skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You don't want never negative, or never stern to put a lighter touch on it—but many people, probably the audience of this article at large, simply don't know enough behavior theory to even know of the alternative.

Save the negative reinforcement and punishment for situations where it's absolutely clear and necessary—that's the best way to keep it an effective tool anyway. Maybe 60% positive, and 10% negative, with the other part just not being reinforced (an incredibly powerful behavioral tool all on its own).

It's the same with dogs (not as a derogatory comparison—just the truth of the science). I negatively reinforce for biting only, and only after they're at an age where they can comprehend the association between the bite and the punishment. It's remarkably effective. For nearly everything else, positive reinforcement is orders of magnitude more effective.

Overall, the most important part is to be a majority positive player, which makes you an overwhelmingly positive symbol in your child's (or pup's) life. This has primary effects that far outweigh the alternatives and negative side-effects of negative punishment and negative reinforcement methods.

I don't agree that the article is dangerous—people are unlikely to give up negative reinforcement altogether, but being introduced to a wider diversity of well-proven methods will only help, and we need more of it.
If you admit uncertainty over whether EU states can have a military or not (yes obviously EU states can and do have their own military forces), perhaps you shouldn't lecture people on learning more before posting?
Then let her. Would you want to be forced to talk to someone? My benchmark is "What would I feel if my father did this".
one all cars drive themselves we dont need uber or anyone can get into the game.
I think we should work to prove software and that's an ongoing process, but it's hard to imagine using an algorithm without a proof of at least correctness and convergence.

I just see people talking about domains and saying, "We don't need proofs for software" like they learned literally nothing from OpenSSL last year. And perhaps they did not, but I think we all should recognize that the stakes are getting pretty high and it's time to stop pretending we're all supervillan-level software designers.
timeoutlen is also used by leader key combos, and things like gg, fx, etc. If you drop your timeoutlen, make sure you can still combo these fast enough for them to register.
I'm afraid that didn't clarify anything for me.

> the universe of the sample has a bias of sorts

OK, what?

> I have a dog. Well of course it barks.

I'm with you there. Dogs bark. There's a correlation between the animal being a dog and it barking. How does that relate to your original post?

I have plenty of flaws and gaps in my knowledge and I use SO because there are plenty of great answers on there. Just like there's wonderful threads like these: http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/20803/how-does-s... on other parts of that same network of sites.

I don't see how using SO, or any source of information on a topic to help you solve a problem implies or even correlates to not being a capable person in that or other areas in general.
Sysadmin Gets Two Years in Prison for Sabotaging ISP
AFAIK yes. It's not illegal to look at how something works. There are some dumb laws in the US about circumventing and changing things, but I didn't actually touch anything.

I would also be more skittish if I was looking at the license key validation code, but I didn't since I bought a license a long time ago (it was totally worth it).
Yes, I've been evangelizing Rust at work as well. We're making a big push to SOA, so I'm using it as an opportunity to inject new things.
gmail uses HSTS so sslstrip is unlikely.
"According to the Department of Education, over 166,000 students in public schools were physically punished during the 2011–2012 school year."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_corporal_punishment_in_...
>their descendants [came] to believe in his oneness

Not all of them did :). Also I understand you are not trying to proselytize, we have the same motivation in commenting.

I am still curious about the other possibility - If you travelled 1000 years into the future and found no one believed in God anymore than we believe in Zeus:

Would it bother you to live a lifetime of staying silent, or being discriminated against by nearly everyone as being a crackpot?
It definitely could, as far as I understand it's the underpinning for all of Chrome's graphics for instance, including Canvas.
Sublime's doesn't: https://www.sublimetext.com/eula
Again, it very much seems like you're trying to miss the point of what Im saying.

Though, for a quick definition, you can roughly say that a deity or angel is equivalent (in definition) to a quasiparticle.

Using this (rough) definition, we can see that I didn't claim to know anything about earthquakes that geologists dont -- merely that I use different terminology (and slightly different strategy) when decomposing the model in to parts.

Your reply entirely skipped over the thrust of mine: that you're strawmanning what others are saying by pretending a difference in language is a different claim. You then immediately made up a new strawman about earthquakes rather than address that.

Have you considered that you're not actually trying to understand what Im saying, and just making self-assured ignorant comments?
In some sense, yes. The line between "punitive corporal punishment" and "assault" is blurred in deference to parents' judgment.

So it's legal for a parent to spank their child with their hand or even a weapon such as a belt. It stops being legal once "lasting" physical injury (e.g. welts, bruises, broken skin) occurs.

We have a very barbaric "society" here in many respects.
It's there, it's just bound to alt-click instead of ctrl-click. And currently you can't rebind any keybinding with a mouse click on it, so you have to use alt-click.
Mostly dead projects: http://web.archive.org/web/20000418011820/http://www.hex.net...

