skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I should stop talking about editors I don't use. Let me focus on Emacs with some comments about Textadept (I've never used Atom and only tried Sublime Text for a day).

1. Yes, the ability to repeat with dot is advantage of the Vim model. Emacs just repeats the command part not the marking part too, not as useful as dot in Vim!

2. In Emacs every command accepts counts, just like Vim. Textadept doesn't offer counts, I believe. I think counts are probably an advantage of Vim and Emacs over most(?) other editors.

3. About Vim having more motions & text objects: Probably, but Emacs is close. Without extra packages you have: words, symbols and S-expressions (the names come from Lisp but these do something sensible in most languages: Symbol is usually identifier and S-expression is something like delimited expression: A string, a parenthesized expression, a block in curly braces or brackets, etc.), lines, sentences, and paragraphs. Texts packages add other targets like LaTeX environment. One thing definitely lacking in Emacs is that Vim usually offers two variants that differ slightly at the ends (like w vs e, or i( vs a(), those minor variations are pretty useful.

My point is just the saying other editors don't have the ability to combine commands with different things to operate on is obviously false, and claiming is unlikely to convert anytime to Vim. Instead Vim bloggers should focus on how Vim makes the basic composability idea even better with things like counts, repeatability of composed commands, and richer set of selection commands.
Right, because I'm going to commit myself to eighteen years of making sure the l'il shit makes it to the adulthood, all so I can get a year off at half pay and a trivial tax deduction every year. Damn, it's so unfair to those of us without children.
Yeah... I remember those days. The first projects I built with it were 0.5. The migration to 0.8 was... painful. But given the huge performance improvements it was worth it.

As you said, you kinda just have to expect a little pain pre-1.0. But the time investment in learning and using it has been worth it in my opinion.
If that is the comparison you want to make, you have to look at what sort of healthcare private companies provide across their entire employment pool.

I bet American Express has a program that looks an awful lot like universal coverage for their employees.
> You think race realism is accurate but we should ignore

No, I do not think race realism is accurate. I just think that race realism is not an adequate defense of racial discrimination, AND ALSO that race realism is inaccurate.

Pessimizer and I agree.

> Many examples in the article don't fit your description of the problem at all

You asked me what I think the problem is, not what I think the article's author thinks the problem is. The fact that I emphasize different things is not proof that I misunderstand the article's author.

> The only thing that I argued is that the imprecise language used by Techcrunch is confusing people and that this is bad.

Who, exactly, is supposed to be confused?

Subject matter experts should know the difference, and if they don't, that's really their own problem.

The public at large doesn't even know what statistical bias is, so why in the world would they be confused?

No matter how confusing the current state of affairs is, it would be far more confusing if suddenly everyone starting using bias to mean statistical bias. Mostly because 99.9% of the people using the term wouldn't have an adequate grasp of mathematics to even know to which object they are referring. So if your priority is clarity, then keeping around the messy moralized and politicized vernacular notion of bias is far preferable.

> I didn't argue in favor of or against your mysterious "vernacular-discrimination" - how could I when I don't even know what it is?

Not everything in the world can be mathematically formalized. Most things don't even have fixed meaning over time. If your criticism is genuinely about imprecision, you've got a lot of much lower hanging fruit than "discrimination" and "bias"...
There would be none if they were aware the information they hand out contains insider info.
My issue with those sounds in Arrival was that I wasn't sure in a few places whether the alien ship was making them, or whether they were part of the soundtrack. This is a hazard of going for the same effect, but trying to do it differently.
Introducing oxd: secure OpenID Connect client software for web applications
Yeah the SDKs outside of C# are supported by the services team. They are created by a separate team so you will run into issues where the node SDK won't have the latest features
Who is "we"? All life on earth? Even "we" as humanity is a colony organism; we have more non-human cells in our bodies than human ones.
The tone and lack of compassion in this comment reminds of that line from The Big Lebowski:

"You're not wrong Walter. You're just an asshole."
Just enough to allow one to criticize the movie on some high moral platform instead of only on the basis of its merits as film.
Overpopulation is not a risk anymore in pretty much any developed nation.
I don't think that most families I know could get by for a year on 55% pay. How do people do that?
Children pay the pension of childless people, of course they should be forced to subsidize those who have them.
> but those aren't clearly different from "use some statistics to make a prediction"

You can reduce 90% of ML to this. Even neural networks are based on statistics.

