skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
See my other post, but I have to agree stats is incredibly hard to teach at the high school level. I also see the problem with grandparent's failures at applying math.

The huge problem as I mentioned elsewhere is that stats is really applied math. You do learn a lot of regurgitation-style stuff - formulas, proofs, blah blah, but it's all useless without applying it. Moreover, stats draws from so many different areas in math and requires analytical skills that are closer to many of the things scientists emphasize in learning to conduct studies and experiments. This makes it almost unsuitable to teach the more valuable parts of stats at lower levels because the students can't possibly be prepared.

At best, I think you can teach some general things about stats and the mentality I described of being analytical and skeptical. Unfortunately, stats is just really hard for anyone to properly and comprehensively learn who isn't going to be able to invest a lot of time both learning pre-requisites and then all the different areas of stats. It's like learning to be a carpenter and only understanding how to work a hammer, but not a saw, measuring tape, or anything else.
Actually the comment I was responding to was about "running a tight shop" -- which is about operational integrity in general (not just on the matter of unhedged risk).

In the, you know, "would you buy a used car from these guys?" sense.
Neat, I like organizational apps. Any https://taskwarrior.org/ users here comment on what they think of Tdo?
Empathizing means understanding other people's point of view. Why wouldn't we need more of that?
> features a libelous picture of him

That's a very strong statement, and AFAICT completely unwarranted. The picture depicts him thinking of a 400 pound weight, which is a reference to his statement that was quoted later in the article:

"[Hillary Clinton’s] saying Russia, Russia, Russia. Maybe it was. It could also be China, it could be someone sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds."

And the question marks on the picture are representative of the fact that his tech policy (the main subject of the piece) is incoherent and largely undefined.

> For instance this article can't come up with what a good policy might look like

Classic deflection technique. A critic does not need to be able to come up with a good answer in order to criticize someone else for not doing so. It's not Ars Technica's job to define this nation's tech policy, but it is the president's job (or at least, the president has a huge influence on it), so presidential candidates really ought to be able to define a clear policy.
> burgeoning

Citation Needed.
Not related, but it kind of is.

In 2008 I was working on a joint co-production for one of the biggest TV stations in Europe (it rhymes with RTL/Endemol) and we were stationed in Asia where we were shooting a Big Brother show.

One of the colleagues wrote something on his facebook wall (2008, after all) which was set private and he had a tight circle of friends. What he wrote was really bad, comparing his German employer to Nazis or something. Real bad. His, well, our boss then heard about it (he wasn't on his facebook) and guy got promptly fired and dispatched to Europe. The evening he got fired he wasn't even allowed in the same hotel we were at. They transported him immediately to another hotel where he would wait for transportation back home.

That event made me aware of what this thing will be in our futures, but also to always be open and vocal about your issues in all channels of communications or shut up completely.

edit:

I forgot the 'detail' about the story though. What he wrote was before he landed the gig (with that company), and boss found out during the production.
It's not entirely wrong.

Child pornography is banned, but because moderators have to see it to ban it, and because the entire site is public, it's still possible for a user to encounter it without wanting to.
I'm becoming very worried about what an increasingly likely Clinton presidency means for privacy.

The FBI carried a ton of water for Clinton with the email investigation. We already know what the FBI's top legislative priority is. And now she owes thim a big one.

Then you have all the Wikileaks hacking. I think it's probable that Clinton will see this as further demonstration of the "lawlessness" of the Internet and the need to assert federal authority over the net.

Finally you have the fact that Clinton was already a Dianne Feinstein on this issue. There was a leak where a staffer contemplated getting Clinton to say something good about Snowden or whistle-blowers while she was fighting off Bernie but admitted that it was against her nature to take that position.

I really think that Clinton is going to be a cornucopia of goodies for the police state and the panopticon.

(Disclosure: I'm a Bernie supporter and I've early voted for Stein).
What cringe.
All new job listing sites should follow the lead of AngelList and StackOverflow, and include a salary field.
I thought "Big Red Son" was hilarious. Humor comes from the clash of high culture with low culture. I'm not sure what the point of view was but I'd guess it's "we're all human here" which is a common POV of Wallace's work.
Congrats for doing this and writing so honestly about it! But why only $1000? There are 134 "green" jobs * $50 which would be $6700. Or the Stripe integration was added that much later on?
Not sure if this is satire? Am I understanding correctly that he's advocating moving everything to 'web applications' because somehow it'll be more 'free'?
It's been well established that this protest narrative came from the CIA, who had genuine reason to believe it, although it turned out false.

