skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Swifter Swift: A collection of 730 native Swift 3 extensions
I feel like it is foremost a matter of attitude of the practitioner. An applied statistician and a machine learning engineer may deliver exactly the same end product, just the reasoning and assumptions differ. Machine learning uses little to no assumptions, where statisticians do. I also feel that machine learning engineers have a bit less fear of building black boxes.

Caruana showed the cartoon of the difference between a statistician and a machine learning practitioner by showing a cliff. The statistician carefully inches to the edge, stomping her feet to see if the ground is still stable, then 10 meters before the edge she stops and draws her conclusions. The machine learning practitioner dives headfirst from the cliff, with a parachute that reads "cross-validation".

See also:

http://norvig.com/chomsky.html On Chomsky and the Two Cultures of Statistical Learning.

And http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ss/1009213726 Statistical Modeling: The Two Cultures by Leo Breiman.

and this joke:

> Norvig teamed up with a Stanford statistician to prove that statisticians, data scientists and mathematicians think the same way. They hypothesized that, if they all received the same dataset, worked on it, and came back together, they’d find they all independently used the same techniques. So, they got a very large dataset and shared it between them.

> Norvig used the whole dataset and built a complex predictive model. The statistician took a 1% sample of the dataset, discarded the rest, and showed that the data met certain assumptions.

> The mathematician, believe it or not, didn’t even look at the dataset. Rather, he proved the characteristics of various formulas that could (in theory) be applied to the data.
Twitter says he posted that at 5:26 AM, not 8:26 AM.
The funny thing about bias is that it was invented, technically, as a way of... improving the accuracy of data in audio recordings. By adding something (current or frequency) to the signal you could increase the quality of the output.
Without chasing the metaphor too much, it's also interesting to considerer that, maybe, adding something, yes a bias, to the data would also increase their quality.
Why did authors (e.g. Azimov) came up with fundamental robotic laws?
It's 100% clear from the article that 'bias' is in the political, or common sense of the word. It's an existing, established usage, and not one that the authors simply made up.

I fail to see why you insist that the authors use a word in its statistical sense when they clearly aren't making a statistical argument -- especially since the the statistical sense of the word bias is ultimately derived from the common usage, and not the other way around. The use of 'bias' in the sense of 'prejudice' in English dates from the 1570s, well before the development of statistics [1].

If anything, we should complain that the statisticians overloaded a perfectly good English word, instead of coming up with some Greek or Latin neologism for their own technical use.

[1] http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=bias

> Similarly, I advocate against new-age uses of the word "energy" - energy is a specific conserved quantity,

Sounds like a stilted way to look at the world. If someone says 'I'm feeling really energetic today', would you object on the grounds that they haven't shown that their biochemical energy reserves are larger than normal, or that their body is burning calories at a faster rate than usual?
Why would you want it NOT to be so?
That ended early: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13131251
This is a great step for what's really a sad state of affairs in the US.

My wife and I like to "joke" (it's not really funny) that we know enough to not take a puppy or kitten away from its mother before 8 weeks, yet we make human mothers go back to work after 6 weeks. And that's in CA, other states have lower minimums, or none at all.

To those who don't understand parental leave: it is self-evident that child-bearing is a necessary condition for the continuation of society. We also know that time spent with parents, the mother in particular, during that first year is super important for both mental and physical well-being. Just like we subsidize public schools because we recognize the importance of education for society, we should be happy to "pay for" parental leave.
Predictive analytics tells them you need more coffee tables. Many many more.
Obviously the goal of ML in this would be that feeding it enough data about users who buy coffee tables would eventually teach it that you probably don't want another coffee table (because who buys two coffee tables in a row?), but might want to buy say... end tables or other living room furniture in a matching style to the coffee table you just bought.

Not saying it works, but that'd be the goal.
I like this point of view. But for me, it's all in the meaning of "working". If you mean working = "selling a lot of your time to get a bit of freedom in your spare time", then the riches of the article are not working. To me they've just got a ticket to do what they want, in a non-slave relationship with their employer. Being able to quit if necessary, is so much more easy than having to think about your pension. That's not work anymore (at least to me, the poor soul who, eventhough he tries, has neither the luck to work on something big, neither the "commercial interest" to actually transform it into money and who's a bit jealous of those who can choose what they want to do :-), I'm biased :-) )
They are provisionally willing, I'll put more weight on that declaration once they are on their way.

