skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't that's true.

For an example that would apply to computer science: "99% of computer scientists agree that computers are the future of mankind". I don't think you even need to do a study here, it's obvious that around 99% of computer scientists would believe that, because it's what their lives are built around. Climate change scientists' lives are built around the existence of climate change, and so obviously they'd have the same beliefs.

Where the value of a scientific paper comes in is within the discipline: how do a I best use this computer to accomplish something? How do I best cut down on the effects of carbon on the atmosphere? If I increase oxygen density, what will happen? Regardless of the answer to these questions, the people involved will be able to continue their lives. They're disconnected with economic reasons because no matter the answer to the question, there is more work for them. Economic reasons come in when the results of a study would directly threaten the livelihood of the scientist. In that case, we can't just assume that because all the scientists agree that it's automatically perfect.

> In the end, the only proper way to do this is with arguments based on merit, rather than perceived motivations of other people.

Correct! My point was more about how the Agile paper is disparaged. I have more reason to believe the results of an accredited and published Agile paper than I do a paper on the very reason an entire field of study exists.

My personal belief that climate change is real and a huge problem is irrelevant here: I still find the Agile paper to be more convincing. The only reason I believe in climate change is because I've checked the science myself to the best of my ability, and not because of the peer reviewed papers which I believe would say the same exact thing even if climate change does not exist. Hopefully that makes it clearer.
It seems like it might be better to put the metadata at the end. That would make it easier to truncate to a certain amount of entropy. Also, it would make it possible to trim off the metadata without having to understand the format to figure out the variable length.
We've banned this account for violating the HN guidelines.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
ZeniMax files injunction to stop Oculus from selling VR headsets
Agreed, the stupid quiz culture is getting old. I suspect people who cling to this tradition wouldn't be able to code their way out of a paper bag outside the sphere of well defined problems with canned solutions.
How many times in your career have you needed to implement bubble sort without the ability to google it? In my experience I can say never and imagine that's what other people would say too.

I don't think the point is that we should take pride in not knowing things so much as that perhaps this way of evaluating potential hires is not very good. Doesn't seem controversial to point out that doing a technical interview that tests skills not required on the actual job might not work well for finding the people you need.
this will fundamentally change the internet
Should we all list personal anecdotes of the stupid stuff we have seen motorists do as well?
> you'd need to adjust for the benefits you get from your government/employer (Health insurance) for a fair comparison

Indeed. My out of pocket for medical care this year is $19k (and that's with one of the "gold" plans)
I actually find comments like yours far more obnoxious than level-headed criticism. This communities purpose is not to be a marketing team for whoever wants to post here. Criticism is much more edifying than blind support.
Have to say, I'm on a very budget, old Moto 3G and I still get regular updates.
A far more interesting question for me is the system response.

Let's stipulate, for the purposes of the next bit of discussion, that it a fact that human activity is changing the balance of gases in the atmosphere and causing a net increase in warmth. So the planet is warming up and up and up.

Our planet is a system, and by that I mean it has a number of dynamic processes that all run along that are being influenced by other processes. The basis of a climate model is to capture all of those processes and include them in the model so that given changes to a particular part of the system you can predict how the other parts will respond.

To Vivek's point, the "best" model would let you take all of the data you can get and put that in for the various modeled parameters at any given time and get back an answer. But we don't have one of those models.

For example, none of the IPC's models allow for an ice age even though we know we have had ice ages. I haven't looked recently but the literature on what might be the factor behind the cycle of warm and cold cycles is still unknown.

Second, we have ice cores which suggest that with much lower CO2 levels the planet was warmer than it is now, and which much higher CO2 levels it was cooler than it is now. As a result, the research we've done, the models we've produced, are accurate for a small set of conditions which we have been observing for a very short period of time (even giving credit for the first Sumerian tablets).

We also know that there have been periods of time where this planet was unable to support human life. Not that we hadn't evolved or emerged yet, completely unable to exist. Once, like Mars today, our atmosphere was nearly all CO2!

And the really important bit, we don't know how to control climate change, it is pretty clear we can dump a lot of CO2 into the air and affect it but we don't have the necessary understanding, and models, needed to drive it in one direction or another. As a result, if we cut our carbon foot print to zero, we are still 100% at risk of extinction from climate change. Only then it will be due to one of the other things that we're not in control of doing it instead of us. There isn't a climate scientist out there who has ever gone on the record to say "do this and it will 'end' global warming." They can't because we don't know enough to know what would drive the climate to stay in it's current state forever.
> If global warming went away tomorrow -- as in, it were to be completely proven to not exist -- every single climate change scientist would be out of a job.

