skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The problem I'm having, and I have a masters in statistics, is that this data is generated after the fact. If you compare the predictions of the 2000-2010 period with the "after-the-fact" predictions of the 2000-2010 period ... There's a huge difference. According to the prediction EVERY year between 2000 and 2010 was between a 3 and 5-sigma event. In the after-the-fact model this is simply ignored, and the data follows the graph much better and ... nothing special happened apparently.

Sorry no. This is an indication that your predictions are worthless. And of course, after such a massive fuckup, it's going to take a bit of work to convince people otherwise. But none of that is happening, I wonder why not.

The worst of it all is that I used to make a similar argument, first about 1990-2000, then about 1995-2005. They all had the same result. Suddenly, and without explanation they were far, far cooler (compared to the prediction). Not quite 5-sigma years, but 3 sigma years were in there. 2000-2010 is the worst of the lot, but there isn't any decade-long period where one can say ... well climate scientists ... well done. You were right. The IPCC AR's, predicted temperature anomaly versus observed temperature anomaly.

Given these circumstances, how can we give any credence to the idea that the IPCC predictions about the future will match reality ? The joke is that in order for their 95% prediction to actually be true in 95% of cases they now have to be correct for 20.000 years. They don't even predict out that far. It's a joke, but it's also true. You'd think it would give people pause.

And all this is still ignoring the many fundamental theoretical problems climate science has. When they say "it's worse than ever before" ... well they're right, in terms of many variables. Ok ... but that means their methods are invalid. Statistics can fill in expected values in an observed population of values. And yet their claim is that the observed populations are VERY different from the ones seen before. Ok, fine claim. You can even prove that to some extent with statistics. And they've done that. After that, of course, you cannot use statistics to predict these values anymore ! This alone could explain why their predictions are so horribly bad.

I get the utilitarian argument. We don't have any better way of making predictions about the climate. That's great, but that doesn't make our best prediction adequate, nor is it even value-free. In some ways, it's just a political argument : "this looks worrying, let's fix it". It should be treated as such.
I hope that PumpkinDB is an alliterative reference to MUMPS :)
We need to bring pain back. Humanity has become soft in most first world countries. Eliminating pain is big, big problem.
> This is one of the main reasons I like small government. They tend to do a shitty job.

Sorry, this doesn't parse for me. Why is that desirable?
When did Hillary come out against the war?
The argument about the Wall St lobby would have been always valid however. I still wonder what triggered this specific timing.
A few very important additions to this:

1. Appropriately communicate the snag to your client: you've run into an unorthodox problem, and will need a few days to investigate the problem, but you will keep them updated on progress.

2. If it turns out you missed something important and blew the time on a wild-goose chase, don't bill your client for that time. Sure, they might be none the wiser, but nothing builds relationship better than honesty: "I am not billing you for these 20 hours, because I spent them researching a problem and not delivering value."

For (2), clearly state that on your invoice.
Just do it. It seems thats all what you Can do except hiring another guy to identify your problem in this special field.

If it's possible, it is indeed possible.
> It may have been reasonable 50 years ago. It's no longer reasonable.

Why would it become less reasonable?
If you think a manager being of Indian descent is a relevant detail, you're probably not a good fit for Google, or any software company really.
I don't think it's a problem with the hardware either, I'm just acknowledging it's physically possible.

No, I've never even worked with a microchip at all before. I do front-end web development normally. I am actively combing through the ADC section repeatedly, yes, to no avail so far.
Here in New Zealand, Spark (second largest network) has already turned off their 2G network and Vodafone (largest network) is planning to do so in the next few years. This leaves only 2degrees (third largest) with any long term plans to keep running 2G and their own coverage is no where as good as the other two (they roam on Vodafone 2G/3G where they don't have their own coverage which accounts for over 20% of the population). I would be keen to buy this phone if it had at least UMTS 850/900/2100 to ensure I could use it on any network for 10+ years to come. A very short-signed move IMHO.
“I was just asked to balance a Binary Search Tree by JFK's airport immigration”
An experiment doesn't 'work out', if it doesn't lead to continued grant funding.
> A lot of work was done trying to predict what the realistic CO2 levels would do to global temperatures, and now we can see that nearly all the temperature predictions from that work were way, way too high.

You're wrong. The predictions are very good, and your claims are based on... some wrong sources obviously.

The rest of your post is also wrong. Specifically:

> I don't know what to compare it with so don't know if that amount is, for all of the earth and sources of CO2, methane, etc. just a tiny, insignificant, nearly invisible drop in the total bucket or a major change.

It's irrelevant that you don't know. Your "ignorance" won't make global warming disappear. Ditto for your claiming that the scientific methods aren't to your taste. No "denier" was able to make anything scientifically relevant up to now. That's the fact.
Ah, yes.. profit incentive as the silver bullet for all that ails.

