skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I have no problem with people wanting to have GMO labels. Consumers should have a choice as to what they put in their body.

But the argument that GMOs are dangerous has had little--if any--scientific proof. That so many Nobel laureates are getting behind this fact is reassuring, especially in a world where malnutrition is still existent.
Amazing that repricings like this are so rare that even investors like A16Z never / rarely see it:

>>“This is a unique situation, we’ve never seen it before and we don’t expect to see it again,” said a spokesperson for Andreessen Horowitz.

What's the advantage for the company?

The article makes it seem like this was David Sacks' decision and he's trying to coerce existing investors into signing off on this "new deal," making it even more strange.
There is no fundamental difference between genetic modification done in a lab then done with selective breeding. Each relies on modification of the underlying DNA. Selective breeding just takes longer to get the desired results as it requires trial and error. Any result that produced by produced with genetic modification can be produced with selective breeding if given sufficient time. I don't understand the argument against GMO if you support selective breeding.
Open a little shop, work in a bike store or book store, build houses for habitat for humanity, build trails, work for production companies, be a teacher's assistant, be a barista, do all the cool low-paying jobs that you couldn't afford to do before.
They do. It's a big read too.

This reminds me of talks with my dentist.
Me: What about mercury fillings, could they really harm you, or is that just a bunch of BS.
Dentist: That's crazy. There is nothing wrong with mercury fillings. Nothing.
Me: Would you use them for your children?
Dentist: What! Never, composites only. The science is really not out yet on that.

An interesting talk for sure. :-)
I always thought distribution of food was the impediment. And if we could reliably ensure that the people who needed the food got it and not some local dictator (or whatever) then there would be no problem.

Then it would be worth building infrastructure in the countries that needed it and just ship food over.
I'm describing a scientific experiment that goes something like this:

1. Collect N voice samples from N people, and ask M people to classify whether each sample is 'black' or 'not black'. Don't tell the N people exactly how the rest of the experiment is being run, to avoid people intentionally trying to sound different.

2. Define a 'black index' for each of the N people that is the percentage of M people who voted "Sounds like a black person" over (the average percentage of "Sounds like a black person" for the N candidates as a whole). The denominator is said to be the "baseline" percentage.

3. I predict that the black index is positively correlated with frequency-of-fines. I'll further predict that white people with a higher black index are fined more than black people with a lower black index.
What kind of problems were you working on?
I leaned towards reading it as blaming the culture that rewards the behaviors that lead to trouble. Only "leaning" because the strongest support of it is the idea presented of moving a black child to a middle-class American family - that child will still be black, but he contends (rightly or wrongly) that the same issues would not be present.

At least to me, this suggest it's perception of a culture under discussion - a culture that is concomitantly dominated by black members.

Could just be I'm being to generous in my reading though :)
You've hit upon my concerns. For me the consistent messaging from Monsanto and other GMO backing corporations about "There's no evidence it's unsafe to eat." is a red herring. I know some people are concerned about eating GMOs, but personally I'm a lot more concerned with the long term environmental impacts.

Even setting aside the possibility of GMO strains of life (whether plant or animal) reproducing and escaping containment; what about side effects on other species? We know insecticides have had many unforeseen side effects, it's not unreasonable to expect that GMO plants might also have impacts on insects, birds and other animals.

Then there's the business aspects where these mega corporations will use their GMO crops to force onerous contracts/purchasing agreements on farmers.

The way they always try to turn the issue on "There's no evidence its unsafe to eat." is telling to me; they have picked one issue to focus on to try to keep the public from noticing all the other issues with GMOs.

I don't think GMOs need to be made illegal, but I do think the public has a right to know if the food they are consuming comes from GMOs not because I'm worried necessarily about safety of eating, but so that we can choose to support or not support them with our purchasing power.
Not a huge surprise given the events of late, especially considering they laid off more than a hundred of their employees.

If this is the public slash they are announcing, how bad do you think reality is looking on the inside? Just imagine the spin masters trying to spin this to their employees.

I can't help but chuckle a little. Kids.

That being said, I'll add that there are certainly aspects of this that are not funny at all. Real people lost their jobs due to the tomfoolery of others. I feel for them.

edit

Are you saying that all 100 people got the generous severance package?
I think the upgrade challenge is going to be the dependencies - declarative_authorization, typus, etc. Ah well, all part of the fun.
I'm a native speaker and I never make those mistakes.

I find it irritating when I read writing that includes those kinds of basic mistakes.

Of course, you even see those kinds of basic mistakes on the TV, especially the news tickers. I see about one per week, and I'm not even consciously looking for them.

