skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Can you define what you mean here by discontinuity? I meant that the function of the gravitational field is continuous everywhere under the topology of the manifold, the mathematical definition. I see no discontinuity, but perhaps you're using a different definition?

The "no gravity" line there means the stress tensor is zero, and this is a so-called "vacuum solution." Essentially all closed form solutions to the field equations are vacuum solutions because it's almost impossible to write a closed form solution otherwise.
This isn't always the case. Check out the RISC-V compressed extension. It turns out that RV64GC usually beats x86_64 on dynamic code size.

See slide 31: https://riscv.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Tue1130celio-fu...
I submitted this because I found it an interesting read. The article is not written very formally and confirms many thoughts I had myself but which I've not seen in writing before.

I'm slightly (but happily) surprised this many others found it a nice read too.
Twitch is dying? They had 258k+ people watching The International. There were 130k watching an EULCS quarterfinal today. And those are just a couple of streams of the thousands that are online at any given time. Not to mention the popular streamers who have 10 of thousands of subs who pay $5+ a month which Twitch gets part of. Twitch is most definitely not "dying."
OK well I'm 100% confident Ford and BMW will be in existence in 20 years. I'm maybe 80% confident Tesla will be, in any case it's definitely not 100%. So even setting aside the software updates for 10-20 years question, as if that'll even be a thing with these cars, I have less than complete certainty Tesla will be around in its present form making cars at all.
Intel had no choice but to make this move. That is because it has failed in the mobile and embedded/IoT space, and it isn't selling enough x86 chips to keep its new fabs up to capacity, so it needs to also make ARM chips.

That said, the economics of this are pretty uncertain. Intel's business model is to spend an enormous amount of money on process R and D and cutting-edge fabs so it can produce the most advanced chips, and charge premium prices that pay off these costs. It can charge such high prices because x86 dominated computing, and it has had little real competition in the x86 space.

The ARM model, in contrast is to produce large numbers of chips at low cost for markets with many competitors and intense price competition. If Intel charges typical ARM prices, it won't be making enough money to pay for its fabs and R and D costs. If it charges premium prices, it will be more expensive than everyone else and won't sell many chips, and again won't make much money. My guess is Intel will go the latter route and make a relatively small number of premium ARM chips for the highest-end, most expensive smartphones. Better than nothing, but hardly a great success.
To be more clear, the ER bridge would actually allow people on different ends to jump in and meet in the 'middle', they just couldnt then go back out (going from one side out the other). This was the closest thing to a wormhole i can think of (given the ER=RPR conjecture is true)
That's a post from 1996. I'm not sure how "easy" was calculated. Possibly both were hard but tractable, but 64 bits should have been much harder.

Today it is significantly easier to collide a 32-bit key than a 64-bit one, but both are pretty easy. A 32-bit key can be collided in 4 seconds on a GPU, according to https://evil32.com. It can certainly be done on normal desktop hardware in hours. For a 64-bit key, 'JoshTriplett calculated (last week) that a collision would take 15 days if someone built hashing hardware of comparable quality to a commercial Bitcoin miner:

https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2016/08/msg00215.html

(Incidentally, I am very pleased with Bitcoin having created a liquid market between cryptographic computational speed and money, so we can answer these sorts of questions precisely.)
W3clan – User Curated Tutorial Network
Seems it is not merely the strong set.

Mine is not in the strong set and it had a collision uploaded.
It has the same upload (creation?) date -- 2014-06-16 as many others.
See also "Feeling Good: The New Mood Therapy".

(I am sorta-kinda a CBT skeptic, at least personally. But I know a lot of people for whom they claim it's been life-changing, and this is what they recommend.)
There's not a lot of weasel room in this promise, since it includes no accessible controls. And semi-autonomous cars are not really useful for ride hailing in any meaningful way.
Obesity is pretty common in poor people, because of bad but cheaper alimentation.
I can't believe New Jersey would let someone brazenly advertise religiously-motivated cannibalism.
I mostly agree, functions are way too powerful abstractions to introduce sugar on top of them.
Is anyone aware of other, non-automotive applications being discussed? I might have missed it in the article but it seemed like they only alluded to any. Construction? Maybe even aerospace?
It seems like a good article overall, though I'm skeptical of some of his assumptions, and a few of his characterizations are decidedly more sinister than I think is warranted.
Yes. Go straight to the top. It's typically easy to find out who the CEO is. Next, determine the email format that they use. Email the CEO with your issue (extremely concise, problem/resolution first, backstory later -- these are busy people!). Include a phone number. Get resolution within days.
That's why I'm a fan of the RISC-V compressed ISA extension. Compressed instructions are 16 bits long and a subset of the 32 bit instructions, but can be mixed freely with 32 bit. The extension also relaxes the alignment requirements, so that 32 bit instructions can be aligned to 16 bit boundaries.
I'm kind of lost by your contruction. Is the something we drop the same as the object we "lift"? What does it mean to lift the object? Try removing the pronouns, and being more specific with your steps.