This myopic view is foolish and needs to die.
Regarding #2, eliminating context switch overhead and system call latency by running everything in one address space would be huge for some applications.

Enormous effort has been spent to allow HPC applications to talk directly to the network interface hardware without going through the OS (for instance using the Infiniband verbs API), because system calls are way too slow. This puts a lot of burden on the hardware vendors, because hardware implementation bugs might expose security vulnerabilities that could be exploited by malicious software, and there's no OS layer in between to sanity-check the hardware commands.

If a system call is just calling a function, then that's not an issue anymore; you can just use system calls for everything, because it's fast. The compiler might even inline them. The OS can insert any sanity checks it wants and expose a safe API to the application.

Regarding unsafe code, it's true than unsafe code blocks can violate the memory safety of the whole system, but that doesn't mean you can never use them, it just means that you need to use them carefully. An unsafe code block could be treated like kernel code or a setuid root binary. In a language like Rust, ideally many of the unsafe code patterns would be migrated into the standard library with a safe interface, and the unsafe low-level hardware interaction that the OS would need to do would be another set of unsafe code blocks. Normal application could be forbidden from using their own unsafe blocks (unless the superuser says it's okay), but they can still call into the kernel and into the standard library. (The way I imagine this working is that the operating system would have a policy of not executing any code that wasn't compiled by a trusted compiler, with compiler options dictated by some security policy. Code that was compiled on an un-trusted compiler can run inside an emulator.)

If having unsafe code blocks anywhere in the system seems wrong, consider that operating system kernels are essentially large unsafe code blocks. If we can abstract out the bits that truly need to be unsafe and write the rest as safe code, the end result may be far fewer corners for memory corruption bugs to lurk in, and an overall improvement in security and stability.
This is what I'm talking about. This comment is very vague.
I believe poster meant he prefers to keep government small because they muck things up regardless of size. Better to minimize the impact that way.
I'm in the same boat. The clients demanded that I work in Matlab so I worked in Matlab. When I work in Python or Node.js or Scala or R I don't have too many issues going from Unix to Windows or vice-versa. Matlab exploded, and it's not even a huge program. A few hundred lines!

Let them know what's going on. Did they pick the microchip? Then you aren't incompetent, you're fixing their issues.

Keep them in the loop. I like akulbes advice of subcontracting that problem out.

A hangup isn't incompetence. Having trouble with obstacles doesn't mean you're incompetent. It means you're pushing yourself. If you never push yourself you don't get better
Please if you know anything like the product in OP, share it. I need this!
Pre-registration is nice, larger samples/greater power is necessary, and increasing the p-threshold may indirectly filter out some false positives but kind of misses the underlying issue of p-hacking, some of which would be solved by pre-registration.

The authors suggestions are preventative in nature but what I would like to see above all else is requiring researchers to publish the raw data and to make their statistical analyses minimally reproducible--something which could be satisfied by publishing scripts or Excel macros along with instructions for any non-automated data stitching. Experiments frequently implode at the analysis phase which then gets intentionally or unintentionally masked in ambiguous, poorly written methods sections. Giving others access to the data allows errors to be spotted earlier after publication and alternative hypotheses and analyses to be tested against the published results. It's also sometimes the only way of spotting abnormalities resulting from the data collection process itself. Again, not a means of preventing errors, but a low friction way of discovering them. Maybe having everything in the open would light a fire under some researchers to be more thorough, though.
If you don't mind sharing the chip name and the way you are using it, drop me a mail and I can try to help you.
My user name at gmail.

Regarding charging the client. I usually give an estimate prior to the work. If I see the estimate won't be enough I usually tell them that something isn't as expected and that I'll need manufacturer's support. If they are ok with this we keep going.
This is precisely why I dread hiring academic-only profile. Note: I am myself from academia, but I was lucky enough to specialized in CS-related field (NLP). When I wanted to leave academia, Data Science was not a thing where I live and I had to start again at a junior dev position (i.e.: it was that, starving or staying in academia).

Now, I work with a lot of people way smarter than I am, who are mostly useless because they can hardly prototype their stuff in Python or run an SQL query. And they'd expect to only work on the best, cleaned and formatted dataset and only do high-end maths on those. Reality hits hard, we're losing money paying them and they're wasting their time not doing what they like. Add to that the frustration / jealousy that this creates.

In that regard, I like that famous definition for Data Scientist: "A programmer that know more about statistics than most programmers, or a statistician that knows more about programming than most statisticians".

And don't get me started on the general repulsion for understanding the basics of how a business runs from academia. Data Science is all about application.
> we haven't yet figured out how the Earth is going to react to that destabilization.

