skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Sure, some things off the top of my head:

- On the main project page, the file list/table cells have too much padding. The same project's file list, with 22 files, on GitHub fits on my screen comfortably. On Gitlab, the whole table sits at 928px in height. Reducing the top/bottom padding in cells to 5px, without a loss in usability, yields a much nicer 708px height

- The two panels above the file list (the branch, and the latest commit) could be streamlined and merged

- Frankly, the whole area with the project name and the buttons below is incredibly and unnecessarily convoluted. Some important links are grayed, some others are not relevant for every project (e.g. I don't need a contribution guide for my private project)

- A lot of links are indistinguishable from text
Signal used to use the camera intent, it was changed to use direct capture so the camera opens faster and so captured photos aren't stored in the camera roll.
As long as there are 40+ collections data structures like in Java.
Yeah tokio and futures-rs rock. Have there been talks of futures becoming part of std?
If America's adversaries benefit from Snowden's leaks that would be unfortunate, but far less of a problem than the existence of the excesses Snowden revealed.

Until the government starts to take seriously the idea that it has seriously broken trust with the American people, it's hard to take seriously any talk of the damage alleged to have happened due to Snowden's leaks.
While I agree with Maciej's central point, I think the inside arguments he presents are pretty weak. I think that AI risk is not a pressing concern even if you grant the AI risk crowd's assumptions. Elided from https://alexcbecker.net/blog.html#against-ai-risk:

The real AI risk isn't an all-powerful savant which misinterprets a command to "make everyone on Earth happy" and destroys the Earth. It's a military AI that correctly interprets a command to kill a particular group of people, so effectively that its masters start thinking about the next group, and the next. It's smart factories that create a vast chasm between a new, tiny Hyperclass and the destitute masses... AI is hardly the only technology powerful enough to turn dangerous people into existential threats. We already have nuclear weapons, which like almost everything else are always getting cheaper to produce. Income inequality is already rising at a breathtaking pace. The internet has given birth to history's most powerful surveillance system and tools of propaganda.
Show HN: reqwire – an alternative Python requirements management workflow
The difference was Amazon intentionally spent every dime reinvesting in their infrastructure and fulfillment pipeline. Uber is pricing themselves below cost to gain market share. It could be a winning strategy for Uber, but comparing them to Amazon is very superficial at best.
Also see, at least, Phenomenology[1] and Heidegger[2].[3] Neither of them are Vitalism or religious.[4]

[1] - https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/phenomenology/

[2] - https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/heidegger/

[3] - Wikipedia tends to be a pretty horrible source for reading about philosophy, so I don't like to link to it for this. The plato.stanford.edu site is better, at least for Analytics, not so much for Continentals. So I hesitate to link to it for this either. Better to just go to the primary source material, or take a course at one of the rare schools which focus on Continental thought, so you don't get the wrong idea by learing about Continental philosophy from Analytics who all too often see Continentals contemptuously as "not philosophy" or as just some version of Analytics, both of which miss the point.

[4] - Though some, particularly some Christian Existentialist thinkers have in fact interpreted Heidegger's thought from a Christian perspective. But that view, as most any other about Heidegger, really depends on who you ask. Many others interpret Heidegger's thought strictly non-theistically.
"I live in California, which has the highest poverty rate in the United States, even though it's home to Silicon Valley. I see my rich industry doing nothing to improve the lives of everyday people and indigent people around us."

This is trivially false. Over a hundred billionaires have now pledged to donate the majority of their wealth, and the list includes many tech people like Bill Gates, Larry Ellison, Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, Dustin Moskovitz, Pierre Omidyar, Gordon Moore, Tim Cook, Vinod Khosla, etc, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Giving_Pledge

Google has a specific page for its charity efforts in the Bay Area: https://www.google.org/local-giving/bay-area/

This only includes purely non-profit activity; it doesn't count how eg. cellphones, a for-profit industry, have dramatically improved the lives of the poor.
Although the article has little evidence substantiating it, and many, many argument flaws, I do think its main hypothesis is correct, and the current unemployment is not caused mainly by automation.

If you look at the graphs at [0], productivity is falling, not increasing, as is capital. It looks much more that the world is getting old-fashioned poor than automation pushing people out of work.

EDIT: Forgot the link

0: https://bankunderground.co.uk/2016/11/17/there-are-two-produ...
> I can understand why you wouldn't at all feel sorry for an investor to the same extent as my examples above; presumably the investor hasn't ruined their life. However, my point is knowing the risks doesn't preclude someone from receiving empathy/sympathy.

I was not writing about a general case of risktaking: I was writing specifically about investors.