Is this a thought experiment you came up with on your own, or do you have a paper you're citing? If the latter, do you have a link?
Google is famously more selective than Harvard (both places have self-selected applicant pools, but Harvard admits 5% while Google has "millions" of applications and only tens of thousands of programmers hired over multiple years). However, by a similar argument it is less selective than Major League Baseball.

Google hires self-taught programmers. But the median autodidact has low ability compared to the median formally-educated computer scientist. Google cares less about credentials than they used to, and even in the early days they were willing [http://www.codersatwork.com/jamie-zawinski.html] to hire jwz-caliber self-taught programmers. But your interview performance must be on par with traditionally educated candidates. You must be able to write plausible code in 45 minutes to solve a challenging problem that can be described in 2 minutes. That essentially requires that you are familiar with fundamental algorithms and data structures (or that you are a genius who can reinvent these on-the-fly) and some popular programming language.

The portfolio doesn't matter very much. The hiring committee will expect if you are young that you are capable of contributing in some way immediately and show promise for doing much more in the future. If you are older they will expect that you have a track record of exceptional accomplishment that they can expect you will extend at Google.

For info about the process, see https://www.google.com/about/careers/. It's going to be (1) submit your application (2) do phone screens (3) do onsite interviews (4) review offer.

The penalty for trying too early is that it will take some of your time to do interviews and you won't be able to try again for a whole year. So you should put some effort into it if you seriously want to work at Google, but you should not dedicate years of your life to taking a single shot at it because you can and many do successfully reapply after rejection.
Was this basically an acquihire? No price disclosed. I would be very surprised if this was any kind of successful acquisition, given Curse has taken $60m in funding.
How do you decide what to work on?
I think the better that you deform under pressure the longer you have to resist the force against you. Imagine a car where the crumple zone instantly shatters upon impact, it would barely even be worth having, whereas one that deforms will resist the force while crumpling. (I'm a cs person, so excuse me if that's totally inaccurate)
Be good in algorithm. If you can do same work in most efficient and effective way than any one else in this earth. You will be part of google.

Also, google has many other job opportunity than programmer. Try them out, if you are too much google lover.
There have been no IPOs. The largest acquisition was Cruise, then Heroku, then OMGPop, then Parse.

The fall-off of acq prices is pretty steep, but given that they put up hardly any money ($17k early on, now $120k) the returns are insane.

When you look at annualized returns, they actually demolish avg. VC returns just from the number of companies that flip in 1-2 years for $10MM (or more).

Their biggest hurdle is scale (in terms of putting a lot of money to work).
Fair answer. I was hoping there was some well-known blog posts on a major blog about this that I didn't know about.
The article paraphrased. The court document showed that the person attempted for months to get the plates and never did. Also the money was to pay for court fees which the government required the person spend in the first place to get the plates.
Alternatively, you can click on "raw" and get https://raw.githubusercontent.com/raganwald/presentations/ma...
Both are justifiable. Almost any manufacturing that uses press forming and relies on strength/weight.
Serializability, Linearizability, and Locality
In Australia that's the case - paper statements are mandated, and if you want a paperless statement there's a bunch of stuff banks have to do including formally recording your preference to have paperless statements and sending a letter once a year or so to notify you of your recorded preference.
Debate Platform for websites
The last two paragraphs of the article touch exactly on this. They talk about another person who had a similar incident where his first attempt was rejected but the follow-up wasn't, and he explicitly mentions why _that_ is his problem: "the problem was that the system discriminated against me and made me appeal".

But yes, if you come in with a "this didn't actually happen, this is someone making a big deal out of nothing" mindset, that is the lesson you can take away from the article too.
I stated that transparently just to say that it was one, not that it isn't a well done one. I actually am running a Canary build for Linux of Discord and have had almost no issues with it, and any problems have been fixed very transparently.
Python stdlib datetime/time/calendar libs are junk. That one constantly has to read obscure function signatures in the docs to do rather obvious things is just awful.

On the otherhand if you've e.g. Ruby/Rails datetime handling than you get used to reasonable things working ( such as Time.now + 1.day ) that Arrow doesn't handle well. As a matter of fact Arrow got rid of DT deltas and seemingly made the situation worse.