Oh yes we did. It will get warmer. And remain much longer warmer than we'd like. Unless the CO2 production is cut. It's that simple.
Not the case in other parts of the world though. Here in New Zealand one of the two major networks no longer operates a 2G network and the other major network is planning to turn it off in the next few years. The only other network hasn't announced any plans but chances are they will turn off 2G soon after. Definitely would be very surprised if there were still a 2G signal avaliable anywhere in New Zealand in say 5 years time.
Only if you opt-in to a widely astroturfed (likely general-interest) public annotations provider. I know I wouldn't. I don't think there's a browser vendor who'd go for this experience as default.
Only if they insist on keeping their current (very high compared to most people in history) standard of living. A median American could survive at the standard of living of a medieval peasant indefinitely on their current assets.
I've been a googler myself, a few make 200k base salary but it's still a small minority of the company. In your list, only Netflix will guarantee $200k minimum as an annual base salary for pretty much all their engineers. Why? Because first of all they only hire experienced engineers, and second of all, they don't offer RSU's, bonuses etc. It all comes into a single salary, unlike all the other companies in the Bay Area that talks about $250k-300k "hiring package", which doesn't mean anything...

Again, a bonus is NOT part of the base salary. And a hiring package = base salary + annual bonus + sign on bonus + RSU's (4 year vesting period). A financial institute will only look at your base salary to calculate your income/debt ration.
Here's a leading scientist's description of peer review:

Peer review works superbly to separate valid science from nonsense, or, in [Thomas] Kuhnian terms, to ensure that the current paradigm has been respected. It works less well as a means of choosing between competing valid ideas, in part because the peer doing the reviewing is often a competitor for the same resources ... sought by the authors. It works very poorly in catching cheating or fraud, because all scientists are socialized to believe that even their toughest competitor is rigorously honest in the reporting of scientific results ... It certainly does not ensure that the work has been fully vetted in terms of the data analysis and the proper application of research methods.

From: Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence [for U.S. federal judges], Third Edition; How Science Works section by David Goodstein, CalTech Physics Professor and former Provost; published by National Academies Press (2011)

https://www.nap.edu/catalog/13163/reference-manual-on-scient...
Looking for BETA TESTERS
We are looking for Beta Testers for a new simple decision making platform - Indivisible. Voluntary participation, prizes for most active voters.

iSoftStone (NYSE:ISS) a global consulting and IT outsourcing firm is testing a new decision making platform – Indivisible - and would like your support. It is a simple decision making platform where you share your opinion on certain topics and vote for everyone else’s answer.

Participation is voluntary, however, if you win the maximum votes you win $100 !
If you would like to participate please send an email to: info.isoftstone@gmail.com , using as a subject “Indivisible platform – NAME of the SITE you found the AD”. We’ll offer a 10 USD incentive for valuable answers!
Just the fact that it was attempted and noted would be great.

A researcher could then attempt to contact the author and ask a couple questions about details.

Currently, as it stands everyone is walking around in the dark.
Worth a look in this context:

http://www.aaai.org/Papers/AAAI/1980/AAAI80-047.pdf
You're right -- the concept is great :). Last time I got an ESTA, however, the site was somewhat byzantine, chock-full of confusing legalese and the response was slow. Comparatively, to get into Europe for 90 days we just have to arrive (https://www.safetravel.govt.nz/travel-tips-travel-europe) -- same goes for Canada.

However, after checking, it does seem like the site has improved a lot. It's been a while :).
It's entirely possible that the women just hustled harder, thus explaining while all the qualified ones were hired.

The problem is with the one who failed the class. What do we know about her? We know that she either was too lazy to pass the class--implying she doesn't hustle--or she is simply unable to pass the class, implying she isn't qualified.

Combine this with the current political climate, in which a company looks like its trying to solve problems if it employs more women; and the fact that women joining male-dominated fields tends to cause a reduction in wages in those fields, and the fact that this seemingly unqualified and/or non-hustling woman was hired while many men were not, and its suggestive of a gender bias.

That is not to say the other women who were hired aren't qualified or don't deserve those jobs. Merely that there may exist a gender bias which is problematic in that it is focusing a particular outcome (equality of gender) at the expense of economic sense and efficiency; not to mention the personal expense of the qualified men and also at the expense of the unqualified woman who, if such a bias exists, is really being exploited.
I would say this is more illusory than real. It is common in areas that have intense private R&D competition, such as AI, databases, et al to regularly publish research that makes you appear relevant without publishing any internal research that actually matters. The incentives are aligned to encourage this.

It is unfortunate but I have seen it first-hand in a few interesting computer science research areas, and academia simply doesn't have the resources to keep pace with the output that happens under NDA at many private research labs.
Does anybody know if we can read the actual indictment somewhere?
It's worth bearing in mind that Airbus does have electric aviation in mind:

http://www.airbusgroup.com/int/en/corporate-social-responsib...

