skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's not controversial, it's just not what philosophy is I think.

Far be it from me to be able to give a precise (much less consise) definition of what it is exactly, but it's not merely the hypothetical phase when doing science.

Immediately metaphysics comes to mind as a philosophical field that is 'unscientific' in the sense that sometimes(mostly?) advances are not made by empirical measurements in an axiomatic system, but by convoluted and extreme thought-experiments with 0 experimental underpinnings.

Another example is pointed out above, in the philosophy of mind, about the fundamental difference between seeing an experience happen (for example with a brain scan/direct measurement of neurons) and actually experiencing something. That is not something that you can easily touch with science/surveys/brainscans/etc.
At least in Rust's case, RAII/lifetimes provide mostly the same development experience without GC overhead.
On iOS it takes a single TouchID auth and a few message prompts to sign up for a recurring subscription - you won't ever be asked for payment again. I'm certain Android is similarly streamlined.
1. Add more chars
2. Acquire medium or add their on blogging container.
https://medium.com/@hungrycharles/3-things-twitter-can-do-to...
I've done my fair share of mortgages and this pretty accurately matches my experiences, though some banks are better than others.
There are public talks on Youtube from Amazon.com titled "Drinking our own Champagne" where they say the opposite.
Not poor taste at all. Love GCP. I actually host two corporate static sites using Google Cloud Storage and it is fantastic. I just wish there was a bucket wide setting to adjust the cache-control setting. Currently it defaults to 1 hour, and if you want to change it, you have to use the API/CLI and provide a custom cache control value each upload. I'd love to see a default cache-control setting in the web UI applying to the entire bucket.

I also want to personally thank Solomon (@boulos) for hooking me up with a Google Cloud NEXT conference pass. He is awesome!
Thanks for breaking our connected homes, Amazon
Their argument is persuasive. Prominent figures should take care before taking pragmatic steps that likely to further entrench the powerful.

Of course they risk becoming a standards body whom no one follows.
Just because someone happens to work for Walmart/Uber/whoever, I don't see why it means that employer suddenly becomes responsible for meeting any particular set of needs that person might have.

You would have been the "awful" kind of slaver back in the day.
Swift is garbage-collected – it might not have a tracing GC, but ARC is essentially compile-time GC – certainly, from the perspective of a developer, ARC is extrordinarily similar to a tracing GC (with some small caveats).
Question is, does the gov specify what actions to take when a word is encountered? Sure scan for them, maybe report them but banning, blocking etc without proper investigation seems more a typical Paypal thing I have come to expect over the years working with them than something the US gov would specify.
I read something a while back (maybe here?) and I wish I could find the quote but my google-fu is failing me now, anyways it's something like this: "If the corporate structure is set up in such a way as to diffuse responsibility so thinly that no single person can actually be held responsible then the corporate structure is broken." This is a problem in many, many corporations but Uber is an extreme example. Kamel is just trying to hold someone responsible for the pay changes. Of course Kalanick is going to try to reject responsibility, it's what corporate America has taught him to do. That just seems a little messed up to me.

EDIT:

Furthermore, there is no good reason that a CEO should not work for the board as well as for their employees and their customers. Or maybe it's that the board should be looking out for their employees and customers. Either way, somebody should be listening to guys like Kamel so that outbursts like this don't have to happen.
Swap out DYN DDoS with AWS outage and this is very relevant
So, reason isn't actually for reasoning, because we can't (or don't) actually do that. But somewhere in this, he used reasoning to arrive at his conclusions. That is, on some level his position is self-refuting.
What's the point if you can't interact with the DOM?
Almost all examples of webassembly just render to a canvas.

Does this mean instead of a normal "native app" I'm going to start getting C applications compiled with wasm and distributed in electron? What does this possibly gain the end user?
Snapchat Spectacles used as a creative cinematography tool
> If it is up to them to fuel the change, it do make them wrong.

So you're saying if a murderer says murder is wrong, and it is up to them to fuel the change, then murder is right?

> A better comparison would be to murder someone and write an essay about how the world is a violent place.

So you're saying that in this case murder would be right?
Same for me, I actually have mine (a relatively cheap speedcube) on my table at the office. When I want to clean up my mind, I scramble and solve it. I use Roux's method, which is surprisingly light to learn and satisfying to execute
So, it matters that it was lowered but actual amounts are inconsequential? I reject that.
Good riddance! It was crap anyway. I must have submitted sites of mine half a dozen times or more. None of them ever showed up in DMOZ's directory—even though they made you do most of the work for them, by filling out submission forms.

Contrast that with Google, who often have content of my sites returned in search results, within days of it being published—without me having had to lift a finger.

