skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Interesting what are the fundamental reasons for the thrust. It's certainly not throwing photons. Hypotheses:

* Flawed study. It actually throws something (like, cavity material slowly ablating) or repels of Eddy currents in surroundings;

* It repels of Earth (and the force has either gravitational or magnetic nature); then it's not suitable for deep space propulsion

* A sort of ether actually exists, and it throws that. Though, then there would be some anisotropy showing ether wind; in this case it is suitable to be used in deep space
This is pretty good news if only that we will get more research into this phenomenon.

In 1933 von Neumann basically published a proof against the idea of any hidden-variable theory. It took 30 years but Bell then discredited it.

My guess is that a lot of this will get revisited. The outcome of this in the next 10-20 years might be really cheap probes (via reusable launch vehicles like SpaceX is making) that need no propellent to continue onto their merry way for a long time. The current way of doing this would be using solar sails or something along those lines which is not exactly compact.

Having a way to push your little probe along (even at a little bit of acceleration) without having to carry a lot of heavy propellant is a big deal. Maybe just some solar panels to generate the energy needed.
The laws of physics prevailed, despite the LHC and other experiments. As awesome as it sounds, I find it hard to believe that this finding is something relevant.
...eh. I mean Mathworks might not be thaaat diligent but "For personal use only. Not for government, academic, research, commercial, or other organizational use"

Like I mean what the hell does that leave for "personal use"?
Agreed. Yet even more incredible would be not even bringing energy for the propulsion. http://www.space.com/32546-interstellar-spaceflight-stephen-...
R:

m = matrix( c(0,0,1,1,0,0,0,1,0), nrow=3 )
v = c(2,3,1)
solve(m,v)

[1] 1 2 3

Julia: for this code snippet the syntax is identical to Matlab:

m = [0 1 0; 0 0 1; 1 0 0]
v = [2 3 1]'
m\v

3×1 Array{Float64,2}:
1.0
2.0
3.0
My understanding is GKE on GCP is kinda sorta a rewrite of the Borg system Google has used internally for years. Internal services at Google are encouraged to use GKE, but there's little incentive to migrate from the Borg infrastructure that has a long track record for reliability. So currently only a marginal amount of Google services use GKE, but as old services are retired and new ones developed, the share of services on GKE should grow steadily over time.
Yep, build and learn... the best way to do it
Estranges?! You must not be talking about John Conway.

This article honors a mathematician who is utterly devoted to teaching, whose research focuses on making interesting mathematical results more accessible, who can have a half-hour conversation with a middle or high schooler that inspires them in STEM for years. This is the opposite of estrangement.
Two others of theirs:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12014271

http://spinroot.com/gerard/pdf/P10.pdf
It depends on what kind of analysis you're doing. If you're doing pure exploratory stuff on large datasets, you'll mostly be using NumPy as a tool to help with Pandas. See McKinney's Python for Data Analysis (I believe it's from O'Reilly books) if you'd like a fairly good intro.

If you're more like me on using numerical methods, then I'd recommend first going through the math (I can be more specific, depending on what kind of work you'd like to do/are interested in) using Julia/MATLAB/Octave and then jump into NumPy stuff.

In my experience, I've found that using NumPy/SciPy numerical libraries effectively requires some knowledge of the underlying numerical algorithms since the default arguments sometimes require tweaking.
> I had the impression that the laws of physics are seldom rewritten, more of a fix here, another one there.

Newton laws and Noether's theorem has not been changed and they are fundamental

> OTOH, one can hardly say that it violates such laws while we don't know how it works.

The contrary, until we know how it works, it violates fundamental laws of physics
My usual rebuttal to "I have nothing to hide":

http://martinfowler.com/articles/bothersome-privacy.html
I'm sorry, but saying without the wars there would be no terroism is just bullshit. Even saying that they were the primary cause is misinformed.
It's a machine that seems to produce a miniscule amount of thrust without a propellant. The laws of physics as we know them require that momentum always be conserved, but this thing seems to move without pushing on anything, which should be completely impossible.

Most likely what's happening here is a thermal effect or the machine pushing off the earth's magnetic field. Keep in mind that these things are very difficult to measure due to the tiny amount of thrust they may or may not produce. According to this study 1.2mN was measured, which is about the same amount of force as gravity exerts on 6-7 grains of rice (according to my back-of-the napkin calculation).

If this were real it would be absolutely huge, and destroy just about all of modern physics. It isn't just that we believe in conservation of momentum because we don't know of any way to break it, the equations we're using to describe things don't work without it.

This paper has a number of flaws. For example, the test really needed to be performed inside of a vaccuum to have any credibility at all, and whether that was the case was not made clear.

TL;DR It's most likely bunk, unfortunately, but it would be very revolutionary if true
The brain adapts to better deal with what it is exposed to.

