skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Since leaving I'm slowly remembering life - despite having had time off over the last decade, there was only one one month period five years ago when I was uncontactable - other holidays were consumed by me staring at my phone and muttering curses as I'd hammer out emails.

Life doesn't have to be all or nothing. You can both continue to work at a desk and also take unaccountable breaks - in fact, if you're rich enough, you can do whatever the hell you want. To be fair, the article does seem to insinuate people will return to like a totally normal 40-hour workweek, but you can also return to a 10-hour part-time job or start a non-profit or something.
I expanded my comment for clarity. Let me know what you think.
> And many people don't. The difference is that I'm not asserting I have the one true definition, but rather recognizing that "bias" is a term with inherent political and moral content. And that pretending that this isn't (or shouldn't be) the case just because statisticians use the term in a technical setting is extraordinarily intellectually lazy.

Your assertion seems to be that not using the same word to describe separate and distinguishable things in a context where the distinction matters is intellectually lazy.

> If the goal is to accurately predict whether people will appear, then it's working.

> But if the goal is to accurately predict when people will choose not to show up, then there's certainly a chance that it's not working. For example, in the case where there's some significant correlation between race and access to transportation infrastructure. (Which isn't so much the case today, but certainly was 60 or so years ago.)

The goal is to predict whether people will appear. The bail-bondsman has to know whether to issue the bail-bond.

If your issue is transportation infrastructure then the only way to solve it is by fixing the transportation infrastructure, not by bankrupting the bail-bondsman.

> This is a separate discussion I don't want to have.

> But suffice it to say that conflating technical and non-technical definitions is not a reasonable defense of this position.

That's not the point -- the problem is that conflating technical and non-technical definitions is a way to avoid having that discussion.

Effectively everyone agrees that statistical bias is wrong. If you're on the wrong end of it you're being treated unfairly. If you can convince someone that something is this "bias" when everyone agrees bias is wrong then you've convinced them that the thing is wrong.

But if all you've done is broaden the scope of what bias means to encompass something that not everyone agrees is wrong then you've accomplished nothing of virtue. And more than likely misled some number of people who haven't managed to piece together that the "bias" they understand to be wrong and the "bias" you understand to be present are non-overlapping.
In my opinion, there is absolutely no reason to have a tiny stub article with information of no interest to anyone. Keeping the band example going, people come to Wikipedia to read about a band without diving into everything that has ever been written about them; if there's nothing to say, we can't help. But I guess your question is more "why not?" Editors will spend more time per year reverting vandalism and removing original research than readers will ever spend using it. And that's really, really optimistic: what actually happens with stubs on little-known topics is that they fill to the brim with original research and info from bad sources, and anti-vandalism editors don't stop it because either they don't know if the sources are good, or they're rightly afraid of being yelled at for removing content, since anything looks like a potentially constructive addition to a shell of an article. If you require a decent amount of sourced information, someone adding a wall of text without adding references looks suspect and is (somewhat) more likely to be removed in a timely manner.
I really hate the news for lots of reasons. But the one thing that always got under my skin is the false sense of being informed. If I wanted to know trivia, I'll just read the histories of Muslim scholars or the finer points of knot theory. At least those give some context for the world we live in whereas the mainstream news outlets on both wings of the political spectrum just insult me with doom and gloom (unless it's global warming then it's really not that worrying IMO). I know that's a pretty crappy way to look at the news because I like to know what happens around me but if the delivery is crap then I'm not going to bother trying to digest it. I got plenty of other things to keep my interest. Pretending to care for what I can't fix or what really isn't an existential threat to me is just dumb.
SSL Enabled Basic Auth Credential Harvester with Word Document Template URL
aka parallel construction
hehe. Yup we just scaled up.
You must not have heard that corporations are individuals who pulled themselves up by their own bootstraps with only hard work and the power of the American Dream(tm).
I've read a book[1] -- by an actual doctor -- saying the exact opposite. If you think about it from an evolutionary standpoint, our ancestors would have had many times when food accessibility was scarce and they would have needed to maintain their strength through a long fast. An animal that burned muscle/protein over fat is an animal that wouldn't have survived long, that would be a terrible evolutionary disadvantage. The design of our body isn't stupid -- we store fat for a reason, so that we can burn it in times when food is scarce. Burning fat for energy is both normal and totally healthy.

From a personal standpoint, I barely eat any carbs and I've lost zero strength despite dropping 25 pounds. Apparently the diet that has made me thinner and increased my energy and mental clarity is the "dangerous" one, and the diet that has made everyone obese is "healthy" and "balanced".

