense of what they are and why they/I am wrong.
Looks great. Do we all get cake?
IBM Model M just to piss everyone off.
Eh, you'll scoop me on something when it matters.

PS: If you are the song bird guy, I saw a talk of yours on youtube. Cool stuff.
>"You are the one who keeps saying the authors don't even realize what those assumptions are, but you haven't pointed out anything besides what the authors said."

I am saying they are confused because they say "the null hypothesis should be true" under their conditions, when they know for certain that it is false! Therefore these "false positives" are not false at all. They are totally legit "true positives".

These authors are blaming the statistical test when the problem lies with their crappy choice of null hypothesis.

There may very well be other issues, but I have not inspected the code or done anything other than read the description in the paper.
They can't opt-out of technology automating away their jobs. I was in an Uber the other day. The driver was a real estate agent talking about how terrible Redfin is. He didn't seem super excited about his gig economy future.
Even if Apple did open Siri up and provide a "music playing intent" for Siri like they did for messages, it would still be something like "play something by the Rolling Stones using Spotify". Is that much different from "open Spotify" and once Spotify is open "Play something by the Rolling Stones"?
We don't run any ads.
Repeatable? Sorry in advance for quibbling, but -- suppose that a star goes nova, and you weren't expecting it, but you happen to have telescopes gathering interesting data from this once-in-a-stellar-lifetime event. If you learn interesting things from it, is that science? I'd say yes, but this isn't repeatable. It's also not really an experiment. It's wonderful evidence, though, really priceless stuff that you couldn't get any other way.

What is the essence of science? I'm not convinced that it involves repeatability or experimentation in any really fundamental way.
My mistake. I thought you said simpler, not significant.
Our revenue is primarily through affiliate deals with retailers that we partner with. (We don't run any ads.)
This applies to financial network topographic analysis that old reformer adage...
"If one comes upon a gate and wishes to clear it away, I first ask them what purpose the gate may serve? If they can not answer that, then they are not ready to remove the gate."
There seems to be a lot of fear, uncertainty and doubt around making sweeping changes to the financial system based on this recent, and perhaps not fully tested, theory.
A voice stream is 64Kb (yes, bits) per second for full bandwidth over SS7. So my home connection can carry around 16,384 simultaneous calls for $50 a month. That's one third of one cent per incoming call capacity. So yes, essentially free.
Ownership and borrowing may be calculated at compile time, but they still result in code being inserted to do things like deallocate objects at run time. It doesn't seem a useful distinction to call one garbage collection and the other not. Swift and Rust are far more similiar to each other in their memory management scheme then either is to Java or Go or D.
Look at taiga.io or use good old one trac at trac.edgewall.org
I'm so excited about the prospect of Crystal language approaching 1.0 stability even if this is a fair way away. It just seems like a language with a lot of potential. If they added multi-threading and Windows support tomorrow, I think I'd be using it for all of my new projects. These things take time though...
Soldiers don't generally start wars. They go where they're told and fight who they're told. The penalties for disobedience are severe. To force someone to fight and then laugh at them for the effects it has on them strikes me as psychopathic.
That's simply not true. Per student spending in the US is among the highest in the world.

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cmd.asp

We just blow it on administration-heavy bureaucracies and demonstrably failed methods.
After having a short look on the compilation, it shows one thing very accurately IMHO: C syntax is very error prone.

To sad, that so many new programming languages chose to use exactly this syntax that is so error prone.

C was a very good programming language and the short syntax might have some appeal -- but for learning programming, this syntax is not the best option, as long as you don't use it as type of intellectual test to find the best computer-people ...
There's no such thing as "British English," and to declare the multitude of British dialects to all be "trivial variations" seems ridiculous.

AAVE isn't particularly notable, other than the politics surrounding it.
I see what you mean, but on the other hand, the Palestinians are occupied by Israel, barred from trading by Israel and Egypt, beholden to Israel for water and power - so one could say that if Israel lifted the sanctions Palestinians might not need to "keep going". Again I think the parallell to the Warsaw getthoes apply - the Jews and others interned could just have accepted their plight. But it would've been the wrong path.

I'm by no means saying Palestinians have a carte blanche - I'm just saying that calling the attacks "unprovoked" is a bit of a stretch?
> they still result in code being inserted to do things like deallocate objects at run time.