I think it's people who have never read a lot, so they just write whatever sounds similar. Just seems lazy to me to not check, and after reading these comments from non-natives who can get it right, I now think it's super-lazy.
> These things spread in the wild, and we are basically playing god with the building blocks of (plant) life itself, which we definitely do not fully understand. If we fail to acknowledge some detail after meddling with something that could not have happened in nature, we might not find out until it's reaped devastating effects on global agriculture or even long-term human health. Even if GMOs can do a lot of good in the short-term, it would be terrifying to find out in the long-term that we've caused horrific damage due to our arrogance.

But as a species, we've been "playing god with the building blocks of plant life itself" for several thousand years - in far more dramatic and riskier fashion than any current modern biotechnologies would be capable of. Selective and cross breeding of plants has brought about all modern vegetables and fruits we eat today, and has dramatically altered their genetics, biochemistry, and phenotypes in ways that at the time we never understood and certainly could never control. Yet, nothing inherently disastrous happened - some scary mega plant of our design never took over the world out of our control. With modern biotechnology, scientists are not only able to be a LOT more sure of what the heck they're doing when they're editing a plant by specifically targeting understood and characterized genes, they are also far better able to characterize and test the nutritional and safety profile and ecological impact of a genetic modification.

We've been playing God with plants for thousands of years, and there has been no disastrous implications, and it seems like now that we have technologies that make that safer than ever, people are suddenly crying alarm.

Also, out of curiosity - what sort of "devastating effects" could you realistically imagine? As a biologist, it's hard to imagine anything "devastating" that sounds realistic. I could imagine critical biological impacts - such as perhaps the impact of bt-corn on Monarch butterflies - but nothing that we wouldn't be able to recognize and swiftly respond to. Of course, if there's some malevolent people who seek to hide or discredit such findings, or disrupt such a response (as we see today with fossil fuel funded climate change denial), then that's a whole different, but entirely political, apple.
If the internet was invented before antibiotics or animal husbandry, you could post the exact anti-GMO argument for those technologies as well.
Or that radar cannot detect an object moving perpendicularly in front of you regardless of overhead clearance. I assumed that auto pilot was more advanced than what is now being described. They have a lot of work to do here.
How many of those are arrested in high crime areas? What is the arrest rate like in comparison to poor white areas?

The discrepancy may be explainable simply by the police presence in the area.
Turns out that ignoring all political, legal, and economic frictions makes solving all the world's problems very easy! Why don't we all just produce enough food and then give it to the people that are hungry? Duh...!
$50m in the hole means he's carrying $50m in debt.
That was a point of contention on the show, IIRC. The prosecution argued that Adnan was jealous. Adnan claimed to be on OK terms with Lee, even giving her his new phone number shortly before her disappearance. IIRC, this was an angle of suspicion for the Serial producers, who found it strange that he didn't bother to call her after her disappearance.

(I'm on speaking terms with my exes. Even am still Facebook friends)
I would need an array for processing any large data set as an indexed collection. Why is that considered an "odd feature no-one uses" when it's a fundamental data type in most mainstream languages?
I agree that they are similar in some ways, but under the covers they are fundamentally different beasts in almost all ways!!!

Etcd uses Raft and ZooKeeper uses it's own protocol called Zab [0]. Zab shares some characteristics with Paxos but certainly IS NOT Paxos.

[0] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/Zab+vs...
Actually I might argue there is a difference. Going through selective breeding means the plants/animals live long enough to reproduce and likely reproduce sexually. Cloning + GMOs means you can make things that don't need to go through this process but still exist and serve some purpose.
I believe ZK implements Pacis. Maybe someone not on mobile can correct me / provide reference.
This isn't a defensive response, just a genuinely curious one.

For certain types of programming - generally in lower-level languages - arrays can be essential for performance. But then my assumption is that if you needed that kind of performance, you'd be using those languages.

So outside of performance, what's the functional difference between an actual array implementation - and a thing that looks, walks, and quacks like a duck?
At the moment blood isn't cheap or easy to preserve. Then there is a matter of supply. Current research involving parabiosis in mice required a significant age difference and a continuous supply. Meaning you spend 15 - 25 trying to produce double the amount of blood just so you have what you need when you are 70 to 80. Transgenic xeno blood is a more likely solution if not synthetic blood or protein filtering.

Regarding self fecal implants, the case where it could be most beneficial is in post antibiotic treatment. I recall seeing a a before/after graph of gut flora. Antibiotics had the effect of a nuclear bomb. Even years later, gut flora was still a fraction of what it had been.
Adnan would talk Jay into borrowing the car and phone later in the day - he asked for the ride before he created the need for it.
Also, what are some pain points of using RethinkDB, ie development problems, production problems?