I also speculate that there are a number of people willing to go for historic prestige (or something like that), while most potential indentured tickets would have to see some pretty terrific economic prospects at the other end of the contract (it's warm on Earth and the air is free).
>> but most we now know were simply wrong (e.g. Lamarck's theory of evolution)

actually, Lamarck's ideas have made quite a bit of a comeback - epigenetic studies being the prime example.

essentially what that's all about is there are DNA-affecting "things" (introduced by things like stress for example) that don't alter the DNA itself but affects how the DNA gets passed on to the offspring.

also (even though the scientific community gets all passive aggressive when this subject is brought up) - the truth of the matter is that while adaptation driven by natural selection is definitely "a thing" proven by experiments and observed in nature, the actual speciation driven by natural selection - not so much.
The first law of Robotics in action: a robot must obey at the click of a mouse
Handoff works fine without the software running.

Source: i use it
Because it's obviously (well, to me) better to leave the article in the default state of not existing and have the option of allowing anyone to quickly add coverage, rather than needing a committee to unlock a topic if it does become relevant. This is good adherence to the "Wikipedia Is Not Paper" idea.
Gladwell has written a predictable hatchet job of a perceived libertarian hero. Surprised that it was him, not surprised it was done in the NY-anything.

More interesting question is: if one were going to orchestrate a pseudo-intellectual takedown of the forces of popular discontent, who would one go after next?
I'm with you. I view my clients as partners with whom I can speak openly--without sugarcoating, dumbing things down, or worrying about their feelings.

It may feel uncomfortable to say "no" or "that's a bad idea" to the person who's paying you, but in the long term it's better for the relationship. After all, they're paying you for your expertise, not to fulfill their every wish.
Winds 0.3 release
I read this same tweet last week too :)
>full-blown cyber war assault

This "cyber-war" is, naturally, a little less abhorrent to ones personage as the alternative which is that ..

>Clinton is the tip of the ice-berg of a global conspiracy to blackmail .. and control governments .. by way of sick, sexual, perversion, involving human slavery and .. beyond ..

.. okay. I understand. I hope its not true, too. Lets use Democracy (tm), et al., to find out ..
Yes, that (2015) was the most recent attempt.

I have a locally saved copy of the submission and the references included a long form article at arstechnica, a long form print article in a magazine (Linux Format), The Yale Law Journal, theregister.co.uk, Lifehacker, ComputerWorld, EFF/Canarywatch, and more ... all over a 10+ year period.

Dismissed, flagged as not notable, and nothing to do but let the submission expire.
is there more information? mobile version of website shows a giant logo, and if you scroll down it shows a static image of a slack channel [1]

Using Android/Chrome

[1] http://imgur.com/n5f6bAG
Yeah it turns out that Bulbasaurus is a very bad example. Sorry. I literally know Pokemon principally as a thing people use to complain about Wikipedia with. I Googled "obscure Pokemon" and will henceforth be using "Kingler" as my example of how unreasonably demanding the Internet is of Wikipedia.
Sadly, this article has nothing to do with an inferno OS port to js.

http://www.vitanuova.com/inferno/
But I don't think this is a software issue: clFFT runs faster on NVIDIA. Simple operations like SAXPY run faster on NVIDIA. Etc.
The precise problem is that things like skin color etc. often have strong predictive power...Notice that an algorithm can exhibit this behavior without being (statistically) biased. - throwaway729, 2 hours ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13159539

No, I do not think race realism is accurate. - throwaway729, 22 minutes ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13160709

Whoops!

The fact that I emphasize different things is not proof that I misunderstand the article's author.

Fine - what do you believe the author thinks "bias" means? I.e. what is the underlying concept behind all his examples?

Who, exactly, is supposed to be confused?

Pessimizer, for one, who thinks the problem is inaccurate predictions. 2 hours ago you disagreed with this, but 22 minutes ago you agreed. I'm getting kind of confused.

If your criticism is genuinely about imprecision, you've got a lot of much lower hanging fruit than "discrimination" and "bias"...

Sure, but this is my field. I give talks about misuse of p-values and the multiple comparison problem, even though there might be other issues worth worrying about. It's just what interests me. The fact that bigger problems exist doesn't mean we shouldn't fix this one.
Be aware before upgrading that this includes an update to sssd that doesn't keep backward compatibility with the previous release.

It seems that the default autofs ldap schema in sssd was rfc2307, but had the wrong default values. So they've fixed the values, but that effectively changes the defaults of sssd.

This broke autofs where I work ...

See:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1372814

(...I'm not sure why they just didn't make a new setting called 'legacy' as default and put the old (wrong) values in there.)
That sounds interesting, especially given a good enough physical model could compute that de-novo.
If that were true, we'd refuse to have articles on Middle East topics and tell people to look elsewhere, because it's an absolute nightmare and NPOV routinely loses to people with agendas. But it's worth it in the mission to be a comprehensive encyclopedia.
One could argue taxation is "Target Stealing", in that context I would agree it is justified.

I think I could see a few other cases of selective stealing making sense. Stealing the weapon(s) of a person intent on maliciously using it, such as the hundreds of pounds of ammonium nitrate from someone likely to build a bomb.

