skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There's no bombshell here. The section on "foreign influence" is still heavily redacted -- leaving literally just one and half sentences to read, in a sea of black. And both of the assertions it makes in those 1.5 sentences are quite vague:

"Snowden has had, and continues to have, contact with Russian intelligence services" (with no specifics). Yes, there are probably plants among the various Russian nationals he deals with. So what? (They make it sound like he's holding regular briefings with these people in a mahogany-paneled room somewhere).

"And in June 2016, [a Russian PM] asserted that 'Snowden did share intelligence' with his government." (That's not what the Russian PM, Frantz Klintsevich said -- and it's dishonest of the IC to assert otherwise). Also, this non-revelation was already made when the initial version of this problematic report was first published over the summer.

The overall weakness of these statements suggest that even now -- 3+ years after being stranded in Moscow, as a more or less direct result of the Obama administration's yanking his passport -- they still don't have anything to nail the guy with.
Intents are the idea that your app doesn't directly request camera permission, for example, but instead asks the system to open a camera screen, and another app (or even your own app) can then respond to that.

This provides more choice, and reduces the amount of needed permissions.
I wonder how they'll get to Arizona.
It's funny that automation is under attack. Any conventional measure says that productivity growth declines and the number of jobs grows.

First, the rise of unemployment is not supported by facts.

The widely cited unemployment rate went down to 4.6%.[1] That's the pre-crisis level of the overheated 2008 economy. This reduction is costly, but manageable.

Jobs disappear, but new ones get created. Nonfarm payrolls (aka "created jobs") are well above zero.[2]

So what's the unemployment the media keep talking about?

The unemployment voter. 4.6% is greater than the winner's margin in any of the recent presidential elections. It's a valuable asset to candidates and, thus, a hot media topic.

The average voter actually gets better thanks to productivity gains, not employment (which we can't reduce below 4% anyway). Productivity accounted for 2 percentage points of per-hour output growth.[3] It still contributes at least 0.5 pp. This decline is the real problem: losing those 2% means being poorer by 21.9% by the end of the decade.

But productivity doesn't vote, so this loss is going to happen.

[1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=4CaW

[2] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?category_id=0&graph_id=12...

[3] Gordon, “Perspectives on The Rise and Fall of American Growth.” p. 73.
GMail is a bad example. If GMail were to close you could just move to another email server.

Besides, using a PaaS is not free and I don't mean in terms of money.
I believe this is a very challenging topic. The Arab world definitely needs a hub for startups and I think Dubai is a very good place for such a place. It's true that there are some challenges there but every place choice will have some. Egypt (which would have been my first choice a few years ago) is not the best option now for all the economical and political challenges in there. Dubai on the other hand seems to progress very fast and will be more likely to set the right basis for entrepreneur and start ups to grow. It is also attractive because it attracts many talents from all over the world and its still growing economically. Having lived almost my whole life in Gaza, i believe Gaza Sky Geeks is currently the Silicon Valley for Gaza; and we can already see many young graduates getting engaged in all it's activities. It won't be long before the majority of students join it to work from there and it will need to grow by many factors to accommodate it. It is no longer a good-to-have, rather it's becoming a necessity and soon one of the pyramids for economic development in the country.
Could you explain why you think he's wrong in more detail? As written, this reads like a Bulverism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulverism):

"The method of Bulverism is to "assume that your opponent is wrong, and explain his error". The Bulverist assumes a speaker's argument is invalid or false and then explains why the speaker came to make that mistake, attacking the speaker or the speaker's motive."
Google can't push a new Signal APK, it's signed by OWS, not google.

3rd parties can download the signal source and compile it. Not sure if there's enough information available to product a bit identical (and thus verifiable binary).

I guess a NSL might compel OWS to push a binary specifically for a targetted user. If that's in your threat model you definitely need to take additional steps.
No, "Congress" doesn't claim that. The Select Committee on Intelligence claims (or rather vaguely asserts) that. But they offer no evidence for their assertions, other than the unreliable (and misquoted) speculation of a Russian parliament member.

