skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Other than below what are some of the other arguments against NN? I also have a number from 0 to 5 next to each indicating how plausible I find these arguments, please shed more light on this if needed as well:

- 3 caching, if you're closer to a cache edge you pay less.

- 1 we give you a heavily discounted data plan but show you only content we want to make money off of you, argument being at least you get something instead of nothing if you're very poor.

- 2 regulations are mostly bad, you don't want government sticking its nose in everything.

- 0 monopolies want their moat to grow.
The safe default for any kind of disclosure is opt-in.
> ancient ideal
> truth-seeking

Surely you realize how much of an oxymoron that is.

Follow an unrealistic and impractical standard, just as your forefathers have. Why? Because it is righteous and good.

There's no point in finding the truth. Perhaps if your knowledge seeking gives you positive neurochemical feedback, more power to you, but to denigrate all of society for not conforming to your ideals is a very ugly personality trait.
I'm not sure what exactly you mean by that, but what I was trying to say is that you can't expose Rust directly, you need to expose a C ABI. Which is totally doable, but is not just "drop in Rust code and it works."
A college degree, in my opinion