And of course there were emails somewhere of people predicting violence or complaining about embassy security. It's the same as those italian scientists put on trial because somebody somewhere predicted an earthquake that they didn't predict. I bet if you go through all the mail the US government gets, you'll find predictions of CERN turning into a black whole and swallowing the known universe. Does that mean the Air Force should bomb Switzerland?
Just in case you didn't know calculus BC is considered the harder AP calculus while AB is considered the easier.
I'll admit, I wasn't as accurate as I should have been. I've corrected the part, but left out the long treatise about 2 and 4 byte instructions. Hopefully no one will miss it.
edit: I did not scroll far enough in the article to see his second comment. That one is much worse, but firing people for their opinions strikes me as a dangerous precedent.
Not sure what you mean about cython and the FFI. As far as I know, cython is tightly coupled to the CPython C API.

I agree that cython is a good option if you only care about CPython.
Rise again, rise again. That her name not be lost to the knowledge of man.
It doesn't imbue with parenting knowledge, but it does imbue you with parenting experience, which is certainly more than non-parents have.
Newspeak was a political tool that was supposed to limit society's freedom of though by making ideas that went against the ruling power's goals literally impossible to express. Think about how that might apply here - by replacing the genderless "patronize" with the gendered "mansplain"[1], we embed the idea that this is something only men do to women into the language itself. (Obviously this doesn't make it impossible to criticize other kinds of patronizing behaviour, just harder than with this kind - Newspeak was a fictional conceit.)

[1] And yes, one is clearly gendered while the other one isn't. If someone claimed that you couldn't describe a woman as "patronizing" because that term only applied to men, this would seem like nonsense to any English speaker, whereas "mansplaining" was explicitly coined as something only men could do to women.
My favorite writer wrote a great book review of Robin Hanson's seminal work 'Age of Em" here

http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/05/28/book-review-age-of-em/
I was involved with a research effort to predict certain cell biology features via molecular dynamics simulations between 2003 and 2006. It's what I wrote my thesis on. After school was done and my research group's grant ran out I started writing software for a living instead of looking for another research position.

I still keep up with molecular and biological simulation research efforts because it's intrinsically interesting to me. The models are improving and better results are also possible due to the increase in computing power since 2006. But the progress appears slow compared with AI/ML research over the same period.

Any time covalent bonds are made or broken, quantum effects are at work. Eliminate all the chemistry that involves forming or breaking bonds and you're throwing away most of the chemistry in a living organism. Getting quantum effects right with ad hoc modifications to molecular dynamics models based on classical physics is very difficult; there's a lot of risk of overfitting to what's easy to observe. Full quantum calculations have terrible scaling properties -- O(N^7) for CCSD(T), the most popular high accuracy approximation of QM, where N is proportional to the number of electrons in the system. Even the best, slowest quantum methods (CCSD(T) and even more exotic methods) still have many cases where they fail to reliably reproduce experimental results.

It's possible that you don't need to simulate anything down to the molecular level to reproduce all the biologically interesting features of cells. I don't want to rule it out completely. But the enormous financial incentives to simulate biology in silico (for e.g. accelerating pharmaceutical development), the large research investments made so far, and the limited progress to date tend to make me think that all those tiny and extremely computationally expensive details at the molecular level are biologically relevant.
Rationalization? It's not a rationalization, it's true. By all appearances Trump would be a national disaster.
The problem IS counterfeit goods, as when they fail, which they will, the consumer thinks that it's from the brand themselves, which causes them undue hardship.
Meh. I get what you're saying.

To be very fair I've called out when libelous pictures are posted of Clinton. I consider anything that makes a candidate look confused or stupid or ineffective politically loaded, damaging to reputation (in the context of an election) and therefore libelous.

His quote had nothing to do with his policy (which I agree is as vacuuous as Clinton's). He was talking about attribution. Separate topic.

Regarding "deflection technique" I don't expect Ars to come up with a uniform policy. I do expect them to have standards (other than number of pages) to evaluate criteria by. The author of the article clearly doesn't. This is what I intended to say and I fully admit that I didn't say it clearly before.
> What harm is Trump going to do?

I would have hoped this would be obvious to anyone who's been paying attention, but allow me to list a few examples:

The fact that the Republican nominee has both admitted to, and been accused of, repeated sexual harassment and assault is already fostering a climate where such behavior is legitimized and excused. That's already bad; the endorsement associated with electing him as President would be dramatically worse.

Trump has demonstrated very poor impulse control in terms of his campaign's communications, and his public statements indicate that he would continue that behavior if made president. He said that he would sink Iranian ships if he considers their behavior insulting. That makes me very nervous about the potential for future US instigation of, and participation in, armed conflicts.