See also - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13240783
I love that "Apply now to become a senator" is the most prominent link on their front page. (Canadian senators aren't elected -- they're appointed by the prime minister. Mostly from long-time political connections, but in principle one can apply, and the PM could like the cut of your jib.)

Anyway, "Apply now to become a senator" has to be 5 orders of magnitude lower conversion rate than "Get a passport", down at the bottom.
Well, there was this last month:

https://opensource.com/business/16/11/open-source-not-free-s...
No.

The relationship is wrong if you feel indebted to your investors and like they deserve thanks. They are partners in the business.

Presumably the CEO did all they could to succeed and behaved in an ethical and honorable manner. If they did so, then investors have been well served.

I will agree however that anyone who ever chooses to do business with you in any context deserves thanks. On that basis, thanks is deserved.
I understand that the investors have agreed to pay all former employees severance pay. I am one of those former employees. That helped somewhat.
I like the article, but I gotta ask: why the focus on "new research"? Is "old research" not good enough? I suppose it might not be, but some of it should really be at least brought up.

Here's a book from 1974 [1] by Robert Weiss, whose first (sample) chapter [2] reads very similar to the NYTimes piece, and covers many of the same issues, even before the internet was around. In particular, it draws the line (much more clearly than the NYTimes piece) between what it calls loneliness of emotional isolation and loneliness of social isolation, and, to me, its examples like the condition of married couples who moved far away are much more salient (and convincing) than reliance on surveys and dry statements like "loneliness can accelerate cognitive decline" and "increases risk of heart disease by 29%".

Am I missing something?

P.S. One cool thing I learned about from reading about Cacioppo's research is that when designing a survey about loneliness you can't ask questions like "do you feel lonely?" because it's much too ambiguous and people end up giving incoherent useless answers. I never thought something so basic could be so confusing to people.

[1] https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/loneliness

[2] https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/content/...
I dont think it is that far off. The iPhone 7 today already provide performance pretty close to Macbook. By 2020, we should have a 5nm TSMC Ax SoC. We already have 8GB single package LPDDR4 on 21nm today, and targeting 12nm by 2020. Basically the 2020 iPhone will very likely be more powerful then today's Macbook, or even some of today's Macbook Pro.
That's not how copyright works; videos are not "legal" or "illegal", it depends on who's doing the distribution.

I may upload a video I made to YouTube, without granting anyone else (including youtube-mp3) a license to redistribute it.
And if everyone were in your position, they probably wouldn't be afraid. That doesn't mean they don't have good reasons right now.
Wearing a Hi-Vis Vest Gets You into Everything for Free
> Trump's former opponent is on record clamoring for a "Manhattan Project style" effort to undermine crypto

While Clinton did call for a "Manhattan Project," it was not to "undermine crypto." In fact she said in a townhall that she opposed back doors, which puts her on the right side a line that Trump is on the wrong side of--he said that Apple should be compelled to build the backdoor that FBI asked for.

And now we have reporting that her advisors knew the reality of encryption and were working on education her.

The scariest things about Trump are 1) he shows no inclination to study or understand complex policy subjects, of which infosec is certainly one, 2) he has policy proposals that will require extremely invasive info technologies to work, like a Muslim registry and mass deportation of immigrants, and 3) he reacts aggressively and impulsively to any criticism or disagreement, which the infosec delivers in spades.
Locate searches the filenames, too.
"Robin Hanson totally thinks that won't happen because human and computer labor are complementary" is not a sufficient response. It's equally true of human and horse labor. Still had the horse die-off. In fact Hanson isn't even disagreeing -- he says that this complement is temporary and will eventually become displacement instead, just like I was saying.