If I have to draw a line between statistics and ML is that ML learns, it means it can predict things, however statistics only gives you information about the data you have. But for sure statistics and ML overlap a lot.
I wouldn't. I'd call it "basic computational statistics." But I think I might be in the minority on that.
Investor cash, it sounds like.
"Super simple" would be nice, but as I understand it, even "dumb car" software is incredibly huge and complicated. (It's very unclear to me why that needs to be so)
Yes we evolve from a common ancestor with the monkey, which used to eat mainly fruit, hence sugar.
I've used Polymer for about a year now, and it's not my favorite.

Two way data binding yields bad design, and stack traces are incredibly opaque (they go through polymer guts). That means debugging is an absolute nightmare (I come from strongly typed closure javascript, so this was a punch in the face). If your HTML has problems, the browser won't yell at you; debugging tools are just plainly lacking. There's a reason Google doesn't use it widely.

So, it seems great at first because it does so much, but you realize you want some minor customization and you end up spending all your time trying to hack around it when you could have just written from scratch in the same time (for example, I wanted an iron-collapse to move upwards, and had to do some crazy CSS hackery to get that to work).

That being said, if you restrict Polymer with team style guide, it can be incredibly powerful for code reuse. My team has a style guide that looks like this: only use paper components if absolutely necessary, never use {{}} only use one-way data binding, and attach strongly typed javascript to the Polymer component classes with Closure or Typescript.

(I work at Google, was tech lead for the image search frontend team for 4 years, and now work on Tensorboard in Tensorflow which is Typescript + Polymer)
I use this so much it became my to-go place to create step by step plan (a.plan) for any project I do. I would also bind :w with converting the wiki to html and have a cronjob to sync the html with the server so anyone can easily check the project I m working on and its progress
It's more like 75% because only one person stays at home while the other keeps working at 100% salary.
Google employees confess all the things they hated most about working at Google
We use ML to model complex interactions in electrical grids in order to make decisions that improve grid efficiency, which has been (at least in the short term) more effective than using an optimizer and trying to iterate on problem specification to get better results.

Generally speaking, I think if you know your data relationships you don't need ML. If you don't, it can be especially useful.
Here's my American take on this: if enough people want this to happen, it should happen. This is a democracy after all.

And why do you say "we owe you nothing". You aren't a company, you're an individual.
Why should we take Gladwell seriously on this? Why does anyone think he is qualified? He is a windbag famous for writing the most base and insulting form of literary clickbait: pop science novels that tell a series of 'just so' fables which add up to give the reader a satisfying sense of the world which is completely opposed to the world the way it is. He is a propaganda artist at best, insidious at least.

And now he writes on Snowden, omits hugely important pieces of the story, warps the narrative in service of his hip contrarianism and unsurprisingly misses the point completely but distracts with cute anecdotes about Ellsberg.

I guess the question we should be asking ourselves is why is he given a spot to write a long-form article like this in the New Yorker? Why does anyone still take him seriously at this point? Has intellectualism in this country truly failed this hard?

Perhaps a good thing could come from this: people who have done their due diligence and read about Snowden will read this and recognize Gladwell for the hack he is.
No one wants your money
This is more or less an argument that Wikipedia is impossible and shouldn't exist, since almost every topic is a potential battlefield. And yet the project not only manages to handle this, but counts among it's highest-quality FA contentious subjects like renewable energy, Everglades restoration, BAE Systems, and Microsoft's Security Essentials package.
I believe that CentOS doesn't release sooner when these point releases happen upstream (compared to regular errata updates) may have to do with ensuring packages outside the ones sourced directly from RHEL don't break.

Packages in point releases may sometimes force some packages higher in the dependency tree to be rebuilt, or perhaps may change the dependency chain in some way. Red Hat likely takes care to release only when this doesn't violate stability guarantees for the stuff they support.

If there was no CentOS, I'd say you could end up in a situation where EPEL and IUS (just to mention the most popular - almost indispensable - external repos out there) would be broken for the lastest point release for a while. That would be bad for users.

Red Hat customers are less likely to be using them. After all, if you're going to use unsupported packages, why do it on RHEL instead of CentOS which is mostly the same minus support?

(Also, you can follow the CentOS CR repository if you really want to keep up more closely with upstream RHEL.)
I agree with your second point, but not the first.

If true waste has very little/no cost associated with it, evolution wouldn't be able to select for it's removal.
> Instead have your CI system run the tests.

Is "your CI system" typically distelli or another vendor?
Yeah... I used it initially with no TS experience, but coming back to it later I do find myself missing TS. But yeah you can use polymer-build to split the script block out of the HTML file, run it through TSC, then insert it back into the file as JS.
You may take the stance that we need less children due to overpopulation problems. Either way though, people having kids is what continues America's and humanity's existence.

This is the whole idea behind lower tax brackets for married couples and similar things. Making sure our population is at least being maintained and preferably growing.