[1] The Obesity Code by Dr. Jason Fung
We exclusively rely on ML for our core product at Diffbot: automatic data extraction from web pages (articles, products, images, discussion threads, more in the pipeline), cross-site data normalization, etc. It's interesting and challenging work, but a definite point of pride for us to be a profitable AI-powered entity.
What Wall Street investors think about ecommerce
I think you've completely over looked the benefits to the individual, and society, as a whole when you allow parents to spend more time with their new born kids.

It's really easy to say "hey you decided to have a kid, so that's on you". But you do need children to sustain society in the future. It does them a lot of good if their parents can spend more time with them during their infant stage.

Also that attitude is really detrimental to women. Are future mothers supposed to choose over one day raising a kid or their careers? Doesn't society lose out on a lot of potential if we just say "sorry, if you want a kid then you're going to find a new job" ?
You are confused about my understanding. However, scientific theory does not mean "really it's true". It means we think it's true. Or, this is our best guess so far. To believe anything else is science as religion.
I think these distinctions are akin to discussing musical genre in Youtube comments. Something can be all of: mathematics, advanced IT, computer science, data science, statistics, econometrics, control theory, pattern recognition, machine learning, predictive modeling, data mining, data analysis, data engineering, or even AI if you are feeling fancy.
Syrian Government Moves Closer to Completely Controlling Aleppo
I really don't think this will make a dent in CUDA's platform. CUDA has a well established ecosystem in deep learning and compatible cards like Quadro coupled with very matured platform makes it miles ahead of platform.

That said, I would love to be proven wrong. Healthy competition such as this fosters much better results. Also CUDA is not without issues in certain matters.
Someone started dumping Lockheed Martin stock just before Trump's tweet
How Orwellian.
Sounds like it is about 50:50 here for people who would go back to work and people who think it's nuts.

My personal plan incase anyone cares:

1. Take a lot of time to take care of things I've neglected like my health. Honestly, I would be working out a hour a day and trying out lots of new recipes.

2. Once I'm in the best shape of my life. Take my family someplace nice for vacation so I can show off my new beach body ;) joking, about the beach body part not the vacation

3. Start turning my side project ideas into actionable ideas.
Not a huge fan of grains, but in moderation they are perfectly fine. They are used to fatten up livestock but I highly doubt those livestock are being fed an appropriate distribution of macros (carbs, pro, fats) to maintain their health. Seems more like they are fed primarily grains in the weeks before slaughter.
And this is an example of everything that's wrong with America right now. There is no human compassion left. The rich get to live, the poor deserve to die. Trump appointed a guy that wants to not only get rid of the ACA, but also wants to get rid of Medicare and Medicaid.

"You should have thought about that before you became poor!"
Creator of the web app here!

We struggle a bit to find one good sentence that describes what makes Wishy.gift unique, so here goes:
First off, you make a wishlist and add items to it. When you've done that, you get a unique url that you give to those who should get access to your list. They can then check off items in your list, and add their own suggestions, both of which is only visible to those you've shared the list with.

That way, you (hopefully) get better gifts, and less duplicates.
I have bilateral pars defect at L5 with a grade I Spondylolisthesis.
Local doctors want to fuse L3-L5, or I will be in a wheelchair within 5 years. For younger people that may be their only option.
Non-local doctors do not recomend fusion.

15 years later, no fusion, no wheelchair.

This is what I did and do:

1. Educate myself
a. search: stuart mcgill waterloo university.
b. Understand spinal stability and core excercises
c. Walk! not stroll! (i do 6 miles at least 3 times a week. Sitting is the new Smoking!
2. Listen to your body! I have learned to recognise that my back is close to a traumatic event.
3. When my back goes out, a short rest, but keep moving.
4. Fully understand that excercising will cause irritation, but it is tolerable versus when my back goes out.
5. Medications: Soma, flexeril, and tramadol (NSAIDs such as ibuprohen trash my GI)
After an event, I take the Soma and tramadol to help me keep moving. Daytime, they both will keep me awake. At night, flexeril. It works best on muscle spasms which exhausts the muscles which leads to pain. And it puts me to sleep. I will use these meds for a short period of time every 5-6 months!
6. Streching and doing it correctly is very important.
7. Getting out of a chair, use your legs! DO NOT lean forward to pull yourself upright!
8. You may want to wear a simple lifting belt. Not for support but to remind yourself not to put your lower back in a stressfull position.
9. Understand that "correct" posture sitting may not be a good idea for long periods of time.
10. If the problem is the lower back, educate yourself on the function and stretching of the Psoas muscle. It is a fast twitch muscle, and sitting contracts the muscle. Quick and sudden contraction puts tremendous pressure on the discs.
11. Try to keep your spine in its natural position, maintaining symmetry is critical. Yeah, it is uncomfortable, but the lack of symmetry will impede recovery.
12. If you have imaging done, demand copies on a CD. This will help you to seek additional opinions.
The fake news being talked about is actually fake, as in nearly 100% made up with the intention to misinform. It's definitely not new but I saw it way more during the election and it's very different from shittt reporting.

