skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm an audiobook junkie and as far as professional narrators go, I think it'd be hard to replace a high-end performance with something computer generated and end up with the level of quality offered by the likes of a great narrator like Scott Brick. I mention him by name because it was him that made me realize how important good quality narration is. I had purchased a book at an airport bookstore on a whim and while waiting for a plane was so disgusted with the poor quality of the writing that I actually threw the book out[0]. Years later, I had grabbed an audio book by an author I hadn't heard of simply because it was read by Scott Brick and recommended to "Read Next". Two hours in and I realized the book I had been enjoying so much was the same terrible book I had thrown out years before[1].

While I don't doubt it'll be possible for a computer to match it with enough input data (both in voice and human adjustment), it'll probably be a while before we'll be there and when we are there it'll likely require a lot of adjustment on the part of a professional. A big part of narration is knowing when and where a part of the story requires additional voice acting (and understanding what is required). A machine generated narration would have to understand the story sufficiently to be able to do that correctly. They might be able to get the audio to sound as good as it would sound if I narrated it, but someone with talent in the area is going to be hard to match.

All of that aside, it's getting pretty close to "good enough". When it reaches that point, my hope is more books will have audio versions available[2] and in all likelihood, some books that would have been narrated by a person today will likely be narrated by technology when it reaches that point, limiting human narration only to the top x% of books.

[0] I always resell books or donate them. This book was so bad that the half-hour it took from my life felt like a tragedy. I threw it out to prevent someone from experiencing its awfulness -- even for free.

[1] I realized it was the same book at the point a story was told that I had only read in the first book (and found mildly humorous). The reason I hated the other book was that it was written in the first person as a New York cop. I couldn't form a mental picture and the character was entirely unbelievable and one dimensional. When narrated properly, that problem was eliminated.

[2] I "speed read" (not gimmicky ... scan/skimming) and consume a ton of text. I've been doing it for 20 years or so and find it difficult to read word-for-word as is required for enjoyment of fiction, so to "force" it, I stick with audio books for fiction and love them.
I think that is a common experience for women. I find it really challenging to get men to engage me in meaningful, meaty discussion. Often, once they have, they suddenly are interested in a romantic liaison.

It's maddening.
Stop using fossil fuels?
Researchers identify method of creating long-lasting memories
Money and a core tech/domain I want to learn.

These are unlikely to change and are reasonably transferable.

Perks come and go. Co-workers come and go. Culture changes rapidly. Companies move office locations. Corporate policies change. Etc.

I just got a new boss and he has insisted everyone arrive for 9am stand-up. Goodbye flexible working hours.

The last place I worked had a top of the line coffee machine and free lunch. Unfortunately when the coffee machine broke they replaced it with a cheap pod machine and they switched lunch providers to a (IMO) much worse provider.

Another company I worked for in the past moved office locations and doubled my commute (only 10km further away but it meant I had to take a train and then a bus).

In these cases the company I was working for removed $10-20k/year in benefits without consulting me.

I've never even been approached about taking a $10-20k/year pay cut.
Let's be fair: while the source may well be partisan, it is also a technical document. Referring to it simply as a partisan political document doesn't acknowledge its full contents or its value to a technical community.
Telling the brother seems to have done the same function as telling the parents, since that's the point at which the behaviour changed.
Lucky you, I was once asked to write code on a napkin and on another occasion to say lines of code over the phone :)
Mitigation is the key word here.

The best-case scenario is that over the next 30 years we ramp down our greenhouse emissions to zero, and the planet warms up by ~2 degrees Celsius and stays there.
We're not currently on track for this, but it's still achievable (or close to it).

The worst-case scenario is that we do nothing at all to solve the problem, and the planet warms up by 10+ degrees over the next century.
And the temperature would continue to increase until we literally run out of fossil fuels to burn.

There's a big difference between 2 and 10 degrees warming.
I think modern civilization could survive the former, not so sure about the latter.
to be completely honest, having the time and energy to stay well-informed on current events from a variety of sources is a privilege. working-class and poor people have neither the time nor mental energy to peruse a variety of sources. the reason i say this is not to tell you to "check your privilege", by the way. it's to make the argument that facebook's shaping of the zeitgeist primarily affects the impoverished and working classes - the people who bear the brunt of all policy decisions, the people who need to be well-informed the most.
I don't think that's a great model, in 12 years, lot's of the biosphere could die off, generating more methane in decay.
> How would we go about that? Well, all we have to do is add ? in front of the +. This will lead us to the <.+?> regex.

I was very confused until I realized the author's definition of 'in front' wasn't the same as mine...
>you can have a politician with major donations from Coal/Fossil Fuels try to legitimately discredit a trend that 98% of the scientists in this field have agreed is proven by data

Which politician? What data?