The idea of "human curation" is fine in principle but, as sites like DMOZ, Wikipedia, StackOverflow, etc show, it very often ends up being monopolised by a few self-important nobodies seeing it as a way to wield some authority in life.
It's probably not even possible to offer US cable networks outside of the US. They only have licenses from the content creators to show inside the US.

Besides, all their competitors are US only as well - Sling TV, DirecTV Now.

Someday who knows, but for now live linear is very region-locked.
Product Management Insights 2017 – Free Report [pdf]
>1) Trolls love twitter. ... They gotta go.

I've been hearing this since trolling was invented on Usenet. No one is going to rid the Internet of trolls unless all of the big players enforce RealName™ and we all know how well that ended. "Culling the trolls" means different things to different people, and probably almost every one of us has at some time in our internet lives posted something that another group would consider trolling.

> they gotta cull a lot of trolls, spammers, and free riders, and that's going to hurt their monthly usage numbers.

From the handful of times I've clicked on a link to a tweet and then wandered around, I would bet that the trolls, spammers, and free riders make up something like 98% of their users, so I'm not sure this would really solve anything, since presumably their gross revenue is driven by the numbers of users.
Thanks for the comment, but we were discussing work in a specific context. Instead of being so uncharitable, you could have asked what is being discussed.
> Nip arguments in the bud, not at the leaf.

I like that attitude.
>EC2: why are you replicating EC2 instances or AMIs across regions?

Exactly to avoid single region outages?
YC - Love the blog post intro format. If you offered a daily email with new YC company descriptions I would subscribe (just subscribed to weekly). I've invested in over 100 startups--this is more than curiosity.
Worldmap chat-app built with GraphQL subscriptions
How the Trolls Stole Washington
+1. As someone who has struggled to understand math for a long time, I have come to appreciate that it's not about finding any "intuitive" description of a system but rather the one that's compatible with the underlying mathematics.
That photo needs updating.

And I have to remind myself to get a Z620 workstation, perhaps two of them. So compact, so cool.
And good enough is the enemy of at all. Love this little piece of wisdom from Paul Buchheit.
Stealth is not boolean.

Supercomputers with huge antenna arrays will not fit into aircraft. Aircraft radar will not fit into the small-diameter head of an air-to-air missile.

Becoming aware of a target is not the same as tracking a target.

Occasional detection is not the same as reliable detection.

China being able to do something against stealth does not mean that every other country can do the same thing.

BTW, there are motives to both hide and exaggerate military capability. Perhaps several countries have what China claims to have, but China itself doesn't have it.
Unable to log into my servers. They are still up and taking traffic, but no contact. Also unable to provision new servers at this late hour.
For example, the premier piston engine maker Pratt & Whitney started developing jet engines, with a late start compared to the Brits and the Germans, or even the steam turbine maker General Electric, but they nevertheless became very successful in it.

I think what was needed for the drastic change was, first, the threat of competition, and second, applicability of at least some portion of current skills and assets.

Could oil companies or coal power plant operators work outside fossil fuels? I guess oil companies could still do solar or wind projects because they have project management, engineering and offshore knowhow etc, often in challenging countries. They could also develop alternative fuel refining and distribution. They also have good investor relations. I think BP at least attempted something like this.

Coal plant operators could operate many other kind of power plants too.
> Care to elaborate?

Not the parent, but I do have a background in physics.

Positivism is broadly the philosophy that underlies all of science. i.e. the philosophy that there is a real world external to our minds, and that it can be understood.

Confusing that with relativity is... bizarre. It confuses the foundation of science with individual bricks that are built on it.

> It might not be our modern view but it seems Heisenbergs view on the origin of QM is very much that. He wanted to work with the observable transitions directly rather than any assumed underlying reality, hence his matrix mechanics.

At a certain point, the distinction between theories becomes philosophical. If both theories describe the same underlying reality to a similar approximation, then for all intents and purposes, they are the same theory.

The philosophy behind the theory is used to motivate extensions to the theory. i.e. edge conditions where the theories make different predictions. At that point, the theories are distinguishable.

It's like arguing whether subtraction is adding negative numbers, or subtracting positive numbers. The difference may be important in some edge conditions, but for most purposes, it's two sides of the same coin.
Sports fans watch live TV. Some people basically consider Sling to be a bunch of stuff you get with ESPN.
I feel ambivalence about formal licensing, but I do agree this would be a positive element.

I would be, even 15 years after the fact, perfectly happy to study intensely for an exam on basic math, data structures, and algorithms, similar to the initial mathematics exams used for the actuarial field. Such an exam would be a lasting and widely respected credential, consistently administered and graded. I wouldn't want to put this kind of effort into a single corporation's exam, because those are graded in secrecy, I have no idea what the credentials are of the people who evaluate it, and I don't get much (any) feedback other than "we decided not to continue with your application at this time...".