It seems you just want nice clean black and white rules, and reality does not seem so kind. Let each decide when leaking or stealing is right based on the risks they themselves assume. Let's try to build systems that encourage everyone to make good decisions here so actual secrets (say blueprints of nuclear weapons) aren't leaked and private property is generally not stolen.
Question : is this because you like to work on "outlandish things that will never earn a dollar" that you actually never earned a dollar ? :-)
> Are you really trying to say that Trump, and not Putin, is the primary reason for this?

Not sure why you're being downvoted, it's a good question.

The way I see it, it's an overall pandemic of malaise, a regression to a more primal state, affecting the "West" primarily, but certainly influencing the whole world to some extent.

Brexit is a symptom. The Trump madness is a symptom. Le Pen is a symptom. Putin has been a symptom and an instrument and an agent for a long time. ISIS is an example outside of the West of the same thing.

Fear and lies. Facts don't matter anymore, truth is being trampled into the ground, and the world's state of mind is gradually turning dark. Where violence has an opportunity, it breaks out. Fortunately, not much of this has been translated into material consequences (except for ISIS and so on), but at the psychological level it's really bad. If it stays mostly on that level, then perhaps there is a way out eventually.
50-100% is always going to be extremely organizationally difficult, and it doesn't come down to evil managers being penny pinchers.

- Even if the individual in question had 2x the productivity of the other developers on the team, doubling their salary relative to other employees trades that one developers risk of leaving with the entire rest of the teams.

- If you have enough divergence in compensation that two people at the same level of the hierarchy doing the same role (i.e. an intermediate vs. a senior) can have pay differ by 2x or more, you should be absolutely sure there's no bias to your decisions, whether it's along an identifiable group, or just plain ol' favouritism.

- Frankly, I haven't seen much need for such lavish differentials in salary in the first place. Most people are only motivated by salary to a point. Star performers want to be recognized, and not just with a pat on the back, but give people a good place to work and pay well in general, and you shouldn't need to worry about crazy raises like that.
The Canadian 55% mentioned above is an unemployment benefit, so there is some confusion in this thread. The obligation to the corporation is that they maintain your job (or equivalent) for some period, I forget the details.

Corporations are free to offer top up benefit, and many do as a competitive incentive.
Thanks for the very reasonable and persuasive response. Based on Eichenwald's original version of the article (as linked by 'nostrademons' https://web.archive.org/web/20161010235349/http://www.newswe...), it does look like Greenwald was wrong, and that Eichenwald was instead claiming that the leaked documents were unaltered but intentionally being used in a misleading manner by taking quotes out of context.

This isn't in itself proof that Greenwald was lying, since this requires additional knowledge of his internal mental processes, but it leaves open the possibility. I still think the phrasing in Eichenwald's tweet implies alteration, but with knowledge of the specifics of the article I agree that it can be interpreted differently.

But as 'nostrademons' points out, the current version of the article reads differently. I'll switch to a Dec 1 archive.org link in case it changes again: http://web.archive.org/web/20161201141729/http://www.newswee....

This version starts with a photo caption that includes the words "faked document". It's been changed to include the words "altered documents" multiple times. While couched in a hypothetical, it explicitly says "the Russian effort to quote an altered email". I feel certain that that the new version has been written in a manner that encourages the reader to conclude that leaked emails may have been altered and should not be considered authentic.

I don't know if these changes were made by Eichenwald or by someone else at Newsweek, but I think the post-publication changes strengthen rather than weaken Greenwald's overall claim that there as a strong media narrative to discredit the authenticity of the leaked Podesta emails. While the original article seems accurate, I find the changes that were made to it to be substantial, disingenuous, and worrisome. I'd be very interested to know how these changes came about.
While it no doubt impacts performance in some cases, MADV_RANDOM probably isn't the correct choice for a lot of circumstances (the classloader tends to do a linear scan of JAR files, for example).
It didn't "switch back", it just uses them in certain compatibility and/or external drive situations. I hedged with "most drives" for a reason.
it's like if law enforcement uses a legally questionable tactic to get information about someone. Then, with the help of that illegally obtained knowledge, they can go and re-create it (along with a legal paper trail) via other perfectly legal means.
An unspoken concommitant of this: we don't actually know what things sound like any more. For most people, horses sound like they do in movies. But what we hear in the movies is what the foley artists and the sound designers think horses ought to sound like. It is, as a sound designer friend said 'hyper real'. This was brought home to me when I was watching one of the Lord of the Rings movies. Gimli puts on an over-large suit of chain mail and we hear it falling to the floor. The sound is, I think, either a bunch of Slinkies or some small chains. I know what chain mail sounds like, and it wasn't that. I find myself getting really annoyed with movie sound design now because it's so aritficial. </rant>
He's actually both wrong and an asshole.