RethinkDB looks really nice, was really easy to play around with it when I last did. I'm considering using it for a small project, but wondering what everyone thinks of the downsides, compared to the upsides. (there are pros and cons to everything :)).
if you need constant time access by index to a sequence of fixed size elements you can use binaries. if you want constant time access to a sequence of fixed size you can use tuples. if you want both you can get close with maps using integer keys or with trees (which i believe are used by clojure behind the scenes for arrays)
Without taking a stance either way...that argument isn't very convincing. By that argument a car is just a really fast horse.
I am waiting for entirely synthetic food options that will compete with photosynthesis from an energy perspective. That could be huge for space for instance.
Repository of machine learning models implemented in TensorFlow
I must say it was a fantastic time to watch the web evolving over those months. As every browser over a short period of time but IE produced JavaScript engines that were not just slightly faster, but radically faster websites adapted and there was within months sites would load in seconds everyone but on IE where it would be minutes. It introduced a binary incompatibility of sorts on the web and users were now abandoning IE because the sites they wanted to use were too slow to be useful.

To a lesser degree we are starting to see a similar post of article starting with Opera, Safari, and IE working on reducing their energy usage while oddly it is Chrome that is silent. Just like before a product with a significantly superior feature has caused me to switched. But this time it was back to Safari from Chrome. But the Chrome team is not asleep at the wheel like the Microsoft was and I am expecting/hoping within a year or two there to be a post with dramatic energy savings made by the Chrome team.
what stereo vision? there is only one camera afaik
Self driving == Self Crashing
Why not build some train lines bust people using phones while driving and stop this self driving car nonsense?
Surely this argument can be used to criticize any field, though - "the question is whether the technology industry can be trusted to self-regulate" - "the question is whether the pharmaceutical industry can be trusted to self-regulate"- and so on. If you what you have is a concern about capitalist abuse and are calling for checks on and regulation of corporate power, all the power to you (I strongly support these concerns and calls in all industries). However, to be "anti-GMO" because of what some corporations who make them may do in the future is like being "anti-Internet" or "anti-medicine" for the same reasons.
But why not create that conglomerate themselves rather than join another service where they have less control as individuals, say signed exclusively to Spotify or whatever?

I've long thought that elite-brand athletes (LeBron, Durant, etc) should collectively start an alternative social media network that gives them more functionality that suits them, rather than just play on Instagram, Twitter and the like.

You already see things like The Players' Tribune - a media presence by players giving them direct control over things like signing announcements and so on.
Very well said. I think the cogent part of the complaint is the economics of it. I can understand being opposed to the capitalist enterprise of inventing, patenting, and licensing the seeds. I personally am happy there's a way to fund this kind of R&D in the general market, but it does create interesting power dynamics between farmers and the patent holders.
Fatal crash in Tesla autopilot mode
As a python programmer for over 15 years, you will be better served by learning a PL from a different paradigm

* Erlang/Elixir -- concurrency

* OCaml/Haskell -- static typing etc.,

* Typescript/Elm/Purescript -- better Javascript

* You get the idea ...

more so than Ruby. Ruby lives in the same neighbourhood in the galaxy of programming languages. You are not missing much by ignoring Ruby.
I have studied Elixir and other functional languages such as Clojure where vectors are 1 of the 3 basic collection types so the "new way of doing things" isn't an issue for me. Elixir took a lot of inspiration from Clojure so the 2 languages are not that different.
You could make a similar argument about any technology: we don't fully understand nature, so messing with it is dangerous. Luckily we've come up with techniques of science and engineering that help us mitigate the danger. We can run experiments, do focused testing, build and validate models, and so on. Is there something unique about GMOs that would make these techniques not work? How do you feel about pharmaceuticals that often "play god" at a more fundamental biochemical level with even more poorly-understood mechanisms?
>they have picked one issue to focus on to try to keep the public from noticing all the other issues with GMOs

They're not the ones that picked that focus, people that rally against GMOs did, they're just refuting the most common "mainstream" complaint about GMO.

>it's not unreasonable to expect that GMO plants might also have impacts on insects, birds and other animals.

Well it's just as reasonable as expecting plants modified through selective breeding to have those same effects.
> There is no fundamental difference between genetic modification done in a lab then done with selective breeding.

That's just not true at all. You cannot selectively breed corn to start secreting Miracle Gro. You cannot selectively breed salmon to have eel DNA.

This is a canard that the GMO companies try to push; that it's "exactly the same", but it's an absurd statement.

Yes you can say if you had literally millions or billions of years you could breed mice to glow in the dark, but that's like saying if I had millions or billions of years my random text generator would eventually write the works of Shakespeare (because you are relying on random mutation to give you that glowing gene eventually in the case of breeding for it.)