>98% of experts in a field have empirically demonstrated with data that trends are occurring

I would think those experts would have better things to do, but any source?

What is hilarious to me is to see ignorant pseudo intellectuals who believe in political propaganda without even considering what the implications are. So, yeah, climate is changing, it always has and yes human activities affects it too. So what do your politicians do about it? Collect money from people who have no other alternative but to use the same fuel and give it to their friends, move manufacturing to different parts of the world causing more resource usage in transportation instead and pushing inferior, impractical and just as environmentally taxing technologies by subsidising them. How is any of it helping the cause again?
Current research shows this is not something you can just change your mind about because you want to, sadly.

But I agree, being confrontational will not fix things. At the same time, it being subconscious makes it not a single person's fault. One can and should do better than that, but if sub-ideal situations happen (within reason), it does not mean the person is bad. So actions can be judged with this in mind for now, and everyone can be less afraid to make mistakes.

Someone questions my abilities to drive the heavy car for a long distance, but never the guys'? Let's have a look at what is happening, laugh about it and correct for it. But it has to be out in the open.
> cutting CO2 emissions will make the damage much less severe

What does that actually mean? The best models of a few years ago predicted huge increases in the loss of life due to climate change by today, yet we continue to see a decrease in climate-related deaths (thanks to technology that helps people adapt to climate rather than the other way around). We've been wrong, not just in scale, but in the direction of the trend that (at least in my opinion) matters most.

So if there is a warming trend, how much do you really think we can postpone or alleviate its effects by driving a Prius and using recycled shopping bags - in terms of human lives saved? Even under the completely unrealistic, hypothetical assumption that we could get every country on earth to make it priority #1, how does that affect the overall picture? Do you think, possibly, that kind of focus/priority might actually be a net loss if we sacrifice innovation that saves lives in the face of any climate change (as we do now) for a drop-in-the-bucket-scale difference in an otherwise unavoidable trend?
You might have a point if voting were equally inconvenient for everyone. But actually, it's convenient for some and inconvenient for others.

Think about taking public transportation in a rural area where transit sucks versus driving. The people who take public transit have to take more time to vote (let's say an extra half hour each way) than those who can drive, who in turn have to be more dedicated than the people who live right next to the polling station and just walk over.

Furthermore, this level of convenience can be manipulated to get the results you want.

From a data quality point of view, we'd probably be better off with some kind of unbiased random sampling, but that goes against tradition.
While Prometheus's built-in local storage is not distributed, we are in the process of implementing generic interfaces to allow Prometheus to talk to decoupled distributed, horizontally scalable, durable, remote storage (or even other non-storage systems like queues etc.). There will be several implementations sitting behind this interface in the end (see already Vulcan from DO and Frankenstein from Weaveworks, both experimental right now), depending on what you'd rather run and what fits your use case best.

Most importantly, Prometheus will never decide to exclude a feature for commercial reasons. As it's a 100% open-source and independent project not controlled by any single company, we don't have those kinds of incentives. We just want to build the best monitoring system. Note that we still say "no" to a lot of features, but that's only for technical reasons, to avoid bloat, or to keep the project maintainable.
Kaspersky, the most paid and legalized backdoor ever commercialized, ruining web experience of the average user. Although I'm glad they discover interesting things, I would love they stop messing with third parties http connection and html pages.
What a 1954 psychological experiment can teach us about workplace culture
I want to work for a position that requires domain knowledge (for example, deep learning which is what I'm currently interested in).

Or a job that I can make theoretical breakthroughs and those breakthroughs are connected with industry, can be productized .

I'm sick of solving engineering problems. I'm working on a large code base with lots of people. the difficulty of my job comes from unfamiliarity and complexity. for example, I need to add features to some undocumented code, I have to debug it to understand it. or I need to hack a piece of existing code to add some feature in, because the feature wasn't previously planned in the architecture. these skills I gained via the job enable me to quickly understand complex code, but I don't think it's actual "knowledge".
> This is the first time I hear Mailchimp (or any other company) has some special deal or treatment from ISPs in regarding to their sending emails reputation.

If you use Gmail and PayPal you can see this in action. There will be a little key there. You have to be an approved sender to get the key. The key, besides being a visual indicator, guarantees delivery in the inbox.

Most people who admin big mail sites know each other. When their mail is bouncing, they call each other and ask for help. When they see their friend's big site getting a lot of spam warnings, they call their friend and say "hey this word in your email is triggering our spam filter, you should change it".

This is just how industry works.
Its ultimately the people. Governments just give the people exactly what they allowed to happen.
MediaWiki, no registered users. Has worked wonderfully for years.
A beauty contest was judged by AI and the robots didn't like dark skin
This all looks like really good advice.