Some ideas: https://github.com/robert-strandh/LispOS
If you want to understand Git better, check out this talk on Git basics by our trainer Mike Weilgart: https://youtu.be/j6Se3jH60dA
Redownload. Check again. I'm on satellite internet with the horrible latencies and frequent timeouts associated with that tech, I recently had the netinstall image for Debian fail integrity checking three times in a row, from the http mirrors. Guy from the link said it himself, download via torrent and all is well.

Generally, being on such terrible interwebs I get angry whenever I hear people claim torrents are only for piracy. We all know they're wrong, but my legal torrent use has really never been more intense. Rsync's ability for aggressive retrying is also blessed :)
NASA will give you $30,000 if you can solve their 'space poop' problem
A friend linked just this comment to me, and as somebody amidst an existential crisis, this is such a great answer.

That emotional intuition - have you noticed or observed any ways in yourself, or in others, to really keep this sharp?
Fully understand what you're describing, though it's worthwhile to consider the articles position which essentially states that negative reinforcement will likely prolong and intensify the behavior which prompted the reaction in the first place.
From their FAQ:

How to disable telemetry reporting

VS Code collects usage data and sends it to Microsoft to help improve our products and services. Read our privacy statement to learn more.

If you don’t wish to send usage data to Microsoft, you can set the telemetry.enableTelemetry setting to false.

From File > Preferences > User Settings, add the following option to disable telemetry reporting:

"telemetry.enableTelemetry": false

Note: VS Code gives you the option to install Microsoft and third party extensions. These extensions may be collecting their own usage data and are not controlled by the telemetry.enableTelemetry setting. Consult the specific extension’s documentation to learn about its telemetry reporting.
He did redownload and verify via BT. He seems to also be rebuilding from source(?).
why should they be "on equal footing", and what could that possibly mean? They are two sides of an equation who each want different things out of the relationship. The employee wants to sell his services. The employer wants to purchase services.

Unless you subscribe to the Marxist doctrine that every economic interaction is "really" a question of one party having power over the other, which is delusional like the rest of Marxism.
> So says the cardiology fellow…

Would you say "so says the cryptographer" to circumscribe something that `tptacek says about cryptography?

> One theory as to why statins have a small degree of influence is that they actually have an anti-inflammatory action. When my father talks with his patients, he finds many of them couldn't tolerate statins' side effects.

Given the predictable effects of LDL-cholesterol lowering on MACE and death, invoking beneficial mechanisms of statins beyond LDL-cholesterol lowering (e.g., by anti-inflammatory effects) is not that well supported (or necessary to explain the benefits), but it's not out of the realm of possibility.
Depends how complex your video game is.

It has a GPU back end so it can be pretty fast, but it is still focused on very high quality antialiased rendering so it isn't crazy fast. Apps like Chrome and Sublime don't repaint the entire screen every frame or when scrolling, only the parts that change, so they can afford high quality.
It has the potential to be inefficient if they choose the wrong group of scientific advisors. But, for most of these initiatives, they're very careful to choose smart people to actually lead the details of the project and figure out how to best distribute the money.

Sometimes, we're actually within striking zone of these targeted diseases and funding more translational research is good. Other times, we still don't understand the underlying diseases well enough, and so we still need to do an enormous amount of basic science before trying to cure these diseases in the clinic. A team of good scientific advisors who are at the cutting edge of their respective fields can provide the insight and decision-making that this needs, to extract the maximum value from the money provided.
Stripe founders are the youngest Irish billionaires on paper
That's not what he means in that quote. He means that the extra work of decomposition (which can be done in either approach) is worth it if it's easier to use automated methods for each component separately. Those automated methods work equally well in both approaches (in practice, though, there is a production-quality model checker for TLA+, but not any that I'm aware of for "academic" programming languages). So your quote is completely orthogonal, and in any event, it is not the motivation for the "Milner approach".

There are several motivations for the PL approach: 1. an executable can be extracted from the code -- i.e., it can be compiled to an efficient program, 2. they believe that reasoning with syntax is easier, and 3. high-level reasoning could potentially assist in writing parts the program automatically. Lamport completely disagrees with point 2, and as to point 1, he says that had a language that could both reason about programs affordably and be compiled efficiently existed that would be great, but currently this is not the case. So he believes that they're sacrificing the simplicity of reasoning in a major way for the goal of having both programming and reasoning done in the same language. He may agree that it's a worthy goal, but one that we're currently far from attaining. He's interested in things that work on real-life software today. He says that how you program and how you reason about programs should not necessarily be the same, and if making them the same makes either of them significantly more complicated than would be possible when keeping them separate, then we should keep them separate.
Regarding schools that's on a state by state and district by district basis. It is very legal for a principal or other officers of a school to use corporal punishment if the state and local laws permit it.
Statins are of questionable effectiveness eg. see "Systematic review: Statins are not associated with a decrease in all cause mortality in a high-risk primary prevention setting" http://ebm.bmj.com/content/16/1/8.full?keytype=ref&siteid=bm...

