skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I read the paper, and this is one case where the paper is almost as breathless as the journalists. It describes the findings, and then, as you say, starts the first of many paragraphs based on assumptions and pretty wild leaps.

I think the key take away from this particular paper is actually the turn taking behavior, which they say hadn't been observed before.
Add Cisco to that list.
At Morgan Stanley from 1996 through 2010 and an executive during the banking crisis.

I feel like that's gotta be simplistic and/or wrong because that's nothing but red flags for me. Could someone correct me? Why should this not be concerning? Those were some of the most predatory and poorly run companies in America at the time.
> Lots of people prefer Mint

They shouldn't, their security story is atrocious.

http://www.techrepublic.com/article/why-the-linux-mint-hack-...
Microsoft's income kept rising steadily through the '00s too and look at where they are.
What is the obsession with self driving cars?

There are so many other important problems in the world that need solving
I deeply share your feelings and recommend anyone to give
Emacs and Org mode a try. The learning curve can be long, but
if you start programming Emacs on your first day it will love
you back faster.

If Org mode interests you this may be good advice:

- http://doc.norang.ca/org-mode.html

For the lazy, I have an emacs.d directory packaged with,
Norang's Bernt Hanson Org mode configuration, if you are
eager to try Org mode for the first time, try it out:

- clone https://github.com/ncouture/emacs.d
- replace ~/.emacs.d with the repo's root dir
- launch emacs
- read Bernt Hanson's Org configuration workflow
documentation (http://doc.norang.ca/org-mode.html)

If you start using Emacs and want some advice:

There are many well-rounded pre-packaged Emacs
configurations available out there, they may be nice but
they will fool you.

Try them to get a feeling on how Emacs behaves with
other people, but don't stick around too long.

Build your own environment.

The best way to use Emacs is to make it work the way you want.
peak self driving car would be proclaiming that there is a severe talent shortage, and acquihires are being valued at 10m / head.

oops..
Ex-Googler Sebastian Thrun says the going rate for self-driving talent is $10 million per person
http://www.recode.net/2016/9/17/12943214/sebastian-thrun-sel...
Interesting stuff going on in this thread. I use Emacs for everything except for Mail, since i never liked wanderlust, should try some other mail reader. But i just realised there is some great functionality from this thread i never knew existed like 'which-key', org-mode(wanted to use this from long) etc.
If I didn't complete related courses on Udacity but relevant advanced courses on edX/Coursera, like MIT's Underactuated Robotics, would that be OK as well?
Or quite a lot less:

http://prestigefoodtrucks.com/custom-food-trucks-for-sale/
I think you more mean, "I'm not an 'Emacs is my Operating System' person".

There are many people who use Emacs as their OS, its never been appealing to me, because I like the richness of other tools.

There is a question though, are OSes doing enough to make the integrated experience like Emacs something that's done system wide? I think Apple comes close to providing the set of things you want, but it still feels tacked onto the top, rather than more deeply integrated.
I have a strong dislike for Penn Jillette. His show "Bullshit" was often guilty of the same smoke-and-mirrors rhetorical tricks of which they accused others. This became apparent to me when I watched the episode on climate change, where they failed to interview a single scientist on the subject and Penn later suggested he hated the theory because Al Gore was promoting it [1]. The only evidence I can find of his recanting his position on the science is a reddit thread [2]; meanwhile, to this day, I have Climate Change skeptics throwing the Dihydrogen monoxide hoax [3] episode in my face as proof that Climate Change isn't real.

As a rational atheist skeptic, it drives me up the wall that this guy is on the same side as me. When he sounds smart, it's because he's plagiarizing Carl Sagan, Richard Dawkins, and other skeptics who are smarter than him.

[1] http://reason.com/blog/2008/07/03/penn-teller-and-climate-ch...

[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/skeptic/comments/26o6o9/what_is_the...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydrogen_monoxide_hoax
Even better, which is what prompted my comment: if you're speaking in dissent, asserting there's more to a story, please for the sake of other readers who may so be inclined to learn, do more than drop a one liner as if this concludes all counterpoints of debate.
Google doesn't hide the fact that it puts snacks that are bad for you in a ranked order and makes healthier snacks easier and more convenient to get to on lower shelves. They also label healthy stuff green ink, bad stuff red ink, and semi-ok stuff yellow. How is this any different than planners designing buildings to encourage exercise, or personal interactions?

There's nothing immoral about this, and everyone is told about it, but we know people don't always read the labels, but actually sorting healthy to unhealthy by convenience, leverages the laziness of most people into eating healthy. If I have to bend over to the lowest shelf to eat a Snickers, but a banana or apple is right in front of me, maybe I'll eat that?

There is nothing immoral or unethical about, and it publicly know.