My worry comes from regulatory capture. I'd hate to see something like a bar association that forces people to go through a very expensive three year post graduate degree, putting them deeply in debt, in order to meet licensing requirements. Would the governing body be allowed to deny math or physics or non-cs engineering related majors the right to take the exam?

Also, imagine if people who wrote the EJB spec or the ones who decided all client side code should be written in tag libraries gained control over the licensing procedure? Would the test-driven advocates be able to revoke the license from anyone who publicly questions the value of test-driven methodologies?

This could be great - something along the lines of the actuarial exams are appealing to me, as they are rigorous but allow different educational paths to prepare. But this can also go very wrong, it is a real risk.
How many floating-point numbers are in the interval [0,1]?
Oddly, the self promo worked for a Google employee (see the top rated comment by boulos), but not for you.
Deep Learning Lets Regulated Industries Refocus on Accuracy
Where is your trust in basic human values? The behavior you see around you is an effect of pressure from a completely artificial and destructive environment, regardless of what it's called. Using communism as some kind of crucifix for killing every suggestion of change is not working any more; change is coming, like it or not.
Interesting about the bumps. Lately I've been rehashing some typing tutors (I learned how to type at a very young age). One of the pieces of advice I picked up was to retain your index finger on the home row when you press shift. This is actually impossible on some keyboards, but where it isn't impossible, I was surprised at how much better my typing was.

I learned on an Apple and I wonder now if having the bump on the second key has led to a few problems. I find there is a tendency for me to rotate my hand so that the fingers are no longer on the home row. One of the nice things about changing is that when I'm trying to code on the bus or train, avoiding rotating my hands keeps my elbows in and makes it possible for me to work (yes, I like working on the train :-P).

Not entirely sure what the best answer is for this.
Charge users a cent per tweet or some other amount.

I hate doing this but maybe they need to consider a "freemium" model where you get basic tweets at a certain rate limit for free but to do things like post long videos or images directly in the tweet you can pay to do that.

Consider charging for different types of searches a user can do.

Offer researchers and people using Tweets as a dataset for sentiment or other analysis a fee for real-time and direct access to data.
Seems like bad reporting: trying to make a mountain out of molehill. It's the opinion of one driver who happened to get his boss on tape, and had a pretty productive discussion wherein the driver pushed and became rude, more so than Travis. The article painted an inaccurate picture of what happened - it's entirely a non-issue imo.
I get it, context is everything. So yes, given the current climate, it seems initially acceptable to show the entire video.

The problem is, I can't help but wonder if the current context for Uber, puts such emphasis on Kalanick's behavior, that even a normal night out with 2 women is judged negatively. I mean let's face it, he really didn't do anything wrong in the video. He flirted a bit, and tried to have a reasonable discussion with the driver.

When the conversation got out of hand, he left.

It's sad how often people with pitch forks look to even the most normal of behavior, to crucify someone.
You assume that the box says next to it "can answer questions about his career specialism correctly". It probably doesn't. More likely it says "does not appear nervous when asked about his career specialism, and appears to know topics he claims to know" or something more like that.
Any thoughts on why they've chosen tv.youtube.com over youtube.tv?

(youtube.tv redirects to .com)
That's fair enough and I see that point. My intent is not to defend Kalanick, but I do instinctually defend free markets. I think Uber and its drivers found itself in a situation with falling demand amidst rising competition.
I really like the pricing model where prices are both per seat, and price per seat increases as you add features.

It gives you nice geometric growth for the bigger clients (lots of features × lots of users), but also allows you to have a very low cost for the smallest clients (less features for 1 or 2 users).

For some reason, a lot of companies instinctively give discounts for big customers. If anything, you should be charging your enterprise customers _more_ per user, rather than less. They have the money. This geometric pricing model lets you charge big bucks for big customers, and even leave room for a nice discount percentage if it comes to that. Salesforce has been using this model for quite a while, and it appears to have been working nicely for them.
As I read this post, I find myself wondering who the audience is for instructions on how to read a newspaper.

The writing feels almost as if they're explaining some retro tech.
A JavaScript deep learning and reinforcement learning library
Physics is arguably the most successful branch of science (at least in terms of the accuracy of its predictions), and yet physics hasn't resolved the basic dispute between Hume and Kant regarding the nature of causality and objective reality.

Same thing is likely to hold vis-a-vis neuroscience and philosophy of mind.
I'm all for keyboard-centric navigation, but what makes this better than Holmes? It does the same thing, but lets you search all of your already existing bookmarks, and there's no premium version/limitations.

Holmes: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/holmes/gokficnebmo...
And discontinued next year?
If that would make them more money, I expect they would do that. It's obvious from even a cursory look at Twitter's demographics that it wouldn't make them more money and would make them look bad and hurt their bottom line. Much like the alt-right racist contingent makes them look bad and hurts their bottom line.