I'm probably in the category of people they might be prescribed to - 52, year male, bit overweight, otherwise healthy, but I'm kind of a believer in if it ain't broken don't fix it and so will risk it.

The "cholesterol hypothesis" is kind of a different thing.
This is a really nice over-view.

I'm not from the Milner tradition, but I disagree with your criticisms of that tradition.

I think the key difference between TLA+ et al and the Milner tradition is automation.

In the Milner tradition, the automation follows sort of systematically from a proper formulation. So if you find the "right" way of formulating worst-case complexity, you get a lot more than just a way to state and hopefully prove some particular property -- you also get a way of automatically inferring that property and a sort of systematic way of baking your results into compiler infrastructure. This insight is perhaps masked by the fact that you can also formulate arbitrary properties in arbitrary styles in a dependent type theory... so to put it another way, the evidence for the fact that ML type systems are well-designed is the unification algorithm, not the type checker.

The TLA+ (et al.) story about automation is mostly "model checkers and invariant generators". In other words, the "hard stuff" is typically exogenous to the specification system/language. I know you might claim that model checking is sufficient, but I have a lot of experience with that approach and I respectfully disagree -- in part because the Milner tradition has produced a lot of insights that are often baked into model checkers and invariant generators. But also because this approach has fundamental scaling issues and designing around those constraints requires much more skill than advertised.

So while it's true that the type theory tradition is more difficult to understand, it's also true (IMO) that if you get something "right" in that tradition, it's far more powerful than getting something "right" in the TLA+ tradition.
The "model" in the title is the model of the world, as a probabilistic model. The good thing about such a model is that it explicitly states your beliefs about the world. Once you've defined it, in theory reasoning about it is straightforward. (In practice a lot of papers get written about how to do approximate inference.) It's also straightforward to do unsupervised learning.

This is a different perspective from (most uses of) neural networks, which do not have this clear separation between the model and how to reason about it. It's funny that Chris Bishop in 1995 wrote the textbook "Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition" and now is effectively arguing against using neural networks.

You can use both by using neural networks as "factors" (the black squares) in probabilistic models.
VSCode is better in some ways for a couple languages that it has nice debuggers for. Otherwise Sublime has a lot on it.

Sublime is faster and is crazy polished. It also has a larger plugin ecosystem.
It depends on the state.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0934191.html
10 Questions to Ask When Buying Office Furniture
Depends on what timeframe you're thinking about. Some things are inefficient short term, because of redundancies, but that makes them more robust and therefore more efficient in the long run.
Yes, the federal system reserves more rights for American states than are enjoyed by, say, French régions. They're still a far cry short of sovereign states.
You're basically suggesting that using tools that strengthen democracy is to our disadvantage, because it does not please the government, and that we should therefor not use them to defend our rights. Basically, we should accept being manipulated by fear.
Any cognitive advantage that is abused will be seen as manipulative, absolutely. The way to make "the illusion of choice" work is to be selective about it. You start out by giving the 4 year old the illusion of choice (the jacket or the sweater), but what you're really doing is coaching the child to make appropriate decisions. After a few times, you won't have to give the child the choice anymore, because they will know the parameters of the choices for the challenge facing them. You could simply say "let's get ready to go out."

Same thing with a boss. (S)he can use this cognitive tool to coach good decisions. People like choice and they like being right. Using this method allows for both.
I don't totally follow the conclusion you're trying to draw w.r.t. the definition of a patent troll; clearly there's a lot of people who think that filing and then attempting to enforce a bogus patent applies (though people differ in which patents they think are bogus). Is this some sort of prescriptivist/descriptivist thing?

> The University of Tennessee Knoxville isn't a one man shop.

I mean, sure; but so what? Clearly they were unable or unwilling to fight this battle. Maybe you're right that they should have better protected Plank and society from StreamScale, but I think it makes more sense to put the blame on StreamScale for engaging in this behavior, and our broken patent for encouraging it. Likewise, the paper has multiple authors, but that doesn't really affect the argument at all.

> Ok, if you're going to attack the patent on novelty grounds, you have an easy case to make

I feel like you're deliberately missing the point. Where do you think I'll make this case? I'm certainly not going to spend tens of thousands of dollars fighting the good fight in court. "Technique" in the quote referred to the use of blocking and vector instructions for matrix multiplication. Lots of matrix libraries had such techniques well before the priority date of the patent.