1. That's a bit like saying if powered aviation goes away tomorrow (as in, it is to be completely proven to be impossible), every single engineer at Boeing would be out of a job.

2. The incentive structure doesn't work that way. If you could show that global warming isn't real, yes, all the other climate scientists will lose their job, but you will be rich beyond your dreams. Every billion-dollar petro-business will shower you with praise and contracts. You will be hailed as a savior of mankind, saving a million jobs and preventing policy mistakes that would have cost many billion dollars. The stake has never been higher.

So who's brainwashing all those French, Japanese, Chinese climate researchers to conspire with NASA against their own interest?
Maybe it is precisely because people have more information sources available now that they realize more often how lacking some articles are.

For example, I have witnessed first hand the campaign for banning ads on Breitbart (which was often pointing to Milo articles like "the pill is making women ugly", falsely claiming they were mysognist), and I have followed Milo for a long time. I was following him on Twitter when he was banned, so I know he didn't call for racist attacks on the Ghostbusters actress as many articles claim. I have asked people to prove to me that Breitbart is antisemitic (while employing Jews like Milo) and received no replies. Therefore the article simply seems laughable to me. In fact the way Milo is mentioned is often a quick way to judge an article - if they claim he called for harassment of the Ghostbusters actress, it is bunk.
It looks like the model has interoperability for both shared and private, but there is only one reference I can find to private annotations:

Source: https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/
Kindly see the longer time period:

https://xkcd.com/1732/

"When the people say ''the climate has changed before'' these are the kinds of changes they're talking about"
I wonder how Genius feels about this news. But they were the ones rooting for this future, so probably they will be happy I think.
We've asked you many times to stop making personal attacks and post civilly and substantively, so we've banned this account.
I think the point is that memorizing bubble sort doesn't prove anything.
How ironic is it that if the OP, and those supporting them, had spent some time and not taken the easy route they could have rewritten their entire idea in a constructive way which would have not set off the shit storm occurring on this post...
See e.g. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/26/robert-merc...
Reverse turing test as an actual game: SpyParty
Which is the meat of the article.

This is definitely the point to make a "did you read the full article" check.

My reading of it was that people were clearly seriously concerned about the current state of the art. The article also considered Future possibilities.
Wondershare Filmora Crack 8.3.5 Key 2017 Download [Free] Full Version
Climate change destroyed civilizations. Any student of history knows this, and that, without even to tease apart the mysterious circumstances of, say the Bronze Age - it is as simple as Greenland getting too cold.

The impulse just "to do" something is a religious impulse.

Global cooling is an ancillary matter; it doesn't change the point. After all, the globe really will cool sometime in the future
Calling it ideological blinders is an easy dismissal, and also one that, IMO, isn't terribly useful.

I think what you're really dealing with is cognitive dissonance: Accepting what the science says on climate probably means accepting that you yourself could be be contributing to a situation that could be a serious problem for your children and grandchildren. It probably also implies making some lifestyle modifications that may feel severe, such as cutting way back on high-carbon activities like driving and meat consumption. In a situation like that, which option is less daunting: Accepting the consensus opinion of climate scientists and all the worry that implies, or going with the denialists so that you can get back to business as usual?
Cryptocurrency Trading Robot Poloniex Bittrex
Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/24/world/asia/north-korea-ki...
"The Publisher receives a notification for any annotations made on their site which are explicitly published publicly. There are two proposed mechanisms for this:

1) a client-side event which informs the page of the annotation's publication URLs;

2) a server-side notification sent to the publisher's “well-known” contact address.

Either or both of these mechanisms may be used, each with its own use cases." https://www.w3.org/annotation/diagrams/annotation-architectu...
A trap most of us will fall in to is to assume intents of the anonymous strangers with which we talk on these message boards. In serious academic-ish discussion, I think we should stick as closely to the topic at-hand and avoid pointing out patterns of argumentation where we're easily led into the abyss of us-vs-them and accusations of manipulation. (Manipulation might be rampant, but hard to objectively define anonymously.)

The GP does some finger pointing ("you know that they are not being honest with you.") which might have detracted subsequent (and valid) questions that could be answered in a more pleasant sense by other HNers. We should set an example, if we're feeling superior.
Good point.

I might be wrong.

I was trying to say that everybody needs to learn how to deal with rude people/comments.

This does not justify the bad tone nonetheless.
The point is - everybody could have employed CA, or other firms with similar offerings. That is the game of the presidential election, which one candidate won. To suggest something sinister went on is far off.
This could be great news for platform interoperability and the open web.
Facebook's Building 8 is working on technology that sounds a lot like telepathy
The "3,854 cores" versus "28 cores" is dubious as always. 3,854 I think counts just the individual fp32 ALUs; a true similar comparison would be number of warp schedulers or maximum number of warps resident at once, or even just SM count (which share a cache).

