skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It depends on the company. The head of the department is aware. In some cases, the hiring manager might or might not be aware of the entire process ("HR told me to stack rank my direct reports / HR told me to put my team in these 9-blocks"). In large, large company that is typically a headline "Cisco has announced will lay off 500 people next Monday".
When I think of things like mass surveillance, proliferation of felonies, over-charging & plea bargaining, civil asset forfeiture, and police militarization, the book I really think of is not 1984, but Hannah Arendt's Totalitarianism. I think it is very thought-provoking and helps show what it means to lose the rule of law in your country. Also unlike 1984 it is about things that actually happened.

And just to be clear, I think these fears are non-partisan. The problems didn't start in January, but much sooner. Solving them isn't as easy as just electing the right party.
I guess I'd worry more about rogue nations developing (cheaper) biological weapons and chemical weapons. I imagine it would be easier to build something like [1] than a robot like this.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M139_bomblet
Much faster than a Raspberry Pi 3, I can tell the difference between the two running the same software attached to a large touchscreen. I've got a few dozen OrangePi PC boards going on over a year of being deployed, no issues with any of them yet.
Replying to this comment, but this is in response to all the ancestors who have said they "haven't seen this in X area":

If you're a man (or white, etc) then it makes sense that you don't see this firsthand. It doesn't happen to you. Not all workplace harassment is as egregious or public as the harassment in this article. I absolutely don't believe that this problem mainly affects the US.
It's hard to play the scrappy upstart 'disrupt' card when you're a 50-billion or so valued company who can afford to hire people who can tell you how not to fuck up quite so incompetently.
The most difficult problem I have with Japanese numbers (going on 13 years of study and ten years in-country) is STILL dealing with counting higher numbers based on 10,000s. I've drilled and practiced and it still doesn't come fluently; I always find myself converting the Japanese to English, doing the math, then reconverting to Japanese, usually using my fingers to tick off zeroes to figure out how many 10,000s the number has.
For those wondering, Fat Tony is a character in The Black Swan (and not meant to be the rapper of the same name).
A GPS device secretly installed by the police
My company has 360s and ranking by different levels. the only thing they don't is to lay off the bottom 10%. They stay around. A team of purely top performers is not possible because they still have to fit on the curve.
If I read correctly, they rank yet do not have quotas. Someone performing well doesn't mean someone got scored low. In this system, a low performing person can become average by improving skills.

With this in mind, it makes sense to grade the manager. If a manager has a lot of poor performers, they might not be giving staff the training, support, and feedback that is necessary to improve. If they all get high scores, they might be grading too easily. I'm guessing they have controls to help lessen this.
Also Polaris, a little bit earlier (deployed 1960) had a very small transistorized guidance computer which was the design root of the Apollo Guidance Computer. Polaris was much more of a DDA (digital differential analyzer) than real computer though.
Enron employees called it "rank-and-yank."
I would bet that the astronauts in the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo programs thought there would be more than one fatal spacecraft failure by the end of Apollo. A number of astronauts (who never got to space) also died during training (in aircraft crashes in other incidents).
I'll be real with you. I worked at Uber for a while. I never noticed any sexual harassment while I was there, but what I did notice was that the company culture was quite excellent until the number of employees got up to 1000 or so. It wasn't until there were many layers of management that things got shitty. I left once the culture no longer felt friendly.

I haven't spoken to Travis in quite a few years now, but I find it very hard to believe he is responsible.

Shitty, evil, manages are great at being two-faced. When their boss is around they act one way, but you better watch out when no one is looking.
That applies in the case of a court of law or if I were an individual in the media reporting on the alleged incident (in which case I would likely try to corroborate with other alleged victims).

It doesn't make sense in the situation (here) where someone is making the accusation. She knows it happened, she was there, from that perspective this guy should be getting wrecked. It would be a public service. There's no reason for her to fear that she herself is lying.

(Irrelevant to my argument but perhaps relevant to yours: I'd also argue that de-facto assuming there's a good chance the accuser in the situation is lying flies in the face of everything I've read about it being difficult for abuse victims to come forward. There's little to no gain for the accuser. The accuser is often assumed to be lying, they now have to fear reprisal from the accused and others. Making this type of thing up isn't a rational move with a useful end. Unless it is true, in which case the useful end is to take down the accused, in which case the accused should be named).
If one side has the robot army, they'll target the human soldiers on the other side. If both sides have robot armies, they'll probably target one anothers' civilians.

Nations are never going to rid themselves of the desire for war, or the need for war to involve bloodshed, because we're just another species of simian bludgeoning the out-group to death with extremely abstract and over-engineered rocks. We already have non-violent ways to resolve conflicts between nations, we fight wars explicitly to kill people.
- Software Engineering Daily (hosted by Jeff Meyerson)

- The Indie Hackers Podcast (hosted by me!)
Those are different implementations; I know those exist, and which is why I had specifically said there were multiple implementations and pointed at the "faster one", which is obviously the one most people are going to be paying attention to, and which is the one that is also most relevant as we could and probably should expect the implementations for other languages to use some crazy one-off library: it demonstrates and undermines the limitations placed on the various languages seem arbitrary enough that you can't read into these results as being indicative of the languages themselves, but simultaneously that we shouldn't even care as the fast Java entry effectively "cheated".