The patent is on using those existing techniques for matrix multiplication, when that matrix multiplication happens to be a part of an error correcting code. I don't think those sorts of patents should exist. (The "matrix multiplication" here is tricky because it's multiplication in a Galois field, but that's not what the patent claims cover).
There's a mild difference between punishment and negative reinforcement, and this article is just arguing against <punishment>.

The difference between punishment and negative reinforcement is in how one models the relationship between cause and effect, and how you are increasing or decreasing behavioral frequency.

The important aspect behind punishment or negative reinforcement isn't negativity or pain, but a model of learning that has since fallen out of favor versus bayesian causal learning models.
You and I are talking about different things. My closing sentence could have been more explicit, e.g.:

> The American usage of the word 'state' to refer to the constituent members of its federal system is a relic of a time when they were effectively sovereign states.
How you modify your children's behavior is beside the point, IMO. What's really important is whether the modification is in the child's best interest, or merely convenient or beneficial to the parent.

Some folks get it and won't fuck up their kids too badly, even with bad technique. Others don't and will do lasting harm, even without using abusive techniques to get compliance.
Twitter is not news.

At best, it's unfiltered information, and usually just noise and venting.
What are the main use cases of multiple cursors? It seemed like an interesting feature, and I'm curious why it would be considered essential.
That's simple. When DO came on the scene it was the only one of its kind. Now there are 4 almost identical services: DO, Linode, Vultr, and Lightsail. On the surface those seem the same because of the near linear pricing and similar allocation of resources. The ones you listed aren't even close. Each of those may have some but they don't have all of what makes the DO model so useful to some of us:

1. Mission-critical/Production ready reliability and communication (all maintenance and issues)

2. No unexpected termination of instances / Reasonable warning & mediation

3. Not overprovisioned / little concern of noisy neighbors

4. Tier 3/4 redundancies

5. Strong American coverage (each DC with Tier 3/4 level services)

6. No setup fee on new instances

7. 1-minute provisioning (simple creation of instances / no ticket needed for deleting resource)

8. Programmatic IaaS management including provisioning, DNS, and images

9. Quality resources - mostly Xeons not ARMs, local SSD not Ceph

10. Huge backing - they're not closing tomorrow & I wanted a #10

While OVH, Hetzner, Leaseweb seem like nice services, particularly for needs in Europe, I can't build an American-centric service on those, set it and forget it nearly as easily or worry-free as with DO/Linode/Vultr/Lightsail.
Well of course if you shove it on them after the fact it won't go well. Everyone gets their egos ruffled. You would have to start from scratch.

I'm assuming you're talking about this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unification_of_the_Canadian_Ar...
Genuine question: what's the need of music players these days? I mean, all the songs are locked in music streaming app (apple music, spotify)- where do you download your songs from?
High Quality Document Image Compression with DjVu [pdf]
Anyone else only seeing a 3-second loop on the ustream feed? Tried in Chrome on multiple computers/OSs.
> not close to or identical to any programming language other than Lisp.

It's close to the Lisps, Scheme, Racket, Clojure, and many others.

You are correct that the popularity of Ruby, Python, and JavaScript has eclipsed the popularity of these languages, and so the popularity of JSON has eclipsed that of s-expressions.
Look: I'll just state what is bothering me about your comments: you're trying to assert your opinion as scientific fact / proof without a scientific explanation; you're trying to force me to blindly believe whatever you say.

It bothers me when people can't explain their views; it tells me they're more comfortable to listening than talking, and that they should only listen to select sources because they're too lazy (or possibly scared) to form a dissenting opinion on their own.

You could absolutely be right that Dr. LaViolette is completely wrong, -- but we're not going to know for sure unless we challenge our selves by challenging different theories. Deciding the outcome without any inquiry is practically psychotic: you're denying reality under the delusion that your pride knows everything.

The lecture is interesting because there is a history in electrogravitics from the early 20th century that suddenly became classified in the 1950s. The decade's obsession in flying saucers and UFOs actually derived from real prototypes these aerospace companies were making.

The implication that these companies have possibly suppressed research in this field is daunting, but seeing the universe as a continuous expansion from a higher energy that everything derives from is also transcending.

Again, the theory could be completely wrong, -- but if it somehow is miraculously correct it'd be a shame to not see it all because of some silly pride.

LOL! If you'd ask me if I would be having conversations about anti-gravity a month ago, I'd probably laugh, too. Ugh! It feels hilariously ironic because I've laughed at these people, too. It's almost like we're conditioned to think this way.

Anyways, cheers! Good luck; God bless!
Cached: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:QEt3EVS...
“Watch the Failson:” How the Internet Is Radicalizing the Alt-Right
True. I notice that I filter Google results on last year only just to filter out outdated stuff. Just today I wondered why everything on the web (read: Google) was getting so old.