Apples to oranges (a super-hyperthreaded 1024/2048-bit wide vector machine with minimal cache to a minimally hyperthreaded 128/256-bit wide vector machine with lots of cache).
> If global warming went away tomorrow -- as in, it were to be completely proven to not exist -- every single climate change scientist would be out of a job.

Your mental model of how grants get distributed to scientists is incorrect.
>God forbid Trump actually does something bad

Uhm, is this a joke?

How about having an anti-Semite for a chief strategist[0]? Or selecting a woefully unqualified campaign donor to to lead the Department of Education[1]? How are you feeling about transgender rights[2]? (And let's not pretend this is just about bathrooms -- if you can't use the bathroom in public, you can't go out in public.) Maybe you care about sexual assault[3]?

[0] - http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/trump-campaign...
[1] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2017/01/...
[2] - http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2017/02/23/516837258/5-questi...
[3] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-recorded-havin...
The linked interview with Bryan Cantrill gives a good explanation of why it's broken: a straightforward implementation behaves in a way you never want, with bizarre behavior where the kernel can wake up a thread with an accept() on a fd that has already been closed. linux should just have adopted kqueue or an IOCP model instead.

https://youtu.be/l6XQUciI-Sc?t=3643
How about: "It'll know you when it sees you"
From a cursory glance into the grants and money devoted to climate science research from the UN and others, nearly all of it directly relates to climate change. There is a market for general studies into planetary climate, but they're minuscule compared to the amount of funding provided by the fear of climate change.

To deny the financial link here is purposeful blindness, in my opinion. If all of the studies showed that no climate change was occurring, and all of the studies were funded by oil companies, you'd no doubt be agreeing with me. Actually the studies that are funded by oil companies do show far less climate change, while those funded by the UN show the most. Coincidence? Not a chance.

> I don't agree with the down vote applied to your post. However, the rhetorical device of claiming an opponent has ulterior motives is frowned upon on HN.

Fair enough, but I literally got down voted 5 seconds after pressing submit. I've never seen that before, and I have a feeling I was downvoted by someone without even having my post read fully. It was more of a personal anecdote to myself that there's more here than meets the eye.
Your argument was not made towards "deteriorating journalistic quality". You made two wildly inaccurate statements and are simply not backing them up beyond presenting opinion - rather than scandal exposing - articles where most sources, at the very least, have been more criticized than DN.

And while trying to prove your statements you link to a _tv-debate_, like who's the best tv-debater would matter. That video seem to come from a blatant right-populist account which leaves a bad taste as well, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that one.
>Rather because if the probability weren't so, global warming, as an unprecedented thing, wouldn't be discussed outside of scientific circles yet.

Heres where we disagree.
Sciatic pain is the symptom, you will need to address the cause. Please don't do any exercises that aren't tailored to you. You could make things worse. If you've had it since high school then it really needs addressing by a professional.

Fortunately for me there was no underlying injury and my root cause was a combination of sitting posture, walking gait, muscle tone and genetics (nerve going through glute)

Having the regular physio sessions were by far the most helpful start and the at-home exercises just re-inforced the improvements made.

A couple of general resources I found helpful are the exercises on fixing forward head posture on YouTube and the videos by Kelly Starrett on fixing sitting posture.

For anyone suffering with chronic back pain - please give physio / chiro a chance. Don't just take painkillers for the rest of your life. It can get better.
Raining Frogs
As someone who has received a number of grants, I don't think I'm entirely incorrect here. Although I was exaggerating, the field would shrink dramatically, departments would be shut down or merged, journals would stop carrying articles on a wide range of subjects which would force the researchers to publish into new fields they have no prior experience in. That puts them in a position of competing with researchers already in those fields. With most institutions requiring their researchers to get into journals, you can hopefully see how this would have a very big impact on everyone's career.

I don't think there is actually a prior example of this ever happening as I don't know of any other field of study where everything is based off a single issue. And if that issue were false (yes yes, I know it isn't -- but if it was!) then the entire field would collapse. Something to think about.
I spent about 40 hours in December and January implementing a browser extension for Chrome and a server that speak the web annotation protocol and use the web annotation data model in this specification.

It was very easy to pass the tests the W3C working group used to verify that they had two working implementations of the data model and protocol. Most of the test default to passing if the specified tag is not present. Basically, it's not clear whether a serious, real attempt to use this has been made. I'm unconvinced that the specification is robust enough to be useful without ending up with a lot of vendor lock-in.