Of course an animal raised in an intense environment will handle it better than one that isn't, and have some difficulty with calmer environments. The reverse is also true.

It doesn't surprise me that children used to the quick pacing and interesting stories found in television and games have trouble focusing in slower environments, such as school.

It's easy to jump to the conclusion that children should be raised without television or games, but I think we should also experiment more engaging means of education.
Aren't you committing an error in attributing the achievements of a select group (African immigrants/descendants, mostly Nigerian, living in Western countries) to a broader category (all black people)? This is just a step above saying: "Neil DeGrasse Tyson is intelligent, therefore Black Americans are intelligent".

Does it not stand to reason that the immigrants from Nigeria who come here are likely to be more talented and ambitious than the average Nigerian? Nigeria has over 200 million people, is it any surprise that a selection of their best would produce offspring who are on average more intelligent and successful than the wider swathe of American-born blacks?

I don't have a dog in this fight or a particular strong opinion either way, but your cherry-picked anecdotes fly in the face of statistical distributions that hold much more weight.
It's like certificate authorities - it's awesome how easy it makes things if you can trust a single authority. Until the day you realize you can't actually trust it.
Yes, the way tea is generally made is suboptimal and rife for disruption. But does it need to be a "Wifi enabled" device? Recalls bad memories of "English man spends 11 hours trying to make cup of tea with Wi-Fi kettle", https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/12/english-m...
Ah, in that case I agree.
Not really, because in this case it violates fundamental laws of physics, thereby the probability that the experiment has a source of error unaccounted for is extremely high.

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
React best practices links
I don't see the big deal here, not from your comment or about the article.

Every agency has to operate from someplace. It makes sense that spy agencies operate from non-descript locations. Unless your argument is that NSA should not exist altogether, or that it should not operate on American soil, I honestly don't understand what the fuss is about.

And I say this as a _staunch_ opponent of domestic surveillance.
I even hesitated before upvoting, because I know this action will be recorded. It's the world we live in.
Report OnTarget/Overdue Client Visits
> Guantanamo is still open, the NSA is as powerful as ever, a partisan puppet has been installed at the CIA, and Trump has all of these tools at his disposable.

So, corrupted insiders installed all those tools. Now an outsider gets elected into White House. You know what are the requirements for the post, right? At least 35 years old, American. All parts of that corrupted clique, from Hillary to Jon Stewart, fought tooth and nail to prevent him from being elected. Hillary was known evil. Trump is basically a big unknown. Why can't you give this man a chance?

EDIT. I guess I'm judging American politics by European standards. America are so deep in superficial fluff that it can't see what really happened. Left has lost everything because of bullshit of its progressive wing. Outsider has won White House. And you people are talking about Trump being racist - a "fact" discovered during the most vicious presidential campaign of last 50? years.
Great idea, would love to see some AMAs or a podcast on there with your favorite activist coders.
The trick is that this is not a closed discussion. The thrust was suspiciously repeated in many experiments, and question is whether it's some fundamental flaw with experiments, or it is real.

I guess, the more info is available to the public, the better. Hopefully someone will test it properly. But no way it can be considered as "provably works"
or c) an alternative explanation that still fits with most of what we know.

Anyway I agree with you, although it has already surpassed initial expectations stronger evidence is required.
You'll find a lot of good information like that on Barnacles:

https://barnacl.es/

Check it out. Clifford's articles on SaaS startups are must read, too, as it's the reality check people need. Here's an example:

https://medium.com/@cliffordoravec/expect-everything-to-be-u...
OpenDroneLab – Free Drone Mapping
I've interviewed a lot of dev folks from any level. Your Resume looks fine. Move your education all the way down.

I personally go first visit your github profile. Also, any link you have about the work you've done will make a difference.

good luck
> This is pretty good news if only that we will get more research into this phenomenon.

Agreed.

> Having a way to push your little probe along (even at a little bit of acceleration) without having to carry a lot of heavy propellant is a big deal. Maybe just some solar panels to generate the energy needed.

I'm not sure that actually works. Most use cases are for exploring the outer solar system, or even outside of our solar system. As the probe gets away from the sun, the solar energy it gets decreases with the square of the distance, and so it probably will stop providing even the little bit of acceleration.
There was a cure for Hepatitis C released last year. It's expensive, but priced below the average cost of a lifetime of treatment, so all the incentives align to get everyone to choose the cure.

This of course brings money and marketshare to the company that owns the cure over the company that owns the treatment patents, and it brings recognition to the scientists involved.

So you can take off that tinfoil hat, if someone would find a cure for HIV, they would absolutely not sit on it.
> It's an antibody, so in theory the human body can produce it itself. That's how vaccines work: they trick your body into producing antibodies against the real pathogens.

