skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Stable systems get beaten by their competitors.

It's systems/species that are organized to improve which will tend to survive.
Lots of KYC things, like fraud, AML and CTF. Helps with finding new patterns.
Once an analyst has manually reviewed something, a software system updates a row in a database to mark it as done. Our marketing team calls this machine learning, because the system "learns" not to give analysts the same work twice.

We also use ML to classify bittorrent filenames into media categories, but it's pretty trivial and frankly the initial heuristics applied to clean the data do more of the work than the ML achieves.
IMO, it is unnecessary to commit the conflicts. Instead, you can see how merges were resolved by diffing the commits.
What we call "evolution" is simply the bias towards survival present in self replication.

The bias is present because the genomes that did not exhibit it died out in competition with the ones that did.

The fact that we as humans feel it so profoundly is a testament to the complexity that can emerge from a simple process given enough time.
I moved to OSX a couple of years ago. I was really surprised that the extra buttons on my Logitech mouse doesn't work at all, ok, I bought SteerMouse, now it works.

I use every app in full size window, sometimes two apps side-by-side. On windows it was really easy, on Mac it's painful. So I bought an app for that, Cinch.

I want a tiny calendar in the corner with the weeknumber in it, I had to download Itsycal (which is at least free).

The bar can be a real mess so I bought Bartender, worked fine, I could even hide the spotlight icon. Then I upgraded to El Capitan, and guess what, you can't hide the spotlight anymore, so I had to buy Bartender 2 because they claimed you can hide icons without disabling SIP (https://www.macbartender.com/system-item-setup/). But it turned out it's not working for spotlight... Thanks Bartender!

Ah, the mess when you plugin an external display, how fckd up is that! My carefully fullsized windows are all resized and moved around to some random position. No worries, there is an app for that! It's called Stay, it can save the position of the windows, but you have to do it for every possible screen combination. If you have one external display, you have to save the window positions three times: internal display only, external only, both. If you happen to using the same MacBook with two external displays (at work and at home), now you have to do this a total 6 times. And it stores the window position on per app basis, so usually I open everything and save them all. On Windows this whole problem just doesn't exists.

I can't turn off the internal display, there is no way to just do a windows+p and chose external display only like on windows. I have to close the lid (so now I can't use the keyboard) and wake it up because now it's sleeping. Great.

I always turn off every animation, doing this on windows is easy, but it's really painful on OSX, and every time you upgrade you have to do it again, and sometimes the same terminal commands just doesn't work, thanks Apple. And you can't turn off everything, basically this is why I don't use the fullscreen functionality and multiple desktops.

Every time I use my desktop pc, I feel like when I was a kid and we upgraded our old 300 mhz computer to a 1 ghz one with a 3d card.

After mountain lion I regret every single upgrade. So for me El Capitan is the last, my next computer will be an Alienware 13 with 32 GB ram and GTX 1060 and an OLED screen and it will be still cheaper than a MacBook Pro.
That's the idea. But the "cost" of an item will depend on the number sold.

Let's assume that a company's yearly costs are $1 million. They will sell one widget a year. That widget will now "cost" more than $1 million if they want to be in the black. But if they will sell 1 million widgets, now one widget will "cost" more than $1. (There's a lot of slop here, as the marginal costs will have gone up since you greatly increased production.)

Basically, you have fixed costs, and when you sell many of a thing, you build in the fixed costs, along with the marginal unit cost, into the final price the consumer pays. The problem comes when the size of your market is such that the cost you would need to stay in the black is well more than any reasonable consumer would pay. In Pebble's situation, there surely would be a one-watch cost that would keep them in the black, but that number could be in the thousands or tens-of-thousands. That's when you, as the CEO, start to think about shutting down the business, because that unit cost would be absurd.

I think you may be thinking of the "cost" of the watch as the marginal cost it takes to pump out one more from a production line. But you also have to take into account all of the fixed costs (software developers, administrators, server infrastructure, getting the production line ready, etc).
Also on display in Natural Born Killers (1994) which doesn't seem to carry the same weight it did back then.
Nobody wants junior engineers (or: get "senior" in your title as soon as possible):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccxrFmIEAmQ
I'm sure their unit costs were lower than their unit revenues, but it was the R & D costs that did them in.

They couldn't just charge more to cover R & D, because you need to hit a price point that your target audience will pay.

They could have gone for a higher price point, but then they're competing more directly with Apple and other premium brands like Gamin.

Investing in R & D to fuel future growth is a normal and reasonable thing to do. It just didn't work out for them, as it turned out the overall market for this product category isn't growing as fast as early indications suggested it would.
I agree. Just look up ai-expert Ray Kurzweil and his hedge fund FatKat. Boom.
You don't "choose" to give someone your wallet because you weighed the options and decided against getting shot. You were robbed.