That agrees with my point that Yudkowsky has made a case for AI not causing unemployment now but still being a future risk, even with the economic analysis holding true.
My experience after building 10+ MVP:

- Don't approach agencies without Wireframes (Do it in Sketch, Paper or Proto.io)

- Hire a consultant to document your applications processes, diagrams and clear objectives (Spending 2 to 5k on this would save you 20k for sure)

- You can rely on Crew, Gigster for excellent but expensive developers

- You can rely upon dev/design studios in Ukraine, Uruguay, Belarus etc.

- Smart way to execute is, first get your branding and final designs with designer

- Hire development agencies locally or outsourced in India or above-mentioned countries

- You can buzz me if you are building iOS App (Would love to share my recent learnings)

An ideal MVP can be made in 10k to 20k
The original statement "They vast majority of poor in SF grew up there or in nearby areas, they didn't migrate there like the economic elite have." is simply not supported by this evidence.

Given historical population growth of California, I think it's not a winning argument. Very few of California's residents have moral ground to live here at the exclusion of others. Pretty much everyone moved here. The only way forward is to allow enough homes to be built for everyone who wants to live here.
If you reverse your sentences, you actually address your own point -

> If you have such single non-violent corporation then there is nothing stops from people to just walk away.

> Law works because everyone concent and choose to follow it

... with the implication that people could choose to walk away from specific laws, which they can but just require a sizable group to do so.

Coming at it from the other direction, a non-violent corporation can still be coercive if it say owns all of the land and you must rent for a place to exist, or even if you own your land it owns all the roads you must sign a contract to travel. Would you feel better by just viewing USG as a corporation with a contract that you continue to consent to by not having left?

The straightforward response is that a contract to use a road should be scope-constrained to the topic of road usage, and not say also preclude you from using drugs on your own property. But that's no longer as simple and universal as a belief in unlimited contracts.
Peer-reviewed Cryptocurrency journal Ledger
In reply to that particular video, see eg. this discussion on /r/badeconomics:

https://np.reddit.com/r/badeconomics/comments/35m6i5/low_han...
The problem with this explaination is that it focuses on the technical aspect and not on the economical one : how is the value created shared among the people in the economy?

Technological progress allows concentration of power in the one who holds the capital, as he will be the main one to benefit from a more efficient capital : with the new machine you can make 15 buns whereas you made less with the new one. The employee is not paid more : the capitalist earns the cost saved.

Problem is that the capitalist doesn't spend 100% of his income : he will consume some, invest some and save the rest in unproductive accounts or stocks. He may produce 50% more hot dogs, but the demand will not follow.

Economics theory says that in this case prices may go down, but that would mean a lowering of the capitalist's profits. He may in this case reduce quality in order to lower the prices while preserving his margins.

Hence we see here 3 things : accumation of capital in a few hands, an era of deflation and low yields due to low demand and high monetary stock needed to be invested, and a reduction of quality of the product.

The last one is counter intuitive but may be seen in reality : buildings have reached the point where it's commodity, replaced every 30 years, clothes are worthless and the quality of food has been decreasing for the last 30 years (at least in my country, France).

If we get richer everyday, why can't we make buildings that are aesthical, solid and durable anymore? Why is quality food reserved only for rich people?
Oh, damn. I wish hacker news let you delete comments.
> There's going to eventually come a point where any job that can be performed by a low-skilled worker can be performed by automation.

A large proportion of low skilled service jobs in which being people, in the service area is 80% of the job and the actual tasks performed have in many cases have been possible to automate for the past century, if anyone thought it worthwhile. Even fast food chains, which aren't exactly renowned for joyous and welcoming customer service and are renowned for process improvement, still use people to dispense food, a century after the invention of the automat.
The will of the American people? You mean the will of the minority of voters?
Real Progressives Interviews Tim Canova
"the purpose of technical universities is to teach broads concepts on computer science"

Which might be a fine way to teach in those nations where college is free, but even there, ignoring the interests of the student, and sticking with a standard canon of course work, undercuts the uniqueness of each student.