Ahh, of course they do. Thanks for the clarification :)

Either way this seems like an exciting result.
I would think that an integrated dash camera and the ability for the driver to automatically upload video for reporting to law enforcement would prevent this from ever becoming an issue.

This has parallels to the situation in Russia where dashcams are more or less considered a necessity for every vehicle. See https://www.wired.com/2013/02/russian-dash-cams/
Which means it's completely applicable for the majority of HN readers.
Great article, thank you for getting to the crux of the paper. Now that you have a base case working:

* Could you convert the parameters that govern the creation and interconnect of each layer into lisp and feed the whole thing into a genetic algorithm to evolve even better translators? Using GAs to evolve NNs was the new hotness in the late 90s and I don't know what ever happened with it. It would take on the order of 10,000 times more computation to simulate all the generations, but hey, it's Google.

* How hard would it be to generalize the GNMT for solving other types of problems where the output translation is the solution to a problem or what to do next? While reading the article, it occurred to me that the hidden layer S could be thought of as the meaning of the input data. If S is smaller than the input data, then you could treat it like a word feeding into another GNMT to process paragraphs, chapters, etc. I guess this would hinge on whether sentences have any relation to one another. In any case, would love to hear your thoughts on something like that.

I'm just an armchair hobbyist toiling away my career building CRUD apps, but I really feel that if we can get beyond the learning curve (no pun intended) and get to basic building blocks like this, then engineers will run with it and scale it very quickly to a passable implementation of hard AI.
Marmaris Escort Bayan Sınırsız Çıtır Eylül
Welcome to pine bark beetles California. We had them before they were cool. Signed - Colorado, Montana, Idaho et al
I would add that by Noether's theorem, a violation of the conservation of momentum implies that the laws of physics are different from one place to another. So these results are even more suspicious than they might sound to a non-physicist.
Technological means to prevent government surveillance are a great idea, and usually also increase personal security from crime at the same time.

However, in the long run technology is insufficient. Laws trump technology, and culture trumps laws.

Consider a group of people with a strong track record of success protecting their rights and privacy: gun owners. The gun lobby is so strong that they have forced the government to use archaic technology:

http://www.gq.com/story/inside-federal-bureau-of-way-too-man...

The most important step in fighting surveillance is getting people to believe that surveillance is bad. I know we all think so, but we need more than just HN for this. Congress will care about privacy when their phones ring nonstop about it; when they lose elections over it.
I don't know. I have personally been told by good meaning friends that 'but you are different from African Americans' by other ethnic groups when I was in Engineering grad school.

Also on your point regarding variance in intelligence among ethnic groups, African Americans mainly came from west Africa, and according to the article I linked above, west African immigrants in the US and UK are the highest achievers, so genes don't seem to be the issue.

So, what is left, culture? If so, the culture of the African American people is molded by racism, both personal and institutional racism.

All I am asking of you really is to not lightly dismiss racism as a contributing, if not the main factor in the achievement gap. It would be easy for me to say that if I can go to school and do well, why can't they do it too? But even though I grew up in a poor, war torn African country, fortunately I was never told on a daily basis that I was inferior because I happened to be black. And I am enormously thankful for that.
A two hour old account created specifically to take a jab?

I wonder what you should be disclosing.
Hello. I am human and I live on this planet and I want privacy, and I want my democracy to come with privacy. You do not speak for me. What happens now? Should I and others like me be rounded up for re-education?

Privacy is one of the things that helps prevent the horrible failure state of democracy; two wolves voting to eat the sheep for dinner. My comment above expresses exactly the kind of fear non-conformists have in zero privacy democracies.
Bayesian linear regression step by step
> This is pretty good news if only that we will get more research into this phenomenon.

Or maybe it's just a waste of time/money? (I'm not being facetious for the sake of it. See cjensen's comment[1])

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12995341
What's the tool's name?
Oh... and you published your personal address/phone so make sure you hide it on HC news.
Can't we put one in a cube sat and give it a go? (or: why can't we?)
GDLive Newsfeed – Real-time cash transfer updates
Not in MS Edge because it makes the browser more competitive with MS software frameworks that have had similar features for decades.
Pseudonymity was a common practice at the time. Also, the Federalist Papers were written before the First Amendment. Indeed freedom of the press was proposed in No. 84.

http://alturasinstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Salad...

The Articles of Confederation mention Freedom of speech and debate in Congress but that's it. Otherwise, this was left to the States.
Conservation principles come from fundamental symmetries.

https://www.eng.fsu.edu/~dommelen/quantum/style_a/physsym.ht...
Thank you - that's helpful. However I was referring more to familiarity with systems and software used when administering one's own infrastructure.