Similarly, poverty in the US is brutal. To choose between spending time with your newborn during a crucial time period or becoming impoverished is not a real choice.
> It's a collective action problem.

Yes, and one that, while I agree it's not easily solvable by academia, should be easily solvable by governments, who fund practically all of the research that gets published in Elsevier's journals (and those of all the other major publishers). So my real question is not why academia hasn't solved this problem (some fields, such as math and physics, basically have, with arxiv.org), but why governments haven't.
I can understand uber, where there are network effects at play as well as ongoing lifetime value from a customer. But this doesn't seem to apply to a watch where you'll maybe buy 1 every 2 years?
I'm not hindu but I won't force my hindu friends to renounce the strength of their beliefs as a prerequisite for discussion.

I'm not atheist but I won't force my atheist friends to admit that there is a God as a prerequisite for discussion.

I think it's possible to have fruitful discussions while holding respect for other belief systems.
I always wonder why some disciplines are more open than others [0]. As someone in biology: the state of publication is very sad. We have to pay thousands to _submit_ a manuscript, and then:

- get rejected right away, or

- the manuscript gets distributed to fellow scientists (who reviews for free). The reviews get collected and manuscript rejected, or

- we get a chance to address the reviewer's concern, resubmit and gets rejected, or

- The editor does some proof-reading and publish the paper behide a paywall. I lose all the rights and I may need to ask the journal for permission to use part of it in my thesis, otherwise I risk plagirizing my own writing.

Sometimes when I read preprints in computer science/physics/bioinformatics etc. I feel in those disciplines researchers are a big happy family, and we biologists are locked in a prisoner's dilemma because we can't communicate. Then we fight each other and the publication companies are selling tickets for others to watch.

[0]: http://www.idea.org/blog/2011/04/04/fees-and-other-business-...
Hmm. I usually do merges locally as serious stuff should be built and tested before pushing anyway, so probably why never used GitHub's hosted functions.
You can just switch to another ISP!
There are a few counter-arguments to that. First, it's impossible to determine that the source on GitHub is the same as what is deployed to a server. Additionally, having to locally debug any given site in order to trace whether or not information is being transmitted is an unrealistic expectation.

I trust that your intentions are in the right place, just that when it comes to medical-related things it's worthwhile to err on the side of caution. If some information is not being used, it's best not to ask for it in the first place.
A few months ago I started working on a large web application that is being implemented with Polymer. A few take a ways that are top of mind:

1) Very easy to learn, but it has no idiomatic way to write large applications; it is not a framework like Angular or Ember.js. What the best way is to write large, maintainable, applications with Polymer is still open IMHO.

A potentially useful way to structure large Polymer based applications is to combine Polymer and Redux, separating presentation code from state/business logic.

2) No idiomatic way to do dependency injection. In Polymer even services are stated declaratively in HTML (e.g. `<my-service data={{resourceData}}></my-service>`). Because of this, there is no natural way to replace my-service with, for instance, a stubbed version for testing purposes. There are some solutions, but they are somewhat laborious [1].

3) Build process still buggy. We encountered multiple issues with the polymer-vulcanize library.

Looking back at the ease with which I started writing application code using Polymer I foresee a great future for this library, especially for smaller applications. We need to learn more best practices in order to use Polymer to create large maintainable applications.

[1] “Polymer - Dependency Injection with Custom Elements by Justin Fagnani” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6o5zaKHedTE
What happened when you tried to eat more sugar?
Not to mention breaking git bisect horribly.
Why Canadians are more tied to real estate than you think and what you can do
I suggest the same but with Interstellar's soundtrack. I personally think is brilliant. No other soundtrack makes me more emotional.
I think you're drawing the wrong conclusion from this. Unless we think that black people are inherently less credit worthy (i.e. are genetically inferior), then what's really happening is that race is acting as a proxy for some other things that aren't being considered.

"Inherent" is always with respect to a particular data set - if there is no data in the data set that is more predictive than a given factor, you might as well treat that as inherent when doing the data analysis - it won't change your algorithm at all.

Maybe living in a neighborhood with drugs and gang violence, or lack of social ties to more affluent people who could be leaned on in tough times, etc.

Could be. However, due to housing separation, this will also be correlated with race. Regulators consider using factors like this to be "redlining" and strongly frown on it. (Historically this was not true; in fact regulators drew the original red line.)

The other is to find the set of actually-causative factors that correlate with race which if you took them into account would make it so that nothing more would be gained by also taking race into account, and use those instead.