I mean yeah, functions are called at runtime, just like every function. The key is more like static/dynamic typing: is the decision to call the destructor at all determined at compile time, or at runtime?

(and millstone has been making good points about drop flags on this thread, but that's still only in fairly niche cases, only one bit, and is an implementation detail more than a fundamental aspect of the language. We've had several different variants of drop flags over time, and it's going to change even more in the future, as erickt says.)

> Swift and Rust are far more similiar...

Agree wholeheartedly.
It's hard for me to imagine the Model X, with its automated everything can be made to be reliable. There are just too many motors and hinges and tracks, especially on the rear doors.
No doubt. HN naturally selects for smart people and relevant stuff. And no ads!
I certainly thought it was misinterpreted, too. Although it is reasonable to interpret the statement both ways, why do we often assume the least charitable interpretation? Maybe it is best to ascertain a comment's intent first.

Could've been trolling. Seems like responding with "do you mean x or y?" would've been more constructive, though.
What do you mean by "And of course the notable quality issues"?
Sure, but the advantage of cubesats is that they 'piggyback' on other launches that were happening anyway (in this case, an ISS resupply mission).
I'm a twenty-something and I see this everyday in my peer group. Most twenty-something's have way too much of their identity and self-esteem tied to their career. I would encourage other people my age to go in at 9, leave 5, work at a comfortable pace and take an hour for lunch. If you're good at your job and your employer is well run, that shouldn't be a problem.
Often referred to as the "iron harvest":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_harvest
But it isn't in transition, more and more people are simply wrong.
Forewarned, contains some NSFW images.
People spend time on this because Haskell syntax is deeply unpleasant to a lot of people, including myself. I love the capabilities and expressiveness of Haskell, but I find the syntax annoying, and it hasn't gotten better even coming on three years of active Haskell programming.

I've forgotten the $ in some usage of do or a final argument lambda twice in the last week even.

I think it's worth solving these (superficial?) syntax issues even if they only affect the comfort of a third of all Haskell programmers.
Just want to confirm 6 million US dollars a months for a computer?
Imagine being a member of an attack force following a creeping barrage, especially before it was perfected and short-falling shells were expected to kill a significant fraction of your comrades. Willfully walking into that kind of hell simply blows my mind.
Oh no. The launched version was... very basic. Originally it was "create your own HN" tool, then I realised I was essentially building a community building tool - surprise, surprise - and that's when various ideas for the features came about. Still long way to go! But we are eating our own dog food by using HelloBox ourselves! This is our Q&A page, built on HelloBox itself - http://self.hellobox.co
you spelled her last name wrong. also accommodations
...and those details are?
So vote my way or civil war?
Communications missions require power. Power is directly relate to solar surface area and the mass required to dissipate heat. That all leads to a larger satellite. Once you get to a certain size/mass, it's best to just park it in a GEO slot, since the dwell time is 24/7 (as opposed to 6 to 9 minutes of contact time in LEO).
Webflow is.... absolutely amazing. I'd love to hear about how you guys built it - e.g. tech stack? challenges? :) Great work!
It's probably hard to be proud of your work when you know that at least half of your bosses (congress and a lot of political appointees) passionately hate that the fact that your job exists. I doubt that the quality of people the military hires is much different from the quality but military people know their service is appreciated.
From memory there was problems with fraud for regular credit card transactions for Candy Japan, so I wonder if Bitcoin would be even worse in this regard.
Wikileaks publishes Clinton war emails
> Why would a barista (/waitress/waiter/any other serving staff) be interested in you? They serve hundreds of people a day and are most interested in taking your order as fast as possible.

You sound like someone who's never worked one of these jobs.

Because if you'd had, you'd know very well that being friendly and chatting with the customers is the best part of the job, the only part that's actually interesting, and what gets you through your day. Why wouldn't they be interested in you?! The best customers are the ones who feel like friends, even if you never see them again. They're fun! The worst customers are the ones who, as you say, "acknowledge your task" and otherwise treat you like a serving robot.

Sure, if you're pulling coffees in morning rush hour, or serving drinks on a Friday night at 9pm, then it's rude to hold up the line of course. But except for peak hours, you're not taking up anyone's time -- to the contrary, you're making their time worthwhile, and as long as you're being genuine then it's roundly appreciated.
> derived from repeatable experiments.