Trump is disdainful of the idea that police violence against minorities is of any particular concern -- or at least, the idea that the behavior of police officers and departments is in any way part of the problem -- and is unlikely to take any action whatsoever to curb it.

Do you not believe that these kinds of harm are likely to result from a Trump presidency, or do you just not care?

> If the possible harm had mattered, voters would've held the DNC responsible for their corruption.

Maybe I'm just not understanding your point, but I have no idea how the DNC's behavior has any causal or evidential relationship to a preference between Clinton and Trump.
>I had never considered the difference between solitude and loneliness before.

I had but only after I stumbled across this quote on the internet, one of my favourite:

Our language has wisely sensed the two sides of being alone. It has created the word loneliness to express the pain of being alone. And it has created the word solitude to express the glory of being alone. - Paul Tillich
It's from the actual post, very first paragraph:

... "Twitter had hired Greg Gopman, formerly in business development at virtual-reality media company UploadVR and the founder AngelHack, a startup that runs hackathons, to lead its burgeoning VR business" ...
Honestly, the title should be:

Twitter fired its VR manager because of Techcrunch reviving something he posted to Facebook in 2013
It's hard to disagree, but I think the problem is more fundamental: way, way too many people working in tech assume that because Google and Facebook and Apple and Microsoft are huge and financially successful overall, that means they know what they're doing and should be emulated.

This has been true in recent years with the trendy but awful design. It's not just the typography. The obsession with flat design and giving up all the distinctiveness and affordances of other styles might even be worse.

It's also been going on for a long time with assuming if Google says it in its guidelines for webmasters then it must be good, as opposed to being good for Google's search engine.

It's even going on with software, specifically the various libraries and tools these organisations produce. Some of those libraries and tools are competently executed, but few are as remarkable or transformative as the hero worship might suggest.

This culture of emulation naturally leads to the kind of bland, homogeneous, poorly conceived work that is all too prevalent in our industry today. How could it not?

Ironically, I was just reading another HN post about a jobs board for older geeks, and the related discussion about the endemic problem with ageism in our industry. What we are talking about in this discussion is literally what happens when you hire a bunch of very young, very inexperienced, very untrained people, given them very snazzy hardware for their very good eyesight and their very dexterous hands to work with, give them effectively unlimited resources but very limited accountability and management, and leave them to run the show.

Anyone who wants to do better certainly can do it, just by studying relevant fields like graphic design and usability and by acquiring the necessary skill and experience (or, for businesses, by hiring people like that). But unsurprisingly, the people who are willing to go against the grain tend to be those who have been around for long enough to have other ideas and to have seen the same sorts of mistakes made before, and who wants to listen to them when you can go watch someone from the Apple team wax lyrical about their new barely legible font, someone from the React team misunderstanding basic MVC, or someone from Google who has never run a small business web site in their life telling everyone what makes good quality content?
New members of society add value. They will do a lifetime worth of work. New members of society have a cost. They will use a lifetime worth of services. On average, those will be about the same.

There is probably an ideal population count, but without actually figuring out what that count is and showing we're below it, that's not a worthwhile discussion.
If I understand the article correctly, it's saying that Free Software developers would better be advancing free software ideals by developing applications for the Google Chromebook platform. I say Google chromebook, not "The Web", since all the author's examples are NaCl or apps from the Chrome web store.

I don't think this is really any different than Free Software developers writing programs for other closed platforms like Android, iOS, macOS, Windows, etc.

Sure, it's probably better for the users to have a free software alternative they can use, but in the end writing free software for these platforms just ends up adding more value to the platform, and reducing the incentive for the user to switch to a more free software platform like GNU/Linux.

The other message I'm picking up from the author is that free software developers are not as interested in web technologies as they should be. I'm not sure that this is true. There are a large number of javascript projects on Github, for example. Also there's quite a large amount of free software projects covering the backend of web development as well. Really the problem is hosting the service, when there's no money involved. For this, I think some kind of distributed effort is key, each user "pays" for the service by helping to serve it to other users.

Maybe the author is speaking about just user-facing applications, not frameworks, and infrastructure projects? This is also a problem with free software desktop applications, not just the web.

I guess I would be considered a "free software fetishist" by the author. I like C, I like vi, I like Linux, I like POSIX, I like CLI, and I don't really like the web that much, especially for applications. And I don't really see anything wrong with that. Let the people who are interested in the web work on it, and I'll work on what I'm interested in.
Learning cursive comes to mind.
Username doesn't check out.
That's a hell of leap from "not having to be politically correct" to "sexual battery".