If you provide any range of snacks for employees, like any store or restaurant, you face a decision on how to order the food. Most restaurants and stores optimize their menus or shelves to hawk stuff that has the highest margin and least cost.

If Google instead sorts their snacks according to say, popularity in the market, and puts all the Kit Kat or Snickers bars on the front shelf, then isn't that immoral? Lining the pockets of corporations that promote unhealthy disease causing foods, getting people addicted to sugar, and subconsciously steering them towards junk food? By "doing nothing" or "doing what was always done before" you are in fact, doing something knowingly bad that will harm health.

I'd say it's even MORE unethical to 'default' to putting the snacks in order of demand or popularity.

Google has also been trying to use data science internally to correct unconscious bias in promotions and interviews. Everyone is made aware of this, it's not a Milgram Experiment. Perhaps we should continue to let people rank resumes based on visible metadata like applicant name, even though we know it biases the reviewer -- even people who are progressive and even women are prone to this biasing effect. We could do nothing, or we could try to change the result -- and people will cry unethical, social engineering and manipulation.

You've been doing anti-Google rants for years, almost a daily obsession, but it doesn't seem like you've toured their offices even once. Maybe you should take a look at how the cafes and microkitchens actually work.
I think the difference is that it's illegal to advertise to promote a contrary view of a terror group. If you pay for ads to counter the anti-ISIS ads, that's material support for terrorism.
Except where it doesn't work, such as in the restaurant business, where some non-trivial percentage of the supply is superfluous and will go out of business. Of course, they will be replaced, so there is an argument that it is at least stable, even despite the high turnover - perhaps that's what you're meaning?
You mean the western toilet in the higher classes of the train?

I've found that Indian toilets are more hygienic while travelling India, because you don't touch the toilet at all. Just bring your own toilet paper.
I use emacs with mac for close to 1 year now, after having used it on linux and windows. It hasn't given me any issues at all except for one minor issue which i chose to ignore. The point is, you don't need to be scared to use emacs on mac
Solid reasoning.
Demand for ads, hardware, software and internet services have been increasing over time as more people are introduced to computers and the intrawebs. If all these companies have peaked, who is capturing the ever increasing demand?
For me, there are a few things that sort it out. I'm in my late 30's, and have been here for a bit over 3 years.

I find less distinction between poor and rich folks. In the US, if you got below a certain money threshold, your life could be pretty miserable, while here there is a push to make sure everyone has internet and computers and cell phones - and these are the folks on complete public assistance. Even conversations about work are different. It is like I'm less defined by a job (though some are viewed as 'better' than others).

Health care is a lot more viewed as a basic human right. There is national healthcare, with its pros and cons, and a network of private places as well.

Schooling is basically free, including university level. They seem unversally good - as in, the royal family sent their children to a public school until a year or two ago. I'd nearly expect their children to go to private school if only for security reasons. Private schools must teach to the same standards as public ones, including sex education and such. Rich and poor can both access the same levels of education in country.

Families in the US are still pretty 'traditional' in the way the chores and such things are split up. In addition, a lot of financial circumstances dictate how you take care of children. I got out here and see a fairly equal number of men and women alone with kids or carrying kids. And it seems to extend to homes as well. Still some traditionalism, of course, it just plays out differently.

I have blue hair. This does not make me un-hireable any longer, and though I get a few funny looks and occasional avoidance, most folks are just nice and treat me no different. Some of this is because I'm in one of the few 'large' cities - maybe 200k people.

Police aren't so much a special class of people like in the US. I mean, sure, they are police and all. So naturally there will be tension points and looking after each other and stuff, but not quite like the US. Some one could tell the cops to "Fuck off" without fearing getting arrested so long as theyve done nothing wrong (not recommended in general, though).

And I both feel like I haven't described it all but yet have went on and on. But I'll leave it nonetheless since it is after 3am and I'm starting to get sleepy.
Yeah. My father went to CMU, and told me some stories about a few professors that were... less than enthusiastic about teaching. Like one that was pretty much using the class for his reseach project, and didn't teach the intended subject matter. At all.
If you read the paragraph before that sentence, you'll se that this part refers to Kosovo albanians (so in Kosovo, not Albania). Though the culture and heritage between the two countries is similar, there are actually no cases of Jews that were given up in Albania, a fact which I find interesting, because no other country in Europe has such clear statistics. The way most people helped Jews in Albania was by not only offering them a home, but also giving them albanian names and teaching them albanian customs and the language, so they would blend in . Additionally, there have also been many reports of locals sending anonymous threatening letters to officials who were looking for the refugees.
That you have to take over a prototype and that you only get 0.6% is a warning sign. You will doing a cofounders job and should get a much bigger share.