And this is why astronomy, geology, and paleontology are not sciences, and it's not looking too good for climatology or oceanography or meteorology.
We were thinking cupcakes!
Exactly. The whole concept is flawed.

The brain computes an abstraction of the reality (or most likely multiple competing abstractions) and decides on actions. There's the free will.

There is some kind of idea that the consciousness "floats" on top of this abstract soup as some kind of a running program in an operative system, and is making the calls, but this is most likely not how it works.

All these abstractions of sensory input, probabilities, decisions, etc, is probably what creates the consciousnesses but I doubt that there is a meaningful boundary.

After-the-fact rationalization may be true or not - it's obvious that events can't be processed in no time at all, and that there must be some processing time for the experienced "now."

But trying to build some meaningful philosophical arguments from it is probably a red herring.

After all, when trying to explain the reasons behind a decision made without explicit reasoning and external lists of pros and cons, it's often clear that there are many "hunches" that are not easy to summarize or valuate.
Congrats. Love Polymer (when I get to use it). Looks good.
It's science, but not scientific method. The two are related but different. It's an observation that is rigorously recorded, but not an experiment. Science is full of this stuff - look at the field of taxonomy, for example.

The idea that only those concepts which have been experimentally tested against the null hypothesis can be labelled 'science' goes against both reason and the spirit of the term.
22 days ago, got just 6 points for a high performance java dataframe. Today had 30 unique visitors on github: https://github.com/lwhite1/tablesaw. Good thing i have a day job :)
Perfect! I'll add more stuff to the registry
In all fairness to CGI and company, the government set them up for abject failure, no dream team of programmers could have succeeded with it taking the role of integrator for which is did not have the talent or realization of the testing required, so many delayed decisions, and last minute changes (like a very big one a week or two before), being forced to use an unfamiliar database that, worse, implemented an unfamiliar paradigm (wasn't an RDBMS), etc.

I wrote more details on this on HN at the time, ask and I'll dig some up.
I worked in factory for a while. Wake up at 7am. Be at work by 8am. Work until 12:30. Half hour for lunch. Work until 4:30. Then your day is OVER. You go home and do whatever the hell you want. The stress is lower, the pay is lower and you get much more effective free time. Oh and you don't feel like your brain is about to explode when you go home at 10pm.

tl;dr: yes, there are worse jobs than programming, but not many. The ridiculous amounts of stress is one of the reasons Silicon Valley pays so much more than Industry jobs.
Compare frames per second
I'm working on a contract tangentially related to this work and it's really not about young people working long hours. There are plenty of older people emailing me at 10 or 11 pm after the kids are in bed that don't know what's going on. This is solely about the quality of the talent.

I encounter people and teams that are just unwilling to adopt contemporary development and deployment practices. The article notes that Hipchat was a struggle to get approval for, yet I often run into people at CMS that never log in to it and prefer tons of emails. Deployments aren't automated and still happen for some teams on calls during maintenance periods once a week. I've had people in technical capacities ask what GitHub is.

The problem is institutional, it really has nothing to do with young people working 10 hour days. I care about my work-life balance -- I'm too old to crash on the couch at my startup's office like I did at past jobs in my 20s -- but I also keep up with contemporary development practices, make a point to study a new language every year, read academic papers, and care about my work. I don't think I can say the same about most devs I've encountered in government. The consulting firms are incentivized to build walls and protect the way they do business in order to keep getting that contract money.

If you're an older dev that is intellectually curious in the practice and art of software development I think you'll be fine.
Whether or not you like the dialect's origin story, it's here. Hundreds of thousands of African American children are raised with it as their first language.

You haven't so much "disagreed" with the essay as you've opted to pursue an orthogonal concern to which it doesn't expend any attention at all: whether AAVE is "good" or "bad". Pullum, in this piece, doesn't care. All he's saying is that when considering AAVE, we should at least understand what it is.
I had a similar idea a while ago to try and pair this with gaming benchmarks so you could say "I want to play games X, Y, Z" and it would give you hardware recommendations (affiliate linked to Amazon).

Looks like you've got a decent market sewn up, well done!
For what it's worth, the hope I see for Israel and Palestine today stems from the non-violent protests against the occupation that includes many Israelis and Jews. This includes conscientious objectors and groups championing dialogue between people living in Israel and the West Bank.