I am going to take a step back: you seem irked by my comments, due to the knee-jerk link to have me contribute a different implementation for C++ as well as arguing with the short reply what I really maintain is a nearly-offtopic point about the Java library in question here (both of which I am reading as slightly aggressive towards me or my comment).

Do you really like this benchmark? Are you super excited that Rust is slightly faster right now than C/C++/Java? What is going through your head when you read my comments? Do you disagree that we should expect all native-ish languages to do equally-enough well for most people given these constraints? Is it that my comment is coming off to you as "no fun allowed", as I am trying to point out that this is a meaningless competition that mostly teaches us about different things than "who is winning"?

In fact, looking at your recent comment history, I am realizing you are being super aggressive about this with everyone, and are nigh unto spamming the play.html link to everyone who tries to comment about the high-level idea of "what are we doing here". What's up?
Ah, as I expected.
Personally, I think talking about false positive and accuracy is a straw man problem.

The much more difficult question (or not difficult question depending on who you ask) is whether a system like this should exist even if it has perfect accuracy.

At what point does the tracking of individuals cross privacy lines and become oppressive? Scraping internet browsing habits? Automated traffic cameras? Mandatory facial screening?

That is the real question and unfortunately it's not one that can be grounded empirically (at least as far as I have seen).

One thing is for sure: we have been headed down a dangerous road for awhile. Washington seemingly wants to go down it seeing as Presidents from both sides of the aisle have only rolled us further down this road.

Edit: I used Washington here because I am a US citizen, but I think it worth pointing out that other developed nations have been going this way as well (e.g. the UK).
I'm quite shocked that nobody stepped in when Mike2 called her a "whiny little bitch" in a meeting. She said the other men "were shocked" spare a couple that giggled. What the fuck kind of person stands around and does nothing when witnessing that kind of abuse in a professional environment?
Whoa - MIPS virtualised their message passing hardware? How?!

Software-based queues die a fiery death when the latency of a send/receive is critical, because you end up stalling on a really slow cache-coherence operation. So, for example, anything like a cross-thread RPC call takes ages (you wait for the transmission and wait for a response, so it's much slower than a function call and often a system call - the Barrelfish research OS suffers a bunch from this). There are also algorithms you just can't parallelise because you can't split them into large chunks, and if you split them into small chunks the cost of communicating so frequently destroys your performance. (Eg there was a brave attempt to parallelise the inner loop of bzip2 - which resists coarse parallelisation thanks to loop-carried dependencies - this way).

Software based queues perform just fine on throughput, though - if you're asynchronous enough to let a few messages build up in your message queue, you'll only pay the latency penalty once per cache line when you drain it (and with a good prefetcher, even less than that).

The examples you cite are actually both instances of software cunningly working within the limits of slow inter-core communication. Work-queue algorithms typically keep local, per-core queues and only rebalance tasks between cores ("work stealing") infrequently, so as to offset how expensive that operation is. Lightweight threads with blocking messages (like Go or Occam or some microkernels) work by turning most message sends into context switches within one core - when you send a message on a Go channel, you can just jump right into the code that receives it. Again, they can then rebalance infrequently. (For an extra bonus, by making it easy to create 100k "threads", they hope to engage in latency-hiding for individual threads - and once you're in "throughput" mode it's all gravy).
Of course those deaths are horrible. Even a single needless death is the most tragic thing in the world. The point of my question was that "conventional" weapons are still limited compared to robotic warfare / AI. Very strong military in the hands of a repressive regime has always been bad, but I fear the robot military age will make it far worse.
Is this a personal opinion or a analysis of the business? As personal opinion, fine, whatever, it isn't really for me either.

But as an analysis of the business, this seems very weak. It doesn't matter whether you think their filters are vapid or what you think of the disappearing nudes angle. What matters is that they have released a number of new things that people (who are more social than me) have found entertaining. That's what it takes to be successful in entertainment: keep releasing things that your target audience finds entertaining. Their best innovation was to realize that they're in the entertainment industry and that they should behave accordingly.
Ask HN: How to get a job in machine learning in health-related industries?
There's an increase of data science and machine learning jobs in fintech due to the movement from traditional SAS tools to more open source stack like Python and AWS. The demands of these positions are high and well-compensated.

For someone who prefers working in the biomedical science and health informatic industries, are there similar demands and compensations? If there are, what are some of the companies worth looking out for and applying to?

Thanks!
James Cameron? He seems to have a penchant for this stuff.
> If I were to run a performance-critical application, I'd definitely tune the GC accordingly.

But you have to tune it for the performance of the whole application (AFAIK), you can't tune it for an individual algorithm like you can with c. It's a one size fits all approach.
Major requirement associated with getting that $150 permit is reporting disengagement statistics, and, hence, showing up on this report:

http://www.recode.net/2017/2/2/14474800/waymo-self-driving-d...
But would an individual's choice to not use Uber actually help anyone? Or is it just a knee-jerk over-reaction? If my choice to not use Uber wouldn't actually help anyone, and it would limit me quite a bit (I'm visually impaired and can't drive), then the correct moral choice (at least according to utilitarianism) would be for me to keep using Uber but go out of my way to be nice to the drivers.
>It's worded in a way that it could apply to a protest that becomes a riot rather than only a planned riot.

Where? Where in the statute are these words? It's possible they're there and I just didn't see them. Maybe you can point them out.