Maybe I am misreading you and other posters here, but I am getting the idea that people don't think this is a real thing or that it's no worse then actual news. This shit is real, harmful, and really not hard to find. I have a pretty trimmed down Facebook account but I would see multiple fake news posts shared by people every other week or so this past year. The way people talk about manipulative ads here could be applied to these articles. The worst part is they are incredibly easy to debunk, but no one gives a shit about checking what they read.
"I don't care about price or hours (within reason), I care about not having to think about it."

Brilliant, thank you for your comment!
Do you know what website you're on right now?
> Every WP article is a commitment to defend a topic against entropy and malice.

But at this point you've basically given up any attempt of civil community processes and you're doing things not because they are right, but because not doing them might give the enemy a speculative advantage.
Does American Express provide this insurance to people that don't work for them?

I don't believe they do, so that makes it fairly irrelevant to the conversation about universal health care.
I think data science is a little different from other consulting jobs.

For most consulting jobs, the client has a clearer idea of what they are going to get. You might promise them a working SAP system, advice on a document they might sign, a tax return they can file and so on.

With data science, you might just be promising them: hey, we will take a look around in the data and see if we can find something interesting.

This is a harder sell. I think you need a clear example of what you might find and why that is valuable to the client.

Strategy consulting firms often deal with similar issues. I do think that it is not easy to land pure strategy assignments unless you are already at McKinsey, BCG or Bain.
We're a republic, and it's precisely to prevent unfair outcomes like the one you're proposing. It's not good policy just because most people want it.

The thing is that in America, there is still a barrier between the private and public sectors. While we obviously like perks like this, we don't believe that it's the government's place to mandate it. As we can see by many companies in the United States willfully offering such perks without legal mandate, companies are willing to make these accommodations on their own if they feel it will benefit their position in the market by allowing them to attract better talent.

Companies that can't afford this will be at a market disadvantage, but they won't have to be afraid to hire the workers they need when they're growing because the law would force them to pay out half of the employee's salary for up to a year without being able to derive any productive benefit from that outlay.

The most American thing about America is "it's a free country". That means that unless there is a vast social cost with allowing a certain behavior, it should be legal and people should be allowed to prosper or fail on the basis of their own choices rather than governmental policy that states "we know what's best for you".
OpenStreetMap is an impressive project, but Wikipedia is in some sense the most impressive, most ambitious project in the history of the Internet (and, because of how important the Internet is in the history of recorded human knowledge... well, &c &c &c).

The active Wikipedia editing community has been remarkably stable for years (the predictions in Gwern's 2009 post do not appear to have borne out). It's a large and vibrant community. OSM is still a growth community (to wit: it is not the most important mapping project in the world, while Wikipedia is almost definitely the most important encyclopedia), and has a narrower charter. Community growth targets that might be a reasonable lift for OSM might not be for WP.

There are a lot of things Wikipedia could potentially do to grow the community. But curbing deletionism isn't likely to be one of the more important ones. Deletionism is primarily an Internet message board concern.

So my counterargument would be: Wikipedia should first do big things to improve participation (for instance: it can and should be made much easier, in a technical/UX sense, to write or edit an article). Then, once the community has grown, it can start turning the dials on how much vandalism and error its community can sustainable fight.

I think the page you linked to is a pretty wonderful capsule summary of how Wikipedia's community differs from other communities. I hadn't read it before and am glad I did. Thanks!
If not, perhaps you should consider starting a company to develop this tech for others. Drop me a line :-)
How does this compare to Quantopian?
great idea! although sharing data or model with blockchain is very costly I think?
I remember a legal case a few years back when the Pirate Bay guy was arrested in Cambodia for hacking into a government computer. They found hacking tools and stolen data on his machine. He used the legal defense that since his computer was also found to have malware on it that anyone could have put those tools onto his computer and could have used it as a jump-off point for the attack.

It didn't end up working, he was found guilty. But it's an interesting defense, especially if there isn't any other evidence or motive pointing to the defendant.

Given the insecurity of desktop operating system's and the prevalence of malware that any infosec expert could attest to this could become one of those common fallback legal defenses (similar to "my rights against unjustified searches were violated") when there aren't other good options.
There are some things we must remember, of course. A child has no choice but to memorise the digits. Axioms, essentially.