How did you get there exactly?
People love to talk about the "lesser of the evils" like they can take positive credit for effecting an evil result because a different possibility could have been slightly more evil. But actually they're just responsible for endorsing evil.

Furthermore, when the "lesser evil" is a subjective epsilon and up for debate, they're also responsible for fueling support for the "other" evil. Somebody who cheerleads for Clinton is actually responsible for the results of a possible Trump presidency! (And vice-versa).
"Primary risk factor: The country where this card was issued (EC) does not match the country where the payment was made (US)."

This has become clear now....but Stripe has thus been blocking legitimate payments from our users with no insight for us

80% of our clients are travelling at the time of purchase... Now we understand why we were getting so many BLOCKED transactions!!

Although this is a welcome addition, a heads up would have been nice...
> If the link is a self.subreddit link, it goes to the discussion thread, if it was a submitted link to a location outside of reddit

The link goes to the content, wherever that is. Reddit was designed to share content. In the early days they didn't even have comments.
He doesn't really run casinos anymore so that's hardly useful.

But for instance

Key Executives For The Trump Organization LLC

Cathy Hoffman Glosser

http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/people.asp?...

In other words he does have women in leading positions.
I don't think it is possible because of the libGL and libasound, those will not work in static build, and possibly udev. This way it is actually more portable, without static libstdc++ and only standard libs dinamically linked.
I agree, but I thought most lower level classes were often titled things like "Intro to Probability and Statistics." Further, it's been my experience meeting and being around a lot of people who thought they knew stats that they only learned some basics which included but not limited to some basics such as: factorials, normal distributions, coin flips, t-test, permutations, combinations, etc.

I think a good stats education requires heavy emphasis on doing real problems with what you learn. It's so easy to do and apply to the world around you. Unfortunately, most books that even touch on this have absurd text and problem sets that revolve around pulling jelly beans out of a bag or rolling a dice (I mean yeah, but super literal). Mostly the professors and teachers I knew that taught statistics at the lower levels always seemed bored and wanted to be elsewhere. A shame, really.
I eventually figured out that they didn't actually want bugs fixed

Which is bulletpoint #2 in my presentation of "What Your Job as a Professional Software Tester Is". If you answered "file bugs?", my $29 PowerPoint deck will present you with ways to be a professional software tester instead of some hack who muddles his way through the day filing bullshit bugs because you'd never hack it as a dev.

Because the correct answer is: "get bugs fixed". Which means filing better bug reports, and thus it comes full circle.
That's a good point, I'll just say that no one will perceive themselves or their friends as intelligent, except relative to their competitors.
Dear god yes there are downsides.

Here's my thinking:

First, consider that the sample size vs population size of CEOs is goddamn tremendous, and the size of both pools is pretty substantial. It's one thing to try to select a stratified sample of 10 out of 20; it's another to select a stratified sample 500 out of millions. I would expect the transition point to be around when people stop being people, and start being statistics.

Second - It's like dark matter, and then it gets more complicated.
Notionally, men and women are equal in capability; given just that, I'd expect to see a sample representative of the population demographics. This is not what is observed, so we can posit a) inequality in capability and/or b) other forces acting on the system.

A isn't born out by other experiments, leaving B. So then it becomes a question of: What are those other forces AND are they ones we want to keep?

Contrast with age, which clearly has a correlation with inequality in capability, so less of the disparity with the theoretical stratified sample must be explained by B.

Of course, shit gets complicated fast; the correlation of skill with age is not only non-linear, but is more like a non-linear probability function of skill given an age; self-selection might at first seem to be a reasonable B force, but then you have to consider what's causing the self-selection, and what effect that should have on the "equally capable" population sizes...

At 55, it looks like CEOs should be equally split down the middle. That this is not the case means there's more forces in play than explained by the "theory".
I think the reason calc is preferred, to prob/stats is because the intuition is much more visual than the latter. Furthermore, students up until that point spend the majority of their time studying various functional forms (conic fxns, exps/logs etc.)
Functional analysis seems like an obvious next step.

Though stats/prob are perhaps more 'useful' in non-academic life. Imparting the notion of what probability actually is and how Bayes' rule fits into it requires a very gifted teacher with a fundamental grasp of the real mathematics and on top of that the ability to communicate it and link it to previously learned material aka algebra/ pre-calc. You can make it visual, but it would seem to require defining the concepts of sets, sampling, distributions etc.

The issue imo is that teachers tend not to teach the intuitions of math, rather they focus on the mechanics of it. As such, most students turn into machines calculating things as opposed to viewing math as a way to reason.