If I had been writing about athletes, stuntmen, gamblers, or any other kind of people, I would have written something that took into account the different contexts in which such people take risks.

I really don't see what you are trying to accomplish by changing the focus from a specific case to a general case.
Agreed. The large majority of people are in debt due to society telling them to spend more and people wanting to live beyond their means. As a society, if we were taunt how to be financially responsible, the large majority in general would be more financially stable. If you have excess finances, you are more likely to be generous. The main issue is that since everyone is in debt - even millionaires we feel we have more wants and needs that availability to give. 68% of Americans have non-mortgage related debt. That tells me that republicans, democrats, liberals...etc are so self wanting that we are willing to go into debt amd over spend and only willing to help others when our way of life is not directly affected. "(Scrolling down Facebook wall..) Oh those poor kids in Seria! ..I'm going to do my part by commenting and then go to bed"

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/07/29/eight-in-10-americans-are-in-...
The roundworm (c. elegans) only has 302 neurons, and about 7,000 synapses, but is capable of social behavior, movement, and reproduction. The entire connectome has been mapped, and we understand how many of these behaviors work without having to resort to additional ontological entities like your "third way".

If this complex behavior can be explained using only 302 neurons, I have no doubt that the complexity of human behavior and consciousness can be explained using 100,000,000,000 neurons.
The laws of the universe forbid steam locomotives in space, and yet we reached mars regardless. And here we are, barely even regular Inteligences.

The laws of computational complexity seem like a stronger candidate for a hard limit, but that only means that to get smarter they will require more matter to distribute comoutations across.

The battery limit proposal is just silly.
All tech can be tamed, the problem is "tamed by who and for doing what against who?". As any sirian children could teach us, airplanes are deadlier than ever.
Thanks for gi checkout -. I am currently using git checkout @{-1} which does the same thing...in a more verbose way.
A reasonable upgrade path is to do "room versioning". Each server would have a maximum supported room version, and publish it to each room they participate in, and every room has a version. When every server in the room agrees on a new version, they can publish a message to update the room version, and start talking over the new protocol. Older servers then can't join the room unless they agree to the room's new protocol.

Clients can then warn when they're in rooms with older versions than the latest supported, and since nobody wants the people they're talking to to receive scary warnings about insecurity, they'll upgrade.

And, of course, we can do similar with client versioning.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13239484 and marked it off-topic.
I'm not arguing that it's useless to outsmart a cat. I'm disputing the assumption that being vastly smarter means your opponent is hopelessly outmatched and at your mercy.

If you're the first human on an island full of tigers, you're not going to end up as the Tiger King.
I believe I got my first client by posting on Reddit, and from there it organically spread by people sharing it.

It is a side project though, and I'm not under pressure to acquire customers.
Now extend that thinking. What if low-skill labour isn't the largest cost component in anything much worthwhile that we're not already doing? How would that affect the reasoning in this FAQ?
Economies of scale guys. Lose a bit in every transaction but make up for it in scale.

They're dead.
@Gitlab: The features are great but the interface setup is shocking. That whole video assumes you have a K-cluster going already, and is a maze of this-thing, that-thing, auth-thing, copy-thing, etc. Have you guys ever tried interviewing users who are new or maintaining a Gitlab instance over major version upgrades? It's painful.

The 'quick fix' for setup these days is supposed to be to use a docker image... but the docker image most people use is unofficial, the maintainer is swamped and has a policy of ignoring problems, and although it runs it doesn't work well with real IPs/DNS/SSL/etc. for common cases (eg. email setup silently fails for many and has for ages - see https://github.com/sameersbn/docker-gitlab/issues/596 and https://github.com/sameersbn/docker-gitlab/issues/1005 which I recently opened) and adds the docker-is-a-moving-target complexity issue to the potential user's stack.

Normally I am based in China. Given that Github access is not super fast or stable there, you guys have a great opportunity to take that market. I'd personally love to use Gitlab both for my own business and those I consult for, but I can't get past go with mail on real infrastructure, and experiences with upgrades to date have been terrible.

Just offering my own recent experiences as a point of reference.
Americans citizens and companies have a diversity of choices.

If they like high regulation places, they can move to a liberal city. If the citizens or companies like low regulation places, they can move to a place more focused on these so-called freedoms.

This was demonstrated very clearly in this situation.
Many feel that it's likely that the future trait itself could become part of libcore. It's still far too early days to tell, though.
I know very little of machine learning, so...