Lack of dialogue is one of the cornerstones on which we build hatred, racism and violence. It is much harder to justify demolishing someone's family home in order to have a good killing field from your border wall, if you are friends with that family.

[ed eg: http://m.btselem.org/

and http://www.breakingthesilence.org.il/ ]
Outbound Sales and Marketing Calls in 5 Minutes
Scientists Are Learning to “Grow” Drones in a Chemical Computer
This is logic that suggests we that all our comments should read like Beowulf, or at least Chaucer; after all, the dialect we speak is derived from older ones far further from our comprehension than AAVE.
Hahaha you are right, I'll have to fix that when I get home. Or maybe I'll tell Maggie to submit a pull request
If they are forced to do "buy first" things will just continue as usual. You can't outsource well if you don't have a strong technical foundation in-house.
Frame Rate UFO Motion Test
Please do not move the goalposts like this. You said, plainly, upthread, where everyone can see it, that AAVE was simpler than SE. Not "more significant". That word appears for the first time in your comments right here.

This thread, interesting as it may be, was germinated in that argument, not the new one you introduced 38 minutes ago.
The production rate in Q1 was lower than in Q2, so it could be misleading if there are still a number in transit.

In any case, the article should be clear on whether they're talking about production rates or delivery rates.
Why do you think that a hardware startup would do a better job of ramping up production than the Pi people do now?
Yeah I've opined about this a couple times here. But yeah I don't like "experiments" either. I like data, I like observation; experiments are just a way to control the rate we gather those observations, gather that data, instead of (and I did astronomy as an undergrad so I am particularly sympathetic to this field of examples) hoping a star explodes while you're looking at it. Gamma Ray Bursts are a great example of things we spent decades pretty much just hoping we'd be looking at when they happened.

And there's weird one offs that we're basically just guessing on.

But we build better instruments and make better observations and gather more data.
Seeing that you are gainfully employed in academia and with expertise in an unspecified area related to math (the vague description makes it hard to make good suggestions) I would think that you could explore commercialisation projects related to engineering, bio-engineering, etc. That is, areas that could use both your deep thinking and math abilities and open the door to industry without jumping the academic ship before there is a viable new avenue. From what I have seen both Barcelona and Madrid universities have some excellent research which might be ripe for commercialisation. Of course, you should probably explore potential projects with other universities. Academia - Industry collaborations with a view to commercialisation generally needs entrepreneurial input.
What do you think is missing to capture the high-level structure of mathematical concepts?
Do you have any suggestions on where to learn more about testing? I've gone through numerous tutorials and read through The Art of Unit Testing but I still feel like I'm writing tests just to write tests. It's not really clicking for me
I'm not a fan of that quote. It's actually quite common for the gate's purpose to have been forgotten or for the gate to be some pathological emergent side effect of something else. Not everything is necessary or rational. In old systems there is often a huge amount of "cruft" that simply does not need to be there.

Edit: I do believe trying to explain the reason for a thing is a worthwhile exercise, but failure to do so does not prove a thing's value.
Show HN: TrumpRejects – The Most Devious Use of $20 in Twilio Credits
There are hundreds of public wedding details on theknot.com as well.
The transition happened before you were born. Relax and enjoy it.
Wimbledon 2016: Serena Williams Beats Svetlana Kuznetsova
He lacks basic understanding of science. He repeatedly uses the phrase "scientific method" and proclaims its pretty much what you instictively would do, even in many other areas, like writing poems (??!?).

The Demarcation Problem (What is scientific) and Falsifiability.

The english Wikipedia Article is sadly rather poor on the Demarcation Problem. - Karl Popper - Logik der Forschung (Das Abgrenzungsproblem) has the good stuff.

The author compares any kind of investigation and iterative refinement with science,
but does not understand the effects this method has in combination with a specific subset of "sentences" - Those which can be disproven by empiric observations.

A rather trashy article. Especially the third-to-last paragraph:

"If scientific method is only one form of a general method employed in all human inquiry, how is it that the results of science are more reliable than what is provided by these other forms? I think the answer is that science deals with highly quantified variables and that it is the precision of its results that supplies this reliability. But make no mistake: Quantified precision is not to be confused with a superior method of thinking."

That awefully sounds like, "Ah, science, its just like opinion".