And in those nations where college is not free, then the cost of spending time on broad topics needs to be balanced with the student's ability to pay for it.

The style of teaching that you describe is criticized by Paulo Freire in his book "Pedagogy of the Oppressed".

"In the book Freire calls traditional pedagogy the "banking model" because it treats the student as an empty vessel to be filled with knowledge, like a piggy bank. However, he argues for pedagogy to treat the learner as a co-creator of knowledge."

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

This is a model of teaching that can work well if the student is affluent enough that they don't have to worry about money for several years, but it is a style of teaching that really breaks down for 2 important groups:

1.) adults who need to learn a new skill

2.) just about everyone who lives in a poor country

Freire developed his ideas while he was teaching adults to read and write.

There is a teaching style that caters more to the full circumstances of the students, taking into account their age and their economic situation and their interests, so that the teaching empowers them with knowledge, without also disempowering them in other ways (such as crushing them with debt).
I think Jevon's Paradox[1] might apply to our relationship with AI. Jevon's Paradox states that the more efficiently a resource is used, the more the demand for it increases.

Thus with AI, the more efficiently human labor is used, the more demand for it increases? Thus one person is able to accomplish far more with the aid of robots, therefore the usefulness of labor increases. The out of work argument only works if there is a fixed amount of production that needs to be done and then there's no more to be done after that. However, if that were the case, then we'd have all we would need and no one would have to work because working more would just produce useless stuff that would not be used.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons's_paradox
He didn't cite Schneier did he? I really like Schneier and while i'm pretty sure of his political leanings, he doesn't seem to be the type of guy that would abandon his love of logic and reason for some political temper tantrums.

Anyway I will admit I felt compelled to un-follow a couple people on Twitter, and muted some that I normally find very entertaining (swift on security being one of them) because they are channeling their political grief in ways that make them look very foolish to me. How can I trust their logic if they claim or suggest that Trump is going to lock up gay people or will preemptively fire nukes on day 1? There is a massive amount of lies and unfounded propaganda that was put out in the media against Trump that never was nor ever will be true.
It's all well and good to run your own mail server. The biggest problem is 99% of who you send to/receive from will be in one of the big 3 mail servers.
We likely disagree on which is riskier if I read your statement correct. Much like anything though, going into it with an educated mind is the critical part, which is why I pointed out the need to study the market and team up with someone that has prior experience, as the potential to lose money is real in either case.

The simple reason I find the real estate market less risky, and hence the probability of loss less, is that factors which change valuation do so at a much slower rate and are, with some measure, easier to predict. With the stock market you can lose significant money in a single day because of the words that come out of someones mouth, regardless of the truth or veracity in those words. The housing market is a bit more resilient then that which I think mitigates some of the risk, at least the risk of others affecting your asset and money. It doesn't stop you from making bad choices and losing money though, as nothing fixes stupid choices.

There are a lot of other details and I can see the arguments either way, and truly for balance you should be involved with more then one investment vehicle. But for pure rates of return annually, I still stand by the fact I feel the real estate market is less risky overall then the stock market if you want some larger returns.
Keep reading the thread.
I totally agree.

@oblio you should have a look at the “24 days of Rust” blog series[1] which covers a lot of aspect of the Rust ecosystem (serialization, error handling, path management, configuration handling etc.)

[1] https://siciarz.net/24-days-of-rust-working-json/
> You don't enjoy the failure, but you can still enjoy the process that happens to lead to the failure, and the net outcome can still be positive.