Even if you negotiate a bigger share now, it would not matter as they have already shown how much they value the technical part of the company.
That is correct. I think disobeying the law in all forms is a good idea. Excellent strawman.

Or perhaps it is simply because 2,500 regulations including distance signs can be from the curb because one person tripped over a sign while not watching and then sued the city leads to a ridiculously over-litigated atmosphere.
While we are ignorant of your particular situation, by objective metrics, "aced the interview" is commonly defined as "they offered me a job for a salary higher than I had expected". Since they didn't offer you the job, presumably the others involved in the process did not come out of the interview thinking that you were the right person to hire.

It rings of hubristic delusion to claim that nonetheless, you "aced the interview". While hubristic delusion may in fact be the best attitude for self-advancement, depressive realists (likely in high representation on here on HN) might offer a more balanced "I thought I had aced the interview, but apparently the interviewers thought otherwise".
I don't know what the original poster meant, but I may (I'm not sure I would) argue that he may mean things other than simple income/profit. Such things as core competencies/competitiveness/managerial and employee talent and motivation/corporate "cohesiveness"/ability to create successful products/other, maybe more difficult to measure criteria and so forth.

I wouldn't say all (or even most) of the above applies to Google, but I do believe that for large corporate systems in general, these sorts of things become a major issue when you have half a million employees and hundreds of subsidiaries/divisions.

Just trying to make things clearer.
In what way does that mean you'd be able to disprove the statement:

"In financial reporting you have a lot of situations where you need a consistent point-in-time snapshot of your data or you might be in very big trouble."

You're trying to sell your anecdotal experience rather than explain your point.
I work with Jack on a regular basis. You couldn't ask for a more fun colleague to work with too, he not only does all of those things but he does them with incredible grace.

His story really illustrates how we all need to start thinking more about accessibility features in the products we build, however time/budget constrained we might be.
To be fair, not running an adblocker is a form of ignorance.
The article says that was the "out-of-the-box" experience. After upgrading to the latest firmware:

> The newer firmware certainly delivered higher peak throughput: up to 800mbps or so, if you click your mouse just fast enough at just the right point of one of the easiest tests. I'm not sure that's an "upgrade." The improved peak throughput comes at the cost of stalled connections, peaky and unpredictable ceilings, and tremendously degraded throughput in the more demanding 10K tests. This would be a downgrade for someone with 100mbps or 200mbps cable, in my opinion.
Have you noticed it is impossibly slow to start up?
For me channels and append() are the biggest language level landmines. Not so big are nils, :=, lack of panic when you go beyond last element of the slice, i.e. ([]int{0,1})[2:].

Libraries are a lot worse though, they are minefields.
My university had participated in those challenges. They were pretty cool. But yes, once it was proven that something was possible it open the flood gates for commercialization.

I'm more surprised/disappointed that someone on HN wasn't aware of those initiatives. It shows why people are for defunding government research. Though I imagine DARPA being part of the military, wouldn't have been in that boat, but my point remains the same to NASA, NSF, NOAA etc.
I did the same thing..... and then the contributor took contributions from others that added security holes, removed cross platform support, and had what I consider to be low code quality. I've now disowned that project.

Therefore, I'm extremely hesitant to hand out "commit bit"s again. To make up for it I try and review PRs the day of submission; even then I don't get a lot of contributions.

There seems to be a inherent trade off between security+quality and how welcoming you are to new contributors.

On the other hand, I have taken over maintainership for some projects; but it was after months of steady contributions.
>Digital Homicide

Near-infinite wordplay potential here...
Five kind of kills performance compared to three, and doesn't map well into AWS, where you generally have 3 or 4 AZ's. I tend to go with three but make sure you've got fully automated responses towards failures.
Slippery slope arguments are pretty much a corollary of Godwin's law when it comes to internet debates. We can't regulate guns right? because first it'll be a 3 day waiting period, then it'll be infinity, and next we'll have the Stasi with jackboots on our necks?

Let's convict people based on what they actually do, not what they could do.
Or alternatively, the existence of (b) means that (a) is generally understood to mean "Linda is a bank teller, and is NOT active in the feminist movement", regardless of how literally the instructions say to take it.

Either way, it's more a failure of communication between the experimenters and the subjects, rather than a failure of rationality on the part of the subjects. Which is still interesting (and perhaps more interesting), but in a completely different way.
Convince both of them to join you at a Django conference.
Lawsuits are the continuation of flame wars by other means. -- Carl von Clausewitz (not really)
Amazing story! I maintain a network library on iOS where we have automated this process: a merged pull request earns the author an automatic invitation to join the project. The code is at https://github.com/Moya/Aeryn if anyone is interested.
“For instance, on the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much—the wheel, New York, wars and so on—whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man—for precisely the same reasons.” - Douglas Adams (Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy)
I tried Google Wallet before, but it wouldn't let me send money out of the country or something like that.
> Instead of going under the knife, she went to her office, arm in a sling. Porat refused painkillers,
saying they would impair her > judgment, and put in two long workdays before the Tuesday morning call.