I'm generally comparing AWS to colocation, not other IaaS offerings.
Thanks for that--great piece.
"Trying to define a “fake” story is a slippery a slope"

It is not. Some stories are fake beyond any doubt, have been conclusively disproved and still keep popping up. E.g. "Obama is a foreigner" and many others.

We need more critical debate of arguments, and maybe a crowdsorced repository for discussing, and reaching consesnus on such stories.

And websites like Facebook must take responsibility for the stories they spread and be prepared to submit them to quality checks.
Social Norms Shift Preferences for Healthy and Unhealthy Foods
What do you mean by "closed discussion", specifically?

We've been hearing about this for ~1 year at this point, so I'm not sure what you mean.

> I guess, the more info is available to the public, the better.

This is up for debate -- esp. given the whole "fake news" thing and the observation that people basically love echo chambers (as observed in the field of Behavioural Economics).

If, by "info" you mean "actually provable[1] info", then I probably agree.

[1] To some reasonable standard of "proof". Certainly we don't need "mathematical" proof, but we need something better than "a study says". (See: reproducibility crisis[2], the fact that a "study" doesn't require any particular standard of evidence, etc.)

[2] Meta: I wonder if the BE field is itself suffering from a reproducibility crisis? Anyone know?
A lot of the Aasci generators seems to try and reproduce the color gradients - would a similar effect to this not happen of we try to reduce the image to line-art first?
Actually it's not as much useful as an engine as it may seem, at least at current parameters. Ion thrusters are pretty good as low-power engines. And it's not clear that emdrive is better than that even if it works. Maybe with powerful space-based nuclear reactors
My comment was primarily about the aesthetics of the NSA. They don't seem to bother with trying to appear good or friendly.

> It makes sense that spy agencies operate from non-descript locations.

The building is the opposite of nondescript. A 30-story building in Manhattan with no windows stands out a lot more than if they dressed it up with windows.

I also happen to think the NSA should be completely disbanded and replaced with an agency which solely focuses on international espionage.
Agreed, Occam's Razor would select that this is a case of experimental error. However...

The "Laws of Physics" are our current best way to describe the phenomenon that we see; but they may simply be the best approximations we have given the limited set of our observations. It does not follow that these laws are perfectly correct.

I think of it as a best-fit curve, which does a great job of describing the real curve so long as we have sufficiently accurate samples.

Sometimes I worry that we do not provide enough funding to experiments which fly in the face of our current understanding of Physics, and so skew our sample data towards fitting the curve we are presently comfortable with.
Can I ask a dumb question? If I will create model of our Universe in a computer language and I will chose to use five-dimensional array for ease of computation, will our Universe have fifth dimension then?

Despite that randomness is used in calculations, it is very unlikely that our Universe is random, thus "probability wave" is just mathematical abstraction, disconnected from reality, not a real thing. It just a particle, with concentrated rings of magnetic field around it (like rings of magnetic field around magnets). It moves fast, and it motion is influenced a lot by fluctuations in quantum field, so it is impossible to measure position of a particle precisely, like motion of a single atom in plasma, so random distributions and averages are very helpful in calculation.

PS.

Did you see the famous video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsaUX48t0w8
I am not sure what it is for which you want sources. Statements such as "NASA turned to Margaret Hamilton to develop the Apollo software" are absurd; Margaret Hamilton describes being hired onto the project around 1963-1964 rather than resuming her studies at Brandeis; here's one link: http://futurism.com/margaret-hamilton-the-untold-story-of-th.... The AGC project was well under way; which is why people were being hired to join it. Her job was in the COLOSSUS group; she describes herself thus (http://authors.library.caltech.edu/5456/1/hrst.mit.edu/hrs/a...):

"Then, because I was still a beginner, I was assigned responsibility for what was thought to be the least important software to be developed for the next mission. I was the most of the beginners; I mean, I was the first junior person, on this next unmanned mission."

I think it's fair to say she was not "in charge" of things for a while. She was gradually given more responsibility and eventually became the director of COLOSSUS development; Dan Lickly gave her that job. This couldn't have happened until close to the end of COLOSSUS development (it was frozen at the end of 1966, she was "a beginner" in 1964), and I think it was actually after the freeze. She still held the job of COLOSSUS lead programmer in March 1969. She did not become head of program development until Dan Lickly left; which is exactly what she says. This happened after the Apollo 11 flight. Software development was largely complete. So she was not in charge of the team that developed the AGC software while that happened. OK?

I am not saying "she did not contribute" or anything else. I don't know where you got that from what I wrote.
Did the study indicate if the long-term nonprogressor on any anti-viral drugs?

I think the most interesting nonprogressors to look at are the ones who refuse treatment. Many of them die within 5 ~ 10 years, but the ones who don't could potentially have a natural resistance to HIV.