He might only appear right if you take a look at the world in a very narrow and short-term way. Ie, he can only think of children as children, rather than the adults who will sustain society once he is old and (even more) feeble-minded.
When I was a young lawyer, one of our senior partners did just this as he faded into retirement. He audited nearly 4 years worth of coursework, mostly in philosophy and mathematics.
I believe your interpretation of the facts. But the other interpretation, which a bunch of folks hold firmly to, is that Pizzagate is accurate and the NYT is publishing this article as a way of discrediting it.

The problem is that you have to believe either that there's a vast Russian conspiracy to destroy America by manipulating the media, or a vast American conspiracy to run a child trafficking ring by manipulating the media. There isn't a particularly compelling explanation of the facts where you don't believe in a conspiracy at all. And since both possibilities are so far out of our usual experience, the people who favor each interpretation talk past each other.
I also wrote to my MP (and to one of the ministers above her). The response was a wall of polite non-comprehension.

I'm leaving the UK because of this act. Brexit doesn't help (Brexit probably means we can't fight the act in the EU human rights court), but this act is so bad, it is such technologically illiterate bull, it will /at best/ do nothing and at worse expose the nation to criminal hacking, blackmailing, and identity theft.
This is a bizarrely complex question (it relates to US tax law, so no surprise there). Some households would pay more if married, some would pay more if filing separately. See: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-are-marria...
Providing users the best recommendations so they participate more, get more from the service, and churn less. Detecting fraud and so saving money. Predicting users who are about to leave and allowing us to reach out to them. Dynamic pricing to take optimum advantage of the supply and demand curve. Delayed release of product so it doesn't all get reserved immediately and people don't have to camp the release times.
That's upsetting. I'll try not to drop my phone while an update is in progress in that case.
The issue with the methods is that you have to use them actively. As the author's mentor says in the book: most of the memory champions have horrible memory in normal situations, they were just desperate to change that, so they pursued mnemonic techniques. You might have an elaborate system to remember hundreds of playing cards in a loci palace (which takes months and lots of repetition to develop!!) and still frequently lose your key or forget names.

You can develop/discover and consciously apply mnemonic techniques for each situation (eg remembering names at a party by associating the name with prominent features of the face or funny analogies) but if you don't use them they'll be of little help.

Bill Clinton (or was it JFK??) is said to have all his life kept a notebook with him and scribbled down any personal facts revealed in a situation - name, alma mater, etc - and was then able to recall them when meeting the same person years later. He must have had an impressive system and much dedication - but also must have been a bit awkward to talk to when everything you say is recorded (apparently a good listener though).
The difference is that many Americans believe (I do not) that socialism benefits only lazy people who haven't worked hard. That is why they don't see a company providing benefits as socialism, because they think those people deserve it.
What's particularly interesting here is that the Fiji card they propose is a very different beast than any of the NVIDIA offerings.

The MI8 card's HBM has a great power and performance advantage (512 GB/s peak bandwidth) even if it's on 28 nm. NVIDIA has nothing that has even remotely comparable bandwidth in this price/perf/TDP regime.
None of the NVIDIA GP10[24] Teslas have GDDR5X -- not to surprising given that it was rushed to marked, riddled with issues, and barely faster than GDDR5. Hence, the P4 has only 192 Gb/s peak BW; while the P40 does have 346 GB/s peak, it is far higher TDP, different form factor and not intended for cramming in into custom servers.

[I don't work in the field, but] To the best of my knowledge inference is often memory bound (AFAIK GEMV-intensive so low flops/byte), so the Fiji card should be pretty good at inference. In such use-cases GP102 can't compete in bandwidth. So the MI8 with 1.5 the Flop rate, 2.5x bandwidth and likely ~2x higher TDP (possibly configurable like the P4) offers an interesting architectural balance which might very well be quite appealing for certain memory-bound use-cases -- unless of course the same cases are also need large memory.

Update: should have looked closer at the benchmarks in the announcement; in particular the MIOpen benchmarks [1] MI8 clearly beating even TitanX-Pascal which has higher BW than the P40 indicates that this card will be pretty good for latency-sensitive inference as long as stuff fits in 4 GB.

[1] http://images.anandtech.com/doci/10905/AMD%20Radeon%20Instin...
There seems to be more evidence for the former than the latter.
Stephen Wolfram Launching Wolfram Alpha Open Code
Viki/Deplate : A personal wiki for Vim
http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=861
It's sometimes difficult to tell the difference between "cyberwarfare" and "a bunch of idiots on reddit".
„we owe you nothing“ You should print that on your shirt so I'll never do business with you. Disgusting attitude.
I my have read too much into the word "defend", but before my inner eye I saw all-out war against "them".

All over some moderately important issue, at best.
rephrasing Asimov' laws...
Mokomokai
How much research is too much for "easily verified" information?