It seems that your system is supervised for the initial training. Once the system is somewhat trained, is it possible to let it free with unsupervised training, say if the confidence is in some higher range, between some frames? For example, say there was a period of frames with very high confidence, some slightly occlusion or shadow that lowered the confidence, and then another period of high confidence. With something like motion prediction, and some confidence in where the sign was, could you use that period of lower confidence to help train, maybe with some verification from a knows, complicated, supervised data set?

tldr; Are there methods to allow these systems to keep learning once they're deployed?
HN isn't for this kind of partisan battle. Admittedly the thread was dubious in that respect to begin with, but it takes a noticeable turn for the worse here. If you're going to post comments in politicized threads, please post the kind that make flamewars less likely, not more.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13239754 and marked it off-topic.
right so why do I need teleport?
The idea of supernodes is what got everyone paranoid (with reason) that they were now able to be spied upon.
Most of the accountants I know seem to spend a their time managing flows of data, forecasting, interpreting legislation & making judgement calls on tax matters. Things that would require "strong AI" that isn't anywhere to be seen currently.

All the automation appears to have done (when it works, which it often doesn't) is made the job less tedious than it was 10-20 years ago.

Automation CLEARLY hasn't reduced the demand for accountants, just the kind of skills they have, since the numbers have been going up along with inflation: https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/oca/media/wysiwyg/20...

I could see demand for accountants dry if up tax legislation suddenly became radically simpler but that doesn't seem likely currently. If anything it's growing more complex.
is there a list of good slack channels with def focus?
ART OF SEO: SEO Community Q&A
How to Succeed in BBW Online Dating Safely
Not that I take the whole Bostrom superintelligence argument too seriously, but this is an incredibly weak argument (or more accurately, bundle of barely-related arguments thrown at a wall in the hope that some stick) against it. Feel free to skip the long digression about how nerds who think technology can make meaningful changes in a relatively short amount of time are presumptuous megalomaniacs whose ideas can safely be dismissed without consideration, it's nothing that hasn't been said before.
Oh, I hadn't expected to see this here! I had used this project as a way to get more intimately familiar with lisp, as such, a lot of the code is strange or just plain unidiomatic (with dependency management being a particularly ugly point).
You're conflating price (what the student pays) with cost (what the college education costs the provider.

I said the article focused on just the cost part, rather than the interaction of supply and demand. You responded by providing more commentary and data on cost.
https://whispersystems.org/blog/reproducible-android/
> There are no large markets left for it to enter, so how does it entice more ridership except by cutting fares?

Uber is a novelty. There are many people worldwide that don't know about it and are not using it... yet.
It's an interesting parallel you draw. In one case, Canadian students played pranks on an out-of-touch professor, and in the other, the incoming presidential administration in America is taking actions that have historically preceded mass deportation and genocide, both in the sense of "necessary" and "sufficient". Not to say the two aren't directly comparable -- though the queer kids are real dark horses vis-a-vis establishing and normalizing concentration camps.

Perhaps the lesson to draw is that, really, we're all authoritarians in some degree. Some of us want our uncle to stop saying the N-word at the Thanksgiving dinner table, some of us don't identify with our assigned gender and lash out at the opposition with responses of disproportional magnitude, and some of us want to classify people by religion and detain them. America truly is a melting pot.
The extra cost of modern construction projects can easily be attributed to the increased compliance costs. Any building work that impacts the flow of traffic now requires full time traffic control (manual); Safety inspectors are now full time; Continuous testing and inspection of building materials and practices requires trained inspectors.

We have vastly reduced the injury and death rates associated with construction at the expense of increased number of people involved in assuring that safety and building practices are complied with.
I know very little of machine learning, so...

It seems that your system is supervised for the initial training. Once the system is somewhat trained, is it possible to let it free with unsupervised training, say if the confidence is in some higher range, between some frames? For example, say there was a period of frames with very high confidence, some slightly occlusion or shadow that lowered the confidence, and then another period of high confidence. With something like motion prediction, and some confidence in where the sign was, could you use that period of lower confidence to help train, maybe with some verification from a knows, complicated, supervised data set?

tldr; Are there methods to allow these systems to keep learning once they're deployed?

edit: And this may interest you, the brain appears to predict motion: https://whitneylab.berkeley.edu/people/gerrit/MausNijhawan.P...
> So far no one has any kind of answer.

Well, socialists do. Even arch-capitalists are now nervously trying to engineer some light flavor of market socialism with UBI.

The problem of distributing the benefits of technology isn't a physical one, it's purely political and social.
I don't understand why people have such a weird problem reconciling the brain with the mind.

It IS all physical. It's also an unimaginably complex fucking shitload of tiny physical objects working incredibly quickly. If your brain was big enough to see the parts working like little gears of a clock, it would probably be planet sized, or something like that. Huge.