But like I said you're adding your own words / perspective to the post. None of this was said nor implied hence:

>> I think we're going to be arguing in straw man circles
It was 4 days before Christmas. We were all let go yesterday. The announcement was written sometime between then and now.
Yeah, but it's not as convenient as a GUI search in, say, Sublime.
Apparently LW got the hug of death.

https://archive.fo/8ew3S has an archive.
I think we just have different opinions on risk and investing
Data and Goliath - Bruce Schneier (very good, preaching to the choir in my case though)

Dune - Frank Herbert (been waiting more than 20 years to read this. If you haven't seen the movie from 2001 highly recommended, else not)

The Psychopath Code - Pieter Hintjens (psychology book, highly recommended, allowed me to understand a whole lot more of the "toxicity" in society)

Python for Informatics - Charles Severance (too easy for crowd here, and for me, but quite good for newbie programmers. Note: Python 2.x; not 3.x!)

Ghost in the Wires - Kevin Mitnick and William L. Simon (good humor, great suspense, likeable main character)

Kingpin - Kevin Poulsen (a less likeable main character but nevertheless suspenseful)

And a bunch of cookbooks which I won't bother you with, I didn't fully complete any of them either.

I'm very happy that all the books I read were a hit, but did not read nearly as many as I wanted to. To restate, I can recommend all of the above. But they're not all new from 2016 (if that was the intention I apologise).
If the comment is still within the time it can be edited, you can, unless it has a response. In that case, if you want the comment effectively gone, you can edit the comment to remove the content. As a courtesy to the reader, you can leave a
"[self-deleted]" or some such to indicate what happened.
I read the first half of the Quran several years ago; I need to give it another try and read the whole thing someday soon.
Yes, but the essence is true: at some point they had to scrape together enough cash to buy the day's jet fuel or it would have been all over.
I wanted less devices and I wanted PoE.
I would love to see everything in the webinterface for the controller, but I can't really find a good reason to replace my one device with two...
Returns to capital in the form of ownership of companies (including eg. the source code to automate labor that's owned by those companies) have been flat. Higher returns on capital have almost entirely been caused by higher housing prices. See eg. Rognlie's paper at http://www.mit.edu/~mrognlie/piketty_diminishing_returns.pdf.
Here's my whole list for the year in reverse chronological:

- Hillbilly Elegy by JD Vance

- Tools of Titan by Tim Ferriss

- Competing Against Luck by Clayton Christensen

- Scrum: A Breathtakingly Brief and Agile Introduction by Chris Sims

- Build Better Products by Laura Klein

- Capital in the Twenty-first Century by Thomas Picketty

- Shoe Dog by Phil Knight

- Lean Customer Development by Cindy Alvarez

- Impossible to Inevitable by Aaron Ross & Jason Lemkin

- Grit by Angela Duckworth

- Love Sense by Sue Johnson

- Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman

- Working Effectively With Legacy Code by Michael Feathers

- Smarter Faster Better by Charles Duhigg

- Sprint by Jake Knapp

- Fooled by Randomness by Nassim Taleb

- Becoming a Supple Leopard by Kelly Starrett

- Superforecasting by Philip Tetlock

- The Inner Game Of Tennis by Timothy Gallwey

- Design Sprint by Richard Banfield

- The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn

- The Signal and the Noise by Nate Silver

- Advanced Swift by Chris Eidoff

- Siddhartha by Hermann Hesse

Some of these books are older and had been on my list for awhile. Some were released this year. Most of these books are very good. I usually stop reading bad books by the end of the first chapter.
> It means simply 'to significantly value'

Er, not trying to be pedantic but I can't find this definition anywhere. Is that an informal use? I only see references to the condiment or similar to 'greatly enjoy'.

Might be one of those cases where using more specific wording would have helped the blog entry.
Distillation of Deepnets
Does this equal to jobs and investments?
Except for the few people behind the wheel of these cars, I don't think Uber is now suddenly going to move its offices and make big investments in Arizona.
Cached link, for those who can't reach the site (I get a 504): http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:YP88PLE...
> Peter Tompkins -- The Secret Life of Plants (unfinished). I tried but couldn't get past the rampant bad science.

I read this book as well when I was younger (in my "new age" period), and I agree with your opinion.
Do you filter people or anyone can pay and come talk about stock trading? Wouldn't that get noisy?
How to stay focused through the holiday haze