That would be why I am making a clear distinction between "moral" and "financial". The alt-right is immoral and financially negative. The people you so concernedly cite are neither.
A good thought!

My point was orthogonal, though. I don't want a reviewer directly making committed changes to my code, period. Giving me control isn't about preventing inadvertent calls to sedy. It's about handling when someone suggests a substitution that I don't agree with, or want to reword.

My mindset might be different from what Marmelab intends, but to me, code review is a conversation about the changes I'm responsible for making, not a google doc where anyone can change the content I'm about to push.
Yeah, that is one way to look at it, and I honestly wasn't thinking of that. I was intending it to mean "a lot of courses" as the context was that of an university, but it could also mean "a large project" along the same thought axis.
You still have to ferry data in and out of Javascript to interact with the page. In the long-term, maybe language-specific bindings to interact with DOM APIs will become popular, but otherwise to get anything done in most cases you're probably going to expend enough effort on ferrying things in and out of JS land to negate the possible benefits of not needing to deal with a different language. I'd be surprised if many do it soon for anything more than a small high-performance core or for a large application that has a small DOM surface area (a game that just renders to a canvas).
But doing it has friction, both for the writer and for the readers. If you remove the friction, you get more of it.
Just about every modern Lisp has an X-Expression library, and having used Racket's in production, it's a hell of a lot better than the DOM browsers have today.
Most people in the US don't live in walkable areas, but just how many walkable areas are there in the US? Look up New World Economics on really narrow streets and 19th-century hypertrophism: the answer might be as low as three or four. No wonder it's so expensive to live in them!
Browsers worked just fine before the advent of Javascript. Nobody had to use it, but they decided to use it because it was good enough. If some other language was deemed not good enough, there would have been more aversion to using it, and it would have never taken off.

Not to mention that there were other ways to execute code in the browser in those days. We have 'no choice' but Javascript today simply because it's the option that people eventually gravitated towards, forcing the others out of the market.
I think you confuse the tracing during the interpretation of JavaScript with asm.js&WebAsm. Namely asm.js&WebAsm are designed to avoid as much as possible anything deciding in the run-time, except for verifying and generating the machine code, exactly because these "let's see what the code is doing in the run-time" were already implemented and were used for "plain" JavaScript, but had too much overhead, compared to what asm.js&WebAsm does (or avoids to do), for the kind of uses where asm.js&WebAsm are desired.

For the "plain" JavaScript, there are the run-time decisions.

> Modern CPUs use _some_ runtime information to make code run faster. Examples include branch predictors and the recognition of stride lengths to move data into the cache before the instructions being executed need it.

Sure. But that run-time information is internal to the CPU. And the CPU will use it for the native binary code that is the final result of asm.js or WebAsm, just like any other. But that native binary code is "static," it's explicitly not "small traced chunks" the way "plain" JavaScript is handled.

> I do not rule out that WebAssembly developers, similarly, will find hat there are ways to use runtime information that speed up WebAssembly code.

Think about that: it they would find something like that, exactly the same technique could be used to speed any native code, including Linux kernel and anything native you imagine.

If you manage to develop software method that actually improves the execution speed of the native code in run-time, you'd be famous and (if you know how to market it) rich.
disclosure: I dont like Uber since 2010. I have always felt Uber has used the wrong means to achieve its success, and because of that I dislike Travis. (most of my HN comments about Uber are either neutral or negative). I feel bad for all those drivers who bit the Uber bait and bought expensive cars, with an expensive / sub prime loan. But it is the similar entitled attitude that lead people to hate the cab/taxi drivers/fleets.

With that said, I still think, in this video, the driver was on the wrong side and Travis was not. In fact, Travis starts replying in a fairly equanimous way, and loses it only after the driver starts blaming Travis for everything. If the driver has such a problem with Uber, he should not be driving for it!
8 Maps of the Internet of Things
"simply" indicates you've never tried to stand up a fairly recent javascript stack :D

that being said, you're not wrong. Maybe 5% (maybe less) of the guys out there are smart enough to build libraries and frameworks. the next 45% of the guys out there are smart enough to see all the pieces and figure out how to fit them together.

the other 50% understand syntax and can write code, but aren't capable of any sort of bigger picture stuff.

and if my recent interviews are any indication, the split outside of silicon valley is more like 2/18/80.

Shoot, I'm not in that "let's build brilliant frameworks" crew. I don't think I am at least. Haven't really tried :D
No, I'm first talking about why the writer is not only hypocrite but the vector of the problem.

You may had got into an infinite loop in your own poor comparison, though.
> if they're actually trying to just sell access to OTA network content for $35/mo they are insane.

Which they aren't. It includes (probably) the exact same "healthy selection of channels not available OTA (including FX, etc)" as PlayStation.