When it comes to addition however, any attempt to learn addition by tabulation and memory would clearly be futile.

I certainly don't mean to suggest that one should study a theorem in a particular corner of mathematics from fundamentals up; rather understand it "one level down", to something previously interned in a similar manner (and since forgotten because one no longer had need of it) or to somemething axiomatic.

For example, say I come across an equation for the area of a right triangle for the first time. I've previously understood and accepted some other problem that I can reduce it to - area of a rectangle, say, or integration - so I can do so and actually understand why, and be able to reproduce it. Easier to learn, recall, and apply than rote memorisation in my opinion.
This seems to be a common misunderstanding in the US.

Companies don't subsidize these types of plans (well, other than being forced to allow the leave). The government does via something (in Canada) called "Employment Insurance". It's a basic payroll tax. We pay taxes into a program specifically designed to provide benefits if you lose your job. That's been extended to pay for things like leaves for having children or caring for your dying parents, kid with cancer, etc, etc.

Considering that it's in all our best interests to have healthy, well adjusted children in our society, it's a trade-off well worth the "owing". I'd take a look at your crime rates compared to ours and think about your ideology a little. I'm no socialist, but it's silly to not take the very real advantages of living in a society. You wouldn't tell someone to pay for their own roads, or fire service, would you? And if you would, what happens to our society overall when everyone thinks like this? How does that move us forward? How does that move YOU forward?
That's pretty awesome. What are you doing academically to lean this? Went somewhere for a masters?
I don't remember a dog in the book, however yes, the son does meet up with a group at the end.
Your purchase was merely the inaugural move to establish your newfound hobby of coffee table collecting.
At my last company, when someone sent a solid bug report, made a good pull request to our docs, or asked for swag, I'd send them some gear with a handwritten note and my card.

People went crazy about the handwritten note and got thank you notes for the note! I think it was so different that it was a cool surprise.
Ask HN: Any data-breaches known involving DNA data?
I have a bet going on with a friend for some years, about if there will be a hack or data-breach that exposes DNA data in the next 10 years (from 2009). He comes to visit tomorrow, so I researched if there is a public known incident yet, but couldn't find anything.

So I am wondering, if HN does know of something that could fall under this category?
For years we used only algorithms based on basic statistics but we've found places where the machine learned models out perform the simpler models.

This is the right way to approach it. Too many people are looking for "deep" as some sort of silver bullet for an ill defined problem they have. If you can't validate against a simple model trained properly you are already in trouble. Likewise if you don't understand how to evaluate your generalization issues and how/if a simpler model will improve them.
It only works for the basic functionality they can't interop the "operational" CUDA features.
That would be cool, but as a counter-point I'd like to say that financial independence would probably allow me to work on more outlandish ideas and things that will never earn a dollar.
In theory any topic could be a battlefield. In practise, there are only a few ones which have a lots of edit and counter edits.

Comparison_of_<something>_tools is one of them. The products will come and go, YYMV depending on when you read the list.
Just FYI your calculator's cost of living adjustment makes it completely uncompetitive for the Memphis, TN market. Possibly you are already getting good leads from other countries, but I wanted to point that out all the same.
What would be the point of all this? Step 1 is the illegal part, and the other steps don't erase that.
If a private company does it, then it's not socialist, and no taboo gets invoked. Very different from the government doing it.
Looks like AMD is building replacement middleware for most of the major ML stacks, some more information on this page: http://www.anandtech.com/show/10905/amd-announces-radeon-ins...
There's a very convincing and well researched book on this issue: Spark! How exercise will improve the performance of your brain.

The gist: aerobic exercise helps neurogenesis and connectivity in the brain. Running is best if i remember correctly, or maybe that was just my private conclusion.
Notably, every single example you cite is from an Euro currency country. The design flaws of the Euro currency area were well understood already 20 years ago, if not, unfortunately, by European politicians.

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/europe/1996-09-01/eu...
Why is this so? Has anyone ever investigated the root causes?
What's more likely, Podesta getting phished or "a full-blown cyber war assault by Russia against political opponents abroad"?
I'm not sure if Johnny Rico of Starship Troopers was bisexual. I have read the book, and i cannot recall event hints of this. Could you provide some citation/reference?
Did i fall victim of some form of censorship?
> The most American thing about America is "it's a free country".

"You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else." - Winston Churchill
> This is the whole idea behind lower tax brackets for married couples and similar things.

I'm confused by that statement. From my experience, married couples pay more in taxes (in the US) than they would if each were single (and making the same amount).

Or am I misunderstanding, and you meant that there _should_ be lower taxes for married couples?