That certainly might be possible. If you can solve this, and those actually-causative factors do not redundantly encode race (e.g. no redlining), you have built the next unicorn startup. Your customers will be every single bank in America.
To me, they're the same because both can't be proved or disproved. It's a matter of faith. I find Musk's statement stupid because he just didn't say it's possible. He said it was probable.
World's First AI-Generated Christmas Song Is the Stuff of Nightmares
The real problem, IMO, is not inequality. Inequality has always and will always exist. The real issue is a decrease in income mobility. When the poor stay poor and the rich stay rich, that's the real problem.
A key point that I was making (and a point which your rewriting of my comment completely erases) is that parenthood can be planned ahead for (or avoided) to a much greater degree than other situations that require family leave.
I could have made some anodyne choice of words that obscures this fact, but I didn't because I wanted to make the point that if we are giving people support for voluntarily taking on extra family burdens, then it's absolutely inexcusable that we don't extend the same support to people who have had similar burdens thrust upon them involuntarily.
>That thing is regression analysis to a large power. Constantly calculating minimal cost to self preservation and better versions of itself

Edited:

That doesn't sound very articulate, hence doubtful. Your interpretation is just that, recognizing already known patterns. Does that relate to the evolutionary "purpose" from the title? The implicit idea of order ("better") is largely based on the temporal succession of what, as far as I can tell, is indistinguishable from randomness, because it relies on random mutation and other genetic variation moduli. What existential property this really optimizes for is open.

The crux is, existence itself is hardly a logical property. I mean, "exist to exist" really is not a new revelation. It's philosophically akin to "I think therefore I am", but trivially speaking, that's just the pattern recognition at work.
Economy of scale. As a comparison, Fitbit has sold more than 38 million devices worldwide since 2010[1].

[1] https://www.statista.com/topics/2595/fitbit/
Things got a bit heated in the LKML thread, but if you read the more recent messages things have cooled down significantly. It's unclear whether they will ultimately be able to achieve all their goals while also getting the code into an upstreamable state, but they do seem committed to working out the issues with upstream.
This law is sort of interesting. I don't think anyone came out particularly happy with it.

If I remember correctly it was sort of pushed upon us by US pressure so the legislators didn't really like it, it added extra work so the ISPs didn't like it, as a result of that the law has a $25 fee for administering a "strike" to someone, which the copyright holders don't like because they can't so blindly send out mass strikes. The strikes also expire after 9 months. And obviously the people don't like it either.

The maximum fine is capped at $15,000NZD (~$11,000USD) and the average fine in practice has apparently been around $500NZD (~$350USD). As of 22 November 2013 17 people had got their three strikes and received their fines[1]. I wonder what the total is now.

Re actually cutting off your Internet access though, I'm not sure. Thing is, that was temporarily in there and was later removed, as Section 92A in the Copyright Act. You can see it marked as [Repealed][2]. But then section 122B seems to say your Internet can still get cut off. Maybe someone can shed some light on that one.

[1] https://www.lawsociety.org.nz/lawtalk/lawtalk-archives/issue...

[2] http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1994/0143/latest/D...
I have some engineering background and you only have engineers in stable predictable fields. You can predict quite accurately the failure load of a bridge truss or a transistor and its easily testable and the whole process can be simulated and verified top to bottom.

My guess is the wedge to bring in engineering would be network operations, classic operations (not devops which just means we're gonna pencil whip the ops responsibilities). Maybe large data center operations (thermal, electrical loads, UPS, etc) is amenable to engineering workflows.

Software is simply too unpredictable. Both in development and operation. Software is still in the "greeks and amber and rabbit fur experiments" stage of electrical engineering.
If you consider modern fantasy in the YA category then Diane Duane's Young Wizards series has been a favorite of mine http://ebooksdirect.co

Her Star Trek books are quite good, and the audible books of the Young Wizards series are narrated by Christina Moore who does a very good job on all her audiobooks.
> Even that doesn't seem like a clear distinction?

Obviously no, ML uses statistics as statistics uses Maths. But not all ML uses statistics, some algorithms are biological inspired (swarm optimization) other uses theory of information for classification.

The point of ML is you learn something from data, not necessarily with statistics, although it is used in a lot of algorithms. But also function optimization is used in a lot of algorithms. The boundaries are very fuzzy, but for sure not all ML uses statistics and not all statistics are ML.
- Its important to validate the obvious, because sometimes its not so obvious.

- Having a flippant, dismissive, repetitive comment provides no value to the conversation and wastes the time of anyone reading.
It would be amazing to have acme on a browser :)
"Evolution" is a man made term for "The Genome is trying to create a better entity than itself"

I think with regard to humans it is well on its way to manifesting itself with that purpose... It's called" The sum total of the Internet".