In addition, if you dislike the large amount of kids that grow up in orphanages/bad homes things like this should allow people to have more time to take care of their kids during their first several weeks of life as well as potentially encourage more people to keep their kids instead of putting them up for adoption.
Actually my original title was more precise because it included "(1611)" which should make that clear. But, apparently, it got changed.
In some parts of the world salaries go first, as they should. Don't know about Bulgaria though.
Depending on where you live, the population might be declining, and encouraging people to have more children (and letting you country vanish) might be a good thing to do.
Thank you for that link. The idea that I and some other folks have been bouncing around is more along the lines of a shared R&D facility where members have a place to work, common areas to chat, facilities providing (and hosting) resources, with high speed access to the Internet. Badged 24 hour access and reasonable security.

That is in some ways like a maker space where paying your dues not only gave you membership it also gave you an office, shared access to expensive equipment, and medical/dental benefits. The stuff a "real" job gives you but without the (now unnecessary) salary.

The presumption is that the work would yield economic returns and if so, those returns would go back into the organization to offset the cost of membership. Of course if the cost of membership became negative then you'd effectively have an entirely employee owned corporation and that is where things get different. Some of the people I've talked to about this concept have created very valuable things in the past and they expect to again, if they did that in the collective's space how does that work? Does all that value flow to everyone, even people who didn't participate? How about to people who did but were only tangentially influential in the outcome. That is the "success disaster" that one has to create plans for so that what happens at that point has already been agreed to by everyone and we don't start suing each other.

There are other models, places like law offices which share expenses. Things like movie studios which essentially do a vfork(2) to create an entity to "own" a production and the results of that production, groups like the Royal Society (although I've been cautioned against creating something along those lines), and alternate forms of venture incubating[1]. There are interesting examples to look at like Willow Garage to see what worked and what didn't.

[1] One thought was to have this group of seasoned engineers get a project off the ground and proven then hire in a team to be the company, transition it to the team and move on to the next thing.
Visual Studio 2017 (RC) update is now available
Plutocracy? You have to have a decent amount of free time and resources initially to value spending time working on Wikipedia articles enough to gain working knowledge and social connections in the system to advance enough to advance broader agendas, or enforce narrower biases.
(EDITED)

> An encyclopedia is a tertiary source: a roadmap and synopsis of existing sources.Non-notable sources are by definition those for which existing reliable sources are absent. All such articles are, in a very simple sense, "original research". One of the most basic founding principles of Wikipedia, as old as NPOV, is "no original research".... we will do so only when available sources make the job possible to do in the first place.

Why not just incorporate that into verifiability then? As I understand you, you're arguing that (1) non-notability generally implies un-verifiable, (2) Wikipedia info should be verifiable, and so (3) Wikipedia info should be notable.

Isn't it easier to demonstrate objectively that an article contains unverifiable info than it's non-notable?
I have a couple of areas of interest where my knowledge is quite deep and I notice this whenever there's anything about those subjects written in the local or national press.

I see people asking why we can't have a meaningful dialog about the subject and it's because at least half of us don't understand the basics of the issue.
Does anyone use AMD for deep learning in scientific / industry ? All the libraries for deep learning I have seen require CUDA and NVIDIA is winning by merely being the most popular API. Searching github it looks like they are university assignment projects see https://github.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=opencl+deep+learn...
In addition to logging, I believe if you want hassle free roaming handoff between wifi APs you also need it running. It's been a while since I played with it since my setup is so rock-solid now (compared to when I had linksys gear...)
Show HN: Web tool which spits out hardcoded secret API tokens in apps
Great idea! We'll start with you.
I tried Hyper out a while back because I thought the customizability offered interesting options and the ability to have terminal and browser tabs literally side by side, in the same window, had the potential for a good workflow.

I ended up switching back to iTerm2 because encountering minor bugs was a frequent enough occurrence and iTerm2 works perfectly well for me.

I'm now curious what people who have been using Hyper consistently think about its usability and whether it's worth it to switch over? For me, worth it means at least matching iTerm2 in basic functionality and utility, having no noticeable performance issues, and not being a high battery drain. Thoughts?
It would be nice for those without a fitbit device or login to be able to get a preview of the game :)
Interview with the author of React-like Inferno about JavaScript optimisations
> I can't see this getting more expensive than a few thousand $ a month

You aren't accounting for staff time. All software is a living organism, they can't just lay off the developers and expect it to keep working.
Note, don't actually try this as it will lock up Hyper and you'll have to force quit it.
Can I participate as an investor putting my money into the fund? Or I can only participate as a data scientist?
Of course, here's mine:

https://gist.github.com/justonia/caf8c8a794d5252e8dbc149d457...