I'm doing the small(er) company thing, and I don't regret it, but I've slowly shifted to larger groups and I definitely feel the difference. Getting exposure to lots of different things is good, but at a certain point being in charge of maintaining the website while you're also building an actual product is just a distraction.

The "current tech" thing is obviously a constant battle for everyone, and it's an important one. Narrow tools can be trouble, flash-in-the-pan frameworks are ugly, and even things like Go can be chancy if you master something valuable but scarcely employed. At the very least, it's obvious to me even early in my career that I need to maintain a couple of mainstream, in-demand skills no matter what I specialize in.
I am worried about a lot of common functionality in VSCode/Atom, from keyboard bindings to support for more languages, being implemented by 3rd party plugins. They are updated independently, without verification, and have full code execution and network access (and things like independent telemetry).

Am I alone in this? Are there security features that I'm missing to guarantee that my code editor isn't leaking information in 20 different directions?
Perhaps https://www.opm.gov/cybersecurity/cybersecurity-incidents/op... is more informative technically, but this "post-mortem" is a fascinating read for me. It's like The Cuckoo's Egg for modern times, as writ by government subcommittee.
tl;dr if you know a little regex

- convert your number to a string of that length (1 = 1, 2 = 11, 3 = 111)
- handle 0 / 1 separately
- ^(..+?)\1+$
- trick; the WHOLE thing has to match to return (^$)
- first \1 match is "11", ergo string must be "11", "1111", "111111" to match
- second \1 match "111", ergo string must be "111", "111111", "111111111" to match
- and so on. if you find before length of string, it was not prime.

Clever trick. Look forward to being asked it in your next google interview :)
>It takes integrity to defend a principle in lieu of doing the expedient thing of instilling a "zero tolerance" policy.

If you start from the position that kind of content belongs on FB, then sure. But not of you don't. And I don't.

>But I thought that all content is appropriate for all sites. Don't all people fit into size 36 jeans, like cheesecake, ride unicycles, and love to go hiking? I quite like your negate the absolutes game.

And I quite like your pointless reductio ad absurdum. The point is Facebook is a site with a purpose, these kinds of articles are at best tangential to the site's purpose, and it's perfectly reasonable for Facebook to say "This content will make some people uncomfortable, and they're not coming to our site to be made uncomfortable." I would have thought my point was obvious.

>That is a rather banal statement. It is obvious that the argument isn't about one particular picture, but about defending freedom of expression.

Nobody is saying this guy doesn't have the right to express himself. The argument he's trying to make is he has some sort of moral right to put content he likes on a site created, owned, and operated by someone else for a purpose other than disseminating news. He doesn't.

This is why news organizations have their own web sites.

>Nobody complains, nothing is likely to change, things stay the same. I'm on the side of complaining. You?

Not me. I think Facebook made a perfectly reasonable decision here, and I'm not interested in change for its own sake.
No, it's on by default in v1.5.
No. I have seen this system abused many times. There are misbehaved pets in the store all the time now.
Well I guess we won't come to an agreement, because it seems that whatever reason you prefer a very loose definition. For example, you just couldn't help yourself in confusing the privilege escalation point: "...context with escalated privileges." The rootkit isn't escalating anything, in the same way that LKMs, bootloaders, tracetools, or drivers don't escalate - it executes at or below its own privilege level.
This is specifically a bit silly, but as a general trend might be a sensible hedge. For example Toronto is likely to benefit from a 2-3 degree warming, land currently not arable quality is likely to become amenable.

Something similar should be expected for Greenland, Russia, etc. However that's in say 200 years. The meantime is going to be a struggle.

I think it is well worth building models to try and predict these outcomes (not so much the weather models but river and water course changes, etc. I don't think this exists but would be interested)

But trying to predict where the next beachfront will be - nah not great.
I REALLY hope that you are being sarcastic.
Would love to monetize at some point but for now I guess you could say I'm giving back to the community ;)
I am not saying that things can't get very bad but I don't believe we can go extinct. Even if 99.9% of humans die the rest could go underground and have nuclear reactors to provide energy and whatever is needed. It won't be pretty but I believe humans are just too inventive to go completely extinct.
snapchat and instagram
I suspect most name-brand BigCos (including Google and friends) are pretty bad at first-pass decisions about what applicants are qualified. Has anybody stopped to consider that the root cause of their stream of Terri le interview candidates is a terrible filtering process for deciding who gets interviewed?
Humans won't go extinct but modern civilization might
> "Throwing darts at resumes"

That reminds me of another technique - that is you select roughly half of the resumes from the stack and bin it. Nobody wants to work with unlucky people ;)
Yes, using language models is how it's done.

Theoretically, it's not that hard, in practice, it's really hard.