Not sure I agree with its choices, but compared to an individual there is quite a large organism at large there, for better or worse, and that thing is just as potent and self protective as DNA. Go try attack it. Good luck.

Evolution just got evolved. The Genome is building new infrastructure as we speak.
> 1. They lied about having end-to-end encryption in their app

That was before I joined but that got fixed in 24 hours. Not sure how the incorrect claim made it live in the first place.

> 2. They lied about being open source for years.

Wire open sourced it's crypto protocol in March 2016. It never claimed to be open source before that. It further open sourced it client apps in July 2016 and will open source server some time in 2017.

> 3. They lied about being based in switzerland.

Citation needed. Wire is registered and headquartered in Switzerland with an office in Zug.

> 3. They rolled their own crypto, and experts disapprove of the choices they made.

Link?
so what orgs are putting out quality long form journalism?
"Diffing the commits" isn't really available in in a GitHub-style Pull Request web UI, which is where 99% of our code review is happening. I'm definitely optimizing for that view of the merge over everything else.
They were profitable for a lot of their lifetime and then they weren't.
From the photos and perf numbers it looks like the linup is RX480, R9 Nano, and whatever the Vega10 gets called, minus some of the connectors and passively cooled.
But he isn't personally responsible for that debt. As CEO, he could have drawn enough salary to build a decent sized nest egg, where he isn't immediately looking for a job.
Regulation is a wrong word. Regulation is something pushed to you from above, something that you did not ask for and that you'll try to evade using that programmer-brain of you.

What we need is something that clearly comes from fellow developers.
plain javascript. I decided that until I learn plain js well, I would not bother anymore with the frameworks.
> And it has failed spectacularly. Obesity rates have skyrocketed upward despite continual exhortations to cut calories. So, the proof is in the pudding.

Continual exhortations does not mean calories have been cut. The fact that it's still said so often and loudly indicates that either it's not effective, or people aren't doing it.

> us assume basal metabolism of 2,000 calories per day.
> Walking for 45 minutes might burn 100–150 calories.
> If you’ve ever watched the calorie counter on your treadmill,
>you’ve probably already noticed how few calories are actually burned
> This means that 95% of caloric expenditure is not related to exercise.

So exercising doesn't account for that much calorie burn compared to your basal metabolism. 5% is not a small number, though (when you're not high over your daily needs to begin with), and this doesn't address any effect that even minimal regular exercise might have on your basal metabolism.

I haven't read the whole thing - but based on the glaring holes in these couple of paragraphs, I find that there's not a strong case for doing so.

It also doesn't account for the people who do successfully lose weight by following this basic advice. I'm -50lbs from where I started two years ago and am about 10lbs above where current doctrine says is "healthy" for me. What did I change?

I eat larger breakfasts, a light (but not necessarily healthy) afternoon snack, no lunch and small dinner for a net of significantly less food. (I still tend to snack on unhealthy things after 10pm some nights). I started walking (1.5 miles in hill country x 3-5 days. Less often lately).

That's it. I still eat like crap. I still drink mostly heavily-creamed coffee, diet soda, and sweet tea.

Perhaps you can see how I'm skeptical when I the opening paragraphs discount the two most significant but minor changes I made -- being told it doesn't work when it clearly has does not inspire confidence in the accuracy of the rest of the text.

(In a similar way that being told to cut calories an add exercise doesn't inspire confidence in the people who have done so with no luck.)

But "for me" is the important bit. Everyone is different. Perhaps that relatively light walking kicks my basal metabolism into overdrive - I really don't know. What I do know is that I made a couple of seemingly simply changes plus the behavioral change of not eating a) when bored and b) every time I felt slightly hungry, and it worked really well.

There's a lot of crap pseudoscience in this space and there is still a lot that we don't know - which means it's not going to get better anytime soon.
At 15k notifications per minute, a million notifications would take 1hr to clear before the queue returns to normal. I would imagine they prefer to shed load early so notifications don't get delayed, hence the small buffer.
Congrats on your application. Sounds very useful.

And thanks for the info. I worked years ago on a training program for EKGs and it seemed like a field ripe for application of ML and AI.
It's highly rational.

Reduce Entropy. Period
You actually can distinguish the new lines. For any non-trivial merge conflict resolution committed as part of the merge, `git show $SHA` will actually show you the conflict resolution. More specifically, if the diff contains anything that's not just a line taken from either of the parents, then that thing is shown.
"even buying used pebbles on ebay won't help me much with their servers going offline"

...and this is the failure of the IoT in a nutshell.
GitLab does have it already: https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/user/project/merge_requests/resol...