The toy extension was playing around with using these annotations to alert publishers and potentially other users of typos in their articles and pages. It would be nice to have a side channel to report typos other than just using the comment section or trying to find an email address. Will the "meta web" ever catch on?

I never published it but I still might add a page about my experience on my website. I have posted about the idea there before.
For the betterment of humanity, let's hope not. Lest we create another DJT.
That's a lot of extra text (eyeballing, looks like about 50%) to support something that wasn't your point.
I don't think it's pride in ignorance as much as pointing out how disconnected the hiring process is from the work being performed.
If you are actually "bringing in" unqualified candidates and interrupting your team by asking them to interview people who are not at all qualified, that is your fault, not the recruiters.

A 30-45 minute phone screen that you do one on one could quickly filter out those who don't meet the minimum bar for the job.

I went to one interview three years ago without a phone screen, a phone screen would have been better for both sides. After 20 minutes in the on site interview, I couldn't even feign interest anymore. I just went through the process after the first 20 minutes so the recruiter -- that I had worked with off and on for years -- wouldn't look bad.

I said I would never waste my time going to an in person interview without a phone screen.
Anyone in Montréal or Edinburgh who's interested in working on a company that does greenhouse gas and land use assessments, this company is hiring for Django and ReactJS:

http://stackoverflow.com/jobs/companies/ecometrica
Of course. But there's a difference between knowing that there are failure modes, and actually knowing them.

Non-containerized environments (VMs, bare metal) are well-understood and fairly predictable; Docker and Kubernetes are moving targets. There are "known unknowns".

As an example, I am involved in a project that uses continuous delivery for deploys, and we recently had an incident where the GKE node ran out of inodes because Docker was keeping all the layers of dead containers around. Kubernetes handles this correctly: Best-effort pods were evicted and the node went back to being ready once the inode use went down. PostgreSQL would have stayed up in this case, but it was still a little surprising that GKE, which is nominally managed, does not have a process in place for cleaning up Docker's garbage. (Edit: Apparently it's a bug [1].)

When discussing Docker and Kubernetes, there are very often edge cases that come up. For example, until a couple of months ago, Kubernetes had a serious bug that would often cause the wrong network volume to be mounted to a new pod. You can be the world's best containerized-database admin and still be surprised by things like this, which have nothing to do with the nature of containers, and everything to do with the specifics of the software that controls them.

[1] https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/41033
My wife just messaged me about this saying: "I'm finally on-trend!".

She still uses her old Nokia as an alarm and normal phone.

Uses a wifi-connected smartphone for everything else.

Don't ask me why.
> every single climate change scientist would be out of a job

That's very flawed reasoning: Do you think these scientists didn't have a job before?

> I was also thinking about the papers on Agile vs global warming, and the Agile papers generally read as far more balanced and generally go into much deeper detail than any global warming paper.

Where are you getting your global warming papers from?
True but some Greeks really were Buddhist. Remember Bactria is pretty far from Greece
VJing with Web MIDI and RxJS
I like the response peer review or STFU. Maybe PRoSTFU.

What is that technique the fake-reasonable argument makers use? It's like a Gish gallop but slower. Maybe that's the best description of it.
Read the W3C Recommendations for the protocol and data model. Neither has any mention whatsoever of a notification or alert:

https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-protocol/

https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/

Any type of notification would be an extra feature performed by annotation software, but is not a part of the specification.

Your annotation client could query the annotation server at a known endpoint for new annotations. The results should be ordered and paginated, but the order and pagination used seem to be at the discretion of individual implementations.
So by your logic, human-piloted cars shouldn't be sold either, as humans are not able to detect things 100% of the time.
> I wish Apple let others use macOS and iOS on other hardware.

Probably would do jack all good, as the tight integration between hardware and software is likely what makes iOS anything special.
> What matters, and what lenders look at, is debt serviceability.

Quite true. But it also implies something else: Because the disparity of income levels in the US is so broad, just talking about the problem in terms of national totals and averages is useless. Show me the problem divided up by quantiles of the population, maybe even log-scaled as you get closer to the top, and then I might believe that there's a problem.
I always find it odd how the Cambridge educated prime ministers seemingly dried up, one would really expect it to be closer to a 50/50 split as it had been in the past.
Europe is actually going to keep their 2G network around while they take down the 3G network and deploy 4G.
Never got too far into Haskell despite reading up on it several times and writing a little code, but adding constraints does sound exactly like this. One of the prototype P6 implementations was written in Haskell, so P6 stole some features. The only thing I'm not sure about is Haskell does this at compile-time and P6 does this at run-time I believe.