> “Ruth is the only person who can deliver bad news to me, and I’ll still like her,” says Jeff Immelt, CEO > of GE

These people are insane. Keep personalities like this far away from your life.
I'm sure someone can make the same argument for every research.

If self driving cars become mass marketed, then that's reduce death/injuries, less energy consumption/pollution from more efficient driving, more time saved from efficient driving, possible reduction of manufactured cars from a sharing economy standpoint.
That's true. Beyond links to email, I also include links to a specific line in a file, links to a commit, links to a remote file (e.g., an apache config file), maybe some snippets of code, links to other TODOs, all in one TODO. So it's really having all of those together which is important for me.

If I wasn't using org, I don't think I would find it that useful. I'm not really a power user of mu4e. I don't have any complicated email workflows. I like that the search is very fast (for me, anyway -- I only have 100k emails), and, obviously, that my email is stored locally. I like that I can compose in Emacs. I also use two computers and I like that I can easily share configuration. My config, which doesn't do anything too fancy, is here: https://github.com/mjhoy/dotfiles/blob/master/emacs.d/lisp/i...
I agree that those are useful words to distinguish. I also think it's worthwhile to have a thing called "rationality" which maybe means "doing the best possible thing with your brain given your goals," which has to include both of what we're calling reason and intuition [1].

But I wanted to say some words here to flesh out the subject in a little more detail.

"Reason" and "Intuition" may be separate, incomparable types.

I think of Reason sort of like a technical spec -- a description of how a system should work, which leaves the implementation details as an exercise for the reader. I think most people use the word Intuition, meanwhile, as a catch-all to mean "anything that's not consciously executed logical reasoning (and probably not sensory processing either)."

Underlying all these are the implementation details I mentioned I above--the actual "algorithms" our brain is executing. How you actually implement "reason" can make it better or worse, faster or slower, and I've found that people can make significant gains by changing the details of what they are doing with their minds.

More broadly, I think people are capable of having significantly more access to their "unconscious" than most people realize (hence the scare quotes around the word ;)), and further that those nonlogical processes can also be different, and yield better or worse, faster or slower results.

(To justify "significantly more access" a little: consider that 200,000 years ago, no one knew how to do formal logic, but all the required machinery was there between our ears. We did stuff back then that was a primitive type of reasoning just because we had no basis or training in doing better. Today we have decades of training and a culture that supports such things. If you've been educated at all, you've had years of training in reasoning. How much training have you had in introspecting on what we're calling here "unconscious" processing? Probably none or not much! I claim that training in this area can allow a person to have much richer and higher quality "intuitions.")

Anyway, many people sense that the processes they are executing aren't reliable, and some of those come to believe they must rely on what they think of as reason, to the exclusion of their other faculties like emotions. That makes sense, but I think the stronger move is to understand, in detail, what your mind is actually doing, learn what those processes are good for, and where they are weak, and finally change and improve the processes where appropriate.

There's a lot of interesting work going on in this field, and we're just getting started!

[1] I'm the managing director of the Center for Applied Rationality, a nonprofit in the bay area, so I spend an unusual amount of time thinking about this stuff.
US airstrikes directly supporting ISIS troops against Syrian Army. http://www.dawn.com/news/1284465/us-led-coalition-raid-hits-...
* I just said that offering them better shelters and better services isn't helping them getting away from being homeless, in contrary it's doing the opposite.*

You're demonstrably wrong based on the vast majority of our research on homelessness in the developed world. Annonymous needle exchanges not only help reduce blood borne disease transmission rates (we're talking about a reduction of up to 70-90% of HIV infections in some cases like London). They are also most often in rehab buildings, clinics, and hospitals where they have professionals most able to help intervene or assist those who want to quit in an environment of understanding and respect. The idea that free needles increase drug use may sound logical but it's the exact opposite of reality. No one beats addiction just because they're scared of a friend's used needle.

Homeless shelters are even more critical because they allow people to get back on their feet, especially for those with families to support or those without a regional support network of friends. If you're homeless and have a job interview, for example, homeless shelters will often help you with grooming, professional clothing, and even transport. Without shelters or friends/family, bootstrapping from homelessness to financial security is almost impossible. Unless you've ever been homeless you can't begin to fathom the positive effect all of these services have on someone who has hit rock bottom.
Yes, it matters. https is not perfect, but it is 99% less vulnerable than http.
The Accidental Power of Design