I would EVEN say it doesn't raise any interesting philosophical questions. Are computers silicon, or magic? Is a book paper, or magic? Is the economy magic, or a bunch of people buying shit everywhere?

Knowing that the brain is physical doesn't make me question myself or doubt control over my life or any silly shit like that. Yes all of my actions are technically "predetermined" by the Big Bang, but not in an interesting way, at all.

Semi-related, if you made a giant brainlike calculator out of water pipes and valves and shit, and asked it a question, then turned all its pipes and valves for a while... it would probably just say "please kill me."
Grass fed beef is higher quality than corn fed beef, but much more expensive today. Many of the classic high value fish are much harder to get and further as lot of seafood is sold under the wrong name. Even Milk is now much older than it used to be. Granted pre pasteurization Milk was dangerous, but there was a period when people still got fairly fresh pasteurized milk.
Building a hybrid spin mutex in C++
If ever there was a time where I want some government regulation backing up my right not to be killed by a buggy computer, it's when I'm sharing space with a car that's driving itself. I don't see why Uber would want to fend for itself in a litigation free-for-all when its prototype car kills somebody, either. Everyone would be better off operating in a known regulatory framework.
The media only has so much credibility left to burn, and crying wolf every second Tuesday certainly doesn't help, I will agree with you.
In my country, people watch TV an average of 3 hours every single day. It isn't billionaires doing that. It's people that "don't have time to go to the gym". And while Millennials might laugh at this, they're spending just as much on social media sites, Netflix and YouTube.

This whole "I don't have enough time to not neglect myself" it just excuses all the way down. Everyone can find time to exercise and eat well.

People using "not enough time" as an excuse is just a symptom of low self-esteem and self-neglect, which is the real issue. That's the epidemic, and there's great inequality there, though it isn't tied to socioeconomic status.
Google image search cab company owner and then explain where the billions in profit are hiding in the system.
In my experience Scala(.js) works way better than "(node -> JS, Java -> GWT, etc)".

There is a large gap between those and the way Scala _just works_ across platforms.

The huge difference is that you can depend on libraries and have them "just work" regardless of whether they are implemented identical on each platform, or need specific variations to implement the expected features.

Neither JS/Node nor Java/GWT have that.
The issue is the concentration of the wealth itself, not what those who benefit from the concentration of wealth choose to do with it.
A bug in Twitter's app inflated video ad metrics by as much as 35%
Thanks for the honest feedback, it's genuinely useful for improving the product.

Out of curiosity, why use the Docker image over our Omnibus package? Omnibus is generally what we recommend, but if that's not good enough we'd love to know how it can be improved.
I'm not sure how this is off-topic, and I don't believe my statements were partisan. I think any rational person would make the same observation. The topic is people acting irrationally to Trump's win.
I do agree with what you're saying, but also know of instances in finance where people have been fired for theft, then fired for the same thing again, because people were too wary of giving any information other than period of employment. Similar stories also occur among managers that move from one small town government to the next.

The laws that these people are benefiting from are meant to protect people like whistleblowers, those who fought back against discrimination, or just personality conflicts from following people the rest of their careers, but there can be a risk even when this extra background information is above board.
I think this basic concept of intractability, which programmers are very familiar with, hasn't penetrated far enough into AI world.

Bostrom and Yudkowsky in particular seem happy to hand-wave past computational complexity.
You should see British 16-20th century period documentaries. I don't watch them anymore because the cognitive dissonance is overwhelming
That's a fair argument. People might get caught up on thinking that the world object actually has to contain a description of the world.

> {type: 'FFICall', fn: string, arguments: [...]}

I agree that this is simpler to understand, but it's no good in practice. It's obviously not type safe, and you still have to bake support into the interpreter/runtime for whatever your string value is. It's also effectively impossible to inline/optimize away. Which, again, is probably why it's done using "State RealWorld#" in GHC.

I would like to reiterate that however RealWorld# happens to be defined, the way its use is enforced in GHC is the exact same as if it did actually contain a description of the entire universe. You just aren't allowed to look at it. But, you are correct, this is more confusing than a request/response free monad.
I hope they chose a model of mapping a lot of virtual tab threads to a single OS thread, rather than one OS thread per tab, but I don't know.
> an automated interface for ordering [...] would

Would? It already does, at least for a few well know fast food chains in my country. Just a couple of days ago I used one of those kiosks for ordering and paying.
Why would that make them wildly profitable? You have to find margins better than a taxi company somewhere and not just assume they exist because it's an app.

(I keep making this same post for some reason.)