I've only looked at the examples in the docs; but to be serious, Python should just scrap their DT/time/calendar libs and copy Ruby verbatim. This NIH thing needs to stop..
further down the article it says the DMV there has already shown a history of prejudice against atheists. Forcing a lawsuit to rectify their procedures in the future is imo a good use of the courts.

Edit: history of prejudice may be too extreme. probably "has shown to be prejudiced" would be better
It all depends if the force is along or against the bend.
This whole line of reasoning is self-defeating. If what you say is true, then I should go out right now and buy expensive cars and clothes for the sole purpose of attracting a mate. Which should clearly demonstrate that I am not financially well-off, smart, or responsible in any way. And it would mean nothing if I am unattractive in other ways.

>And unfortunately unless you're a doctor, lawyer, or CEO, 'having nice things' is the only socially appropriate way to signal that.

Meaningful conversation, a sense of humor, good looks, and an approachable demeanor are all perfectly socially appropriate, and they tend to attract people much more reliably.
Excellent video. It's amazing how much time we spend on hobbies, learning better skills, having fun - and how little time we spend trying to optimize our lives for happiness.
Intel Announces 10nm
I get the regularization part, but don't you get essentially the same regularization from using a sparse autoencoder? If the encoder realizes it doesn't have much information, it will turn on few units.

What I don't really intuit is: is it just basically doing regularization, or is the interpretation in terms of learning to infer the posterior meaningful?
Which banks do provide paperless billing for business accounts, and what specific policy reason -- compliance? Record keeping? -- prevents SVB from doing it?

You know, the people responsible for printing and shipping? The expense/hassle is not lost on them. I'm curious to know more.
That language. Talking about relationships in pseudo-Darwinian terms is something that comes out of the pickup artist community.

Especially the bit where you use that jargon to dehumanize women by reducing their feelings to a set of base instincts.
It also challenges people to think how to structure a society that maximizes peoples ability to work at this level. The folks who figure out how to put 'everyone' in a position to make successful startups with have contributed orders of magnitude more value to society than any single startup.
Another fab should mean options and with that price decrease.
I wonder how much a given chip price can be decreased with this move.

Another way of reading this is that making more use of a given tech should pay the initial cost faster thus making possible more research and improved processes.

Sadly another way of reading this is that Intel doesn't have any tech that would capitalize in better chips anymore.
Very related:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdom_of_repugnance
I feel like everyone thinks this way in retrospect, but at the time it's so much harder. It's hard to accept not being at the top of everything even when you know they're just local maxima.
The complete list of timeseries databases for your IoT project
> Those always existed and are not new or news. They are actually fewer than before.

That depends on whether or not you consider motive. Sure, people shooting cops during their crimes might be down, but people going hunting for cops is quite clearly up and it takes a bit of cognitive dissonance to equate the two.

> See the problem here is the argument it is increasing and it is a "war" when literally no part of that argument is based on fact.

So, what exactly do you call it when people hate you and go out of their way to shoot you based on who you are, as if all cops are exactly the same and bear collective guilt.

> I've had to resolve 100% of the crimes committed against me myself because the cops took 0 positive action to resolve the issues. This stems from bike thefts to breaking & entering & assault on my person.

This only makes me wonder how you're resolving issues like that and if there's a correlation with your expectations that's becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. I have completely the opposite experience, if we're working on anecdotes, and approximately as many interactions, including the case where my own mother was murdered. The officers there went out of their way to check on us and make sure that no one was mistreating us.
They shouldn't be uncorrelated given x.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkson%27s_paradox
Nice! I read Dario Amodei's paper on Concrete Problems in AI Safety a few months ago, and I'm excited that he and OpenAI are going to be working on them. There's a lot of important research waiting to be done!
Frank Herbert speaking at UCLA 4/17/1985
> suddenly you have all the benefits of async

You don't have the most important one - synchronization-free concurrency, that you can get only by explicitly giving up control.
ChatSim – unlimited global chat sim card
I already faced some of mentioned problems using Arrow, I'll give pendulum a try tomorrow.
There is a limit though - I think it was 3 lifetime rejections before HR stops considering you as a candidate. So don't be shy about re-applying if your circumstances have changed, but also don't "scattershot" apply to Google if you think there's no chance at all of getting in.
World's Most Advanced Stand-Alone Tracking Device
1.day? I confess to not being a Rubyist, but does that require monkeypatching the base int class?

I don't see anything unreasonable about Pendulum's interface. Let's let Python be Python and Ruby be Ruby.
Relevant quote from Otellini, the former CEO

"The thing you have to remember is that this was before the iPhone was introduced and no one knew what the iPhone would do... At the end of the day, there was a chip that they were interested in that they wanted to pay a certain price for and not a nickel more and that price was below our forecasted cost. I couldn't see it. It wasn't one of these things you can make up on volume. And in hindsight, the forecasted cost was wrong and the volume was 100x what anyone thought."