There is an online language modelling course from Stanford that you should check out if you want to take a stab.
Which models predicted a huge loss of life due to climate change by today? The technology for adapting to climate has been around for decades, so I'm skeptical that some change there has made a difference. Your mention of "recycled shopping bags" as if it had anything to do with climate change makes me suspect that you're not being entirely sincere here.
Your argument would be valid if it didn't ship with a free included "analog hole" dongle.
> The Exfiltration of the Security Clearance Files Could Have Been Prevented.

TL;DR, there were two intrusion actors that were acting in concert. After being notified by US-CERT of exfiltration activity from the OPM network, OPM monitored the first one, who conducted the initial breach (use of contractor login credentials) and then performed survey of their network. They attempted to flush out her malware but failed to account for a second actor that had managed to leave an alternate access point into the network.

> "Notably, OPM Director of IT Security Operations, Jeff Wagner, recommended deploying ... preventative technology"

So the problem was identified and brought up to committee and still ignored/tabled by the CIO, Donna Seymour. Preventive measures were only undertaken after the exfiltration of security clearance data was complete.
This is a great point I had overlooked.

I did once realize that I was interviewing for the same job twice, once as a contractor and once as a direct employee. Everyone had been sufficiently close-mouthed about the exact role that I got several phone interviews in before things came to a head.

And I realize this is multiplicative, so it probably means every contractor and the original company are each putting up 2-5 postings for the same job.
If it makes you feel better, melting permafrost is currently a small portion of overall global methane emissions.
There's a potential for a massive release of gas, but it isn't happening yet.
Most modeling suggestions paradoxically that there will be more arable land as vast swathes in Canada warm, and already crops are being planted further north.

There is certainly plenty of political denialism of global climate change, and some of it comes from government distrust .

Sadly most governments use climate change as an excuse for more power and abuse. Also economicly no one knows if it's cheaper to spend wealth now to avoid the worst results or wait and spend wealth later to mitigate the worst consequences.

Wealth isn't infinite, and funds spent on climate change is money not spent on combating malaria or researching new antibiotics etc.
One of NSA's primary missions is information assurance. I'm sure they have blue teams. But their mandate is pretty limited in regards to what they can do with civilian infrastructure.
Do you have any sources for that 12 years datum? It's a new one to me.
you could re-title "How to make sure you talk yourself out of taking a risk and keeping your job" isn't the limitus test from zuckerberg you should have this burning desire to change the world in this particular way, and the burn should be so intense that you wouldn't even consider for 1 second keeping your job.
It is not a technical document. It is a document that contains technical details. For instance: it contains a formal set of "findings", as in the "findings" of law and fact in a trial. Here's one of the first findings:

FINDING: Slow implementation of critical security requirements such as dual factor authentication is a true case of misplaced priorities.

That's not technical language. It's not even formal language.

OPM was/is a clusterfuck. I'm not disputing that. But the authors of this document had a job to do: portray administration appointees in the worst light possible.
Individual actions don't make any noticeable difference. Climate change won't be affected if I fly to Europe next month versus staying home. It's a massive collective action problem, and collective action is hard. Individuals changing their habits won't do anything to help.
You cannot hear the difference in DACs on modern 16 bit devices.

The difference in DAC quality is so far below your perception that any perceived difference is placebo.

If you do not believe me, I strongly encourage you to perform a blinded ABX test. I, too, was surprised by the results.
Is there something in this document that you can point to as being inaccurate or obviously exaggerated?
By "better able to handle danger" I meant that they're more willing to do risky behavior. Like, part of doing a dangerous job is deciding that it's worth doing, and men are more likely to do so in spite of the risk.

Essentially, I'm blaming part of the construction work gender disparity on the same thing that explains why only 14% of motorcycle riders are female.

>just because a job is physical doesn't mean that men are better at it.

Sure. I'm definitely not saying that women can't or shouldn't do physical jobs. Averages and distributions exist, though, and testosterone is a hell of a drug.
I have a question for Amazon SES users. Do you need to submit the "Request a Sending Limit Increase" form to send emails to domains you don't own? Can it still be free? I just want to send 3-4 emails a day from my vps and my home router.
Change in F1
Hell, more than a divorce, if the beating is literal. No one should be beating anyone.
Zika-prone mosquitoes found in Los Angeles
Identity politics is designed to be divisive. Its used to atomize people into identity silos which can then have there interactions policed by busybodies who know the right way we should all interact with each other.
I don't know. That's not a hurdle my argument needs to clear.
Wow good point, I never thought about the fact that with AirPads there are now two batteries competing for the attention of your lightning charger.
On the flip side, as an interviewer I give all candidates the opportunity to use a text editor, and less than 15% of candidates take it. The rest opt for whiteboard.