And again, this statement is made only in some ridiculous attempt to draw a line between something people are comfortable and familiar with and genetic engineering. It's silly. There's a huge difference between selectively breeding my dogs and taking an embryo from one and inserting octopus DNA to try to make them have ink sacs.
It's ironic that the same people who insult conservatives for denying the scientific consensus behind global warming, would themselves deny the scientific consensus behind GMO safety and efficacy. Makes you wonder if anyone actually believes in science, or if everyone simply sees it as a pawn to use and discard when convenient.
That would seem to argue that severely deleterious effects will only persist as long as people keep creating more of that modification and thus preventing unwanted spread of such things.

If anything, my only real concern with GMOs relates to the IP rights and how it could give Monsanto & co. too much control over our food supply, but that's a legal issue, not a safety issue and it's not a good reason to oppose them outright.
>Also how come you don't run windows

Because I find windows to be technologically inferior

>but somehow have no problem with a closed source OS (SteamOS) and a closed source platform (Steam) with always on DRM taking over gaming on Linux?

While I do support open source, I do not choose Linux simply because it is open source. I work in a windows shop, if windows was not a steaming pile of shit I would not have a job. When I get home I want my computer to simply work, the way I want it to work, with out problems or having fucking update popups every 5 mins, or having driver issues (yes I infact have more driver issues on windows than Linux, party because I ensure I select hardware that is supported by the Kernel before I buy something so hardware is never an issue for me)

I choose Linux because for me it is the best computing experience for my workflow, not simply because it is open source.

I have only installed SteamOS once, and do not currently have any system running it, I use Arch Linux for any Desktop Systems, and some dev servers. CentOS for all Production Servers, and I dabble in all the others.

As for DRM, while steam does have DRM not all games use it, People often confuse SteamDRM with the other features of the Platform. Steam is a Application Library that has DRM, I have never had an negative experience in relation to SteamDRM so it does not really bother me.

You have seem to confused me with RMS or something.

This argument is about like asking why I use the Nvidia Closed source Drivers... Hell maybe that is your problem with Shadow, you are attempting to use the nouveau drivers
Line struggles to grow ahead of IPO
> They're not the ones that picked that focus, people that rally against GMOs did, they're just refuting the most common "mainstream" complaint about GMO.

I disagree. I think the pro-GMO people like to pretend it's the main objection, but it isn't. Most people I know with concerns about GMOs are concerned not about eating them as much as what kind of impacts they could have on the environment.

> Well it's just as reasonable as expecting plants modified through selective breeding to have those same effects.

Oh god not this ridiculous canard again. Pretending that bananas which have been bred to be softer are the same as bananas that have been engineered to secrete Miracle Gro is just ridiculous.
That's my point: if it's not lack of food production that is causing malnutrition, then arguing for increased food production to solve malnutrition is not very convincing.
Ruby, Python and Javascript all have native array support but can hardly be considered lower-level languages.
> Why does Clojure need them or Ruby or Python (lists)?

So you want a list it seems

> l=[1,2,3]
> [h | t] = l
[1, 2, 3]
> h
1
> t
[2, 3]

> If I want to process data as a large indexed array Elixir isn't going to help me

But neither will Python. You'd want a large indexed array you probably want numpy.

See now you are revealing a bit more about your usecase that's helpful. So you have large amount of data and want to query it and process it. In that case you might want to check out ETS. The nice benefit, you have have cool matching or query list comprehensions of it. Can also access it concurrently from multiple processes:

http://elixir-lang.org/getting-started/mix-otp/ets.html

This is the Erlang side of it:

http://learnyousomeerlang.com/ets

> but the question here is whether it is deficient in other areas, making it too much of a niche language.

Of course it is deficient. C is deficient. Java, C++ is they all. Every language is deficient in some way. I haven't found a Perfect one yet. Still looking... Maybe Rust, who knows, still struggling to learn it.
>Even if GMOs can do a lot of good in the short-term, it would be terrifying to find out in the long-term that we've caused horrific damage due to our arrogance.

Same thing can be said for selectively breeding plants.
How are you planning on accessing it though?

If it's iterated over sequentially then a list works perfectly.

If it's random access then a map works.
Man, that's insane. Does anyone have links to articles about the prosecution? I want to see how this was sold to the public so I can look out for "warning signs" that show up in other cases.
Man Sues Apple for 10B Dollars
I was putting image net performance out there as a bare minimum capability. I agree 3d real-time reconstruction is harder (although aided by multiple cameras + radar, etc). You're right, it probably isn't a fair comparison because of the convolution of real-time needs and additional sensors/cameras available.
Social skills?
But if you label it, why wouldn't you start labeling all other sorts of things?

GMO vs not-GMO is irrelevant information for the consumer outside of marketing and ignorance-based paranoia.