It was the only moment I heard regret slip into Otellini's voice during the several hours of conversations I had with him. "The lesson I took away from that was, while we like to speak with data around here, so many times in my career I've ended up making decisions with my gut, and I should have followed my gut," he said. "My gut told me to say yes."

Source: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/05/paul-o...
Powerful NSA hacking tools revealed online – Washington Post
> most people would be willing to arrive 0.0000001 hours later to save 998 dollars

Unfortunately, if you don't know how your model behaves, you can't tell when you're setting γ whether you're actually going to get a solution that's way past the point of diminishing returns. You may not even be able to tell after the fact. This is one of the reasons for doing sensitivity analysis on γ. (Your ε-constraint scalarization helps with this problem.)
Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence, and this paper doesn't provide it. It's based on a re-analysis of an experiment's data without replicating the experiment or conducting any new ones to address potential sources of error in the first.

The headline is sensationalist and completely premature.
Looks great for IoT and Texting via gsm modules
Change in relation to the illusory confidence I mentioned in the first part of my sentence.
I think you're underestimating human diversity. In some very base sense what you are saying is true, but you're not going to have a successful date just because you vaguely "demonstrated reproductive value." That's because what is appropriate value depends entirely on the person you're dating -- their mood, their experiences, their self-perceptions...

The only way you're speaking the truth is if just about every human behavior qualifies as demonstrating success. In which case, you're saying nothing. It is nearly useless for making actual decisions, and thus not something you are justified in believing strongly.
15 Page Tutorial for R
Wouldn't that be a CNC lathe?
The best advice I received on this topic was that feedback should be actionable, specific, and kind.

Actionable and specific mean that the person on the receiving end has a set of concrete actions to take to implement.

For example, "get better at programming" isn't specific, and "get a PhD in Computer Science" probably isn't actionable, but "work on improving your ability to write readable code by working through the exercises in this book" is something that can be worked with (especially if you can spend some time to mentor that person!)

Kindness matters a lot, though, and it is different from niceness.

When giving feedback, some people say that they are brutally honest, but often the emphasis is on the first word, rather than the second. Things like "The module you wrote is crap because your code sucks and is hard to maintain." doesn't help in any way, shape or form.

On the other hand, others that focus on being nice often heap on the praise, while excluding or downplaying the criticism. "You worked really hard on that module, and maybe should should spend a more little time refactoring and cleaning things up" is too nice.

Kindness means sharing the good and the bad, but without being aggressive or accusatory: "Thanks for the hard work on that module. It does exactly what it needs to, but I'm really struggling to understand what's going on in there, as there are some really big methods and classes. Breaking those apart into smaller separate objects and functions would help a lot."
first big claim: All other trackers require a phone. Bull.... .

Maybe don't start your marketing material with obvious lies if you want to be taken seriously...
You're thinking Kaspersky has ties with Kremlin, and, after an apparent lack of belief in authenticity (even after inserting commically bad Slavic-person-speaks-bad-English phrases in their "ad") they worked together on writing an "analysis" to bolster the authenticity. So the world believes that this a bona-fide stuff?
An Olympic Event Where First Prize Is the Chance to Lose Billions
I was semi-interested in this until I saw the $125 price for the Mods Development Kit.

I'll stick with IOIO because who has the time and money to invest in another proprietary system that only works with a single phone from a single manufacturer, and will probably end up abandoned?
> If they rejected an offer a few years ago,

Funny story, that: https://techcrunch.com/2011/10/18/dropbox-said-no-to-nine-di...
Most people don't want to admit that the suburbs are underrated. Bland compared to city life? Possibly. But the quality of life is definitely there.
Tips for Giving Clear (Technical) Talks [pdf]
You sure about that?

"...calculations in semiclassical gravity suggest that quantum effects may be able to violate this condition in curved spacetime. Although it was hoped recently that quantum effects could not violate an achronal version of the averaged null energy condition, violations have nevertheless been found, so it remains an open possibility that quantum effects might be used to support a wormhole."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole
Likely they did, just not in a way visible in their skeleton. Bones and teeth are the only things paleontologists can study, but the real animal has many more parts invisible to them. For example they likely continuously evolved resistance against new diseases.
It comes down to definitions. What is "positive impact" to you? To me, it means "increasing the total amount of human understanding", not "making everybod happy and Amish".

Edit: By the way, this is the essential difference between Bentham's and Mill's versions of utilitarian philosophy, if you'd like to research further. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stuart_Mill#Utilitarianis...