I also added a .reg file that lets me right click on an .ahk file and get a menu item to run as administrator.
Don't worry.. the USA is miles behind the rest of the world in MANY regards..
Why vertical is the most engaging type of video
> The "significant coverage" clause prevents sprawling articles about non-notable subjects based on the technicality that the subject's name once occurred in a regional newspaper article; for instance, by being quoted by a local sports reporter at a softball game.

Why not just cut any material that's not actually verifiable?
Could you be more specific about this "laundering" of research through reliable sources?

I definitely saw savvy Wikipedia spammers lawyering their way into the encyclopedia, sometimes successfully, for instance by citing marginal trade press cites as evidence of notability ("my client is notable because one time a trade press writer got a quote from them on the importance of FCIP products for disaster recovery programs").

What I don't see is a lot of bogus research hiding in the secondary sources of major articles.

Whatever you might think about WP's policies on what does or doesn't constitute a "reliable" source, I think it's difficult to argue that any community outside of Wikipedia has spent more time thinking about this problem.
Why Trump’s #DrainTheSwamp Slogan Means Totally Something Different in Israel
Darwin came up with a theory of a _mechanism_ (natural selection) by which the evolution that was _observed_ in nature happens. Neither Darwin nor Wallace "discovered" evolution. Evolution is a feature of our world, easily observed and utilized by animal and plant breeders for hundreds of centuries.

But what was brilliant about Darwin's theory was that he proposed it while knowing basically nothing about the underlying biological features that enabled it--ie, discrete genes that are duplicated, sometimes with errors, in successive generations of individuals.

What blew my mind when I first understood these ideas was that given discrete genes, and given unequal chances of successful reproduction for various sets of genes, natural selection is essentially axiomatic. The rules of the game force natural selection to exist. There is no other way it can work. So I think it's fair to say that Darwin discovered natural selection. But not evolution.

By the way if you are interested in this topic at all and you haven't read "On the Origin of Species", do yourself a favor and seek it out. It's public domain so it's available all over the Internet and there are plenty of good printed editions available as well. For its age, it's remarkably clear and concise even for modern readers. It's well-written and the author takes a very humble approach to the topic. As an argument it's a fantastic example of building to your conclusion by step after concrete step of irrefutable evidence. And when Darwin had to get speculative, he was correct an incredibly high percentage of the time, so even his wildest ideas still hold up today.
Now consider "pizzagate," a claim that John Podesta and possibly Hillary Clinton were somehow involved in some kind of child trafficking ring based on a few cryptic out of context sentences in their e-mails. Clinton was known for being anti-Putin, while her rival Trump seems pro-Putin.

Can I be forgiven for thinking we're in the midst of a full-blown cyber war assault by Russia against political opponents abroad?

If this is indeed the case, I really think the best thing for US intelligence to do would be to take a page from the Russian playbook and leak everything they have on this and "doxx" everyone involved.
how good is the handwriting recognition for searches etc?
This is very cool information. It's too bad his vision never came to fruition. On the contrary, Stanford grads seems really bought into the capitalistic system.
Predict probability of car accidents based on the sensors of your smartphone
I think much of this can be circumvented with real time data from apps like Waze.

However if the car is not able to find an alternate route, it may require the driver to take over, so it wouldn't be fully autonomous.

In either case, the car has to be able to reliably identify conditions in which it is necessary for the person to take over, which is definitely far away from being solved at a level that would be required to meet consumer levels of safety.
I'm aware of its ambiguity, I read the book. For something to be on that scale, it definitely was not nuclear.
At first I thought it was the ship too. Then I came to realize they're trying to get me to have some feeling for a scene where most times I had none. I'd just think "there's that loud sound again."
If AMD can release solid hardware, all they would need to do is add support for their hardware to popular open-source projects like TensorFlow.

I just hope they do the second part correctly.
I've always thought of regressions, even high-order ones, as just a statistical tool. They're present at the start of ML courses, sure, but as a tool used in ML techniques or a good alternative to them.

It looks like that's not the standard view, though.
I completely agree with that sidenote, in particular where did that "M" come from?!
I like how this comment portrays companies as a fixed part of nature, and children as a weird thing that some people choose to do.

I say: you made the choice to have a company. Don't expect child-rearers to subsidize your corporate veil, we owe you nothing.
We (distelli) do provide our own CI system but you don't have to use ours. You can use your own CI system and kick off the pipeline from that.

Some of our customers use Jenkins while others use one of the many hosted CI systems.
People who choose not to have children should not be forced to subsidize those who do.

Why not?

If you pay tax, some of that will go to paying school teachers, regardless of whether or not you have children of your own. Is that also wrong? Like it or not, all western societies include some form of wealth redistribution.