Early days yet, of course, but the groundwork is underway.
FFToast：A very powerful iOS message notifications and AlertView extensions
This. Give the client a set of clear options to choose from, as soon as you realise it's going to take longer than you thought.

One option is to timebox the investigation, like "I'll spend up to 10 hours trying to solve it myself, and then get back to you with more options"

I also give them the option of going fixed-fee for this part of the project, so I take the risk that I can't find a solution or it takes me a long time to find it.

This is absolutely normal, you are not a moron or incompetent for hitting this kind of wall. It can be hard to see past your own inner critic on this stuff ;)
Desktop operating systems have the capacity to do this; "server operating systems" (which are just desktop operating systems configured differently) already do this.

You run each program as a different user account. The HTTP daemon doesn't run as the same user as the DNS daemon even if they're on the same machine.

This is obviously annoying on a desktop because you have to use user switching to use another app. It would be better if desktop operating systems provided native support for it so that user accounts had a sub-account per app and apps automatically ran like that, and then a permission prompt if one app tries to access another app's files, which you can grant as one-time access or permanently.

Then you expect your email program to try to access a document you're attaching to an email, but if a video game tries to read your tax returns you can be appropriately suspicious.
When I used to do consulting, I never charged the client for me learning how to solve their problem. I always charged them for the time it took to actually solve the problem. So if I encountered something I didn't know how to do, or some problem I had no idea how to solve, I would learn or figure that out on my own time.

Some exceptions to this, for example if I am trying to unfuck something the client was responsible for, or they hired me specifically to solve this problem and I was clear up front that I would charge them for the time it took to figure out wtf was going on.

But let's say I decided to write a bit of Python code to solve a problem. And then I run into some obscure bug in one of the libraries I selected. If I can't figure that out quickly then I pause the project and switch to debugging the library and maybe even submitting a pull request, then I go back to the client project. Same if I need to learn some new library, or a new language, etc. If it's not the client's fault that I selected a library that had edge cases I wasn't aware of, why should they pay me to figure that out?
Heavy vehicles use diesel, ships use fuel oil, jets use jet fuel. What industry are you thinking of that would use amounts of gasoline comparable to all light vehicle traffic? I'm honestly curious but doubtful.
Incentives in science are skewed.

The focus shouldn't be on positive results, the focus should be on publishing results. A correctly incentivized researcher would strive to publish, and strive to improve knowledge in their field.
Researchers create first practical attack on SHA-1
Nit: disabling swapping is not the same this as disabling virtual memory. Virtual memory is just something that allows swapping, but does not require swapping.
I know how you feel. Dealing with hardware issues can be _extremely_ frustrating. It's very easy to dig yourself in a hole wherein you stop thinking clearly. In this situation, if you haven't completely given up on it yet, maybe take a day or two off and work on something else? I find that helps. Otherwise I would contact the manufacturer or post to their forums.

Feel free to email me if you want a second pair of eyes. sean at [myusername].com
I dislike IKEA furniture - It never seems to go well, and always in a different, hard-to-plan-for kind of way. Either the bed frame slats will crack at an odd place, or the bookshelf will bend under the weight of too many books, or perhaps a layer of plastic-ish(?) faux-wood will peel off revealing the flimsy glue pressed wood-ish material inside.

I understand the appeal of well designed, flatpacked, self assembled furniture - but why does the quality have to be so terrible? Is it so they can produce and sell at volume? It would be nice to see an intersection of medium/high quality end furniture that I can buy and assemble like IKEA products.
For Honor – Taking Melee Combat to New Heights
>> Regarding #2, eliminating context switch overhead and system call latency by running everything in one address space would be huge for some applications.

That sounds like basically running node.js in kernel space, which is entirely doable. I think people have put HLLs into kernel space before.
> Ingvar Kamprad "is said to fly economy and drive an old Volvo. This frugality may help to explain why he is the world's eighth-richest man - although the four decades he spent living in Switzerland to avoid Swedish taxes may also have something to do with it."
It's already going down:

http://www.frommers.com/tips/miscellaneous/the-travel-press-...

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/seek-foreign-flights-nyc...
This is one of the issues with charging hourly, or even daily. Charge by value or weekly.
> Further it makes no sense to arbitrarily take away all citizens rights in certain locations in the country.

That's not what I said.

> What are your Constitutional Rights at border crossing? What are rights of non-citizens?

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/business/border-enforc...

https://www.google.co.in/url?q=https://www.acluaz.org/sites/...
The compression on some is insane:
NPP = NPOES Preparatory Project = National
Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System Preparatory Project
Perhaps I'm not understanding. Website owners will attempt to AstroTurf whatever annotation system is associated with negative comments on their site.
I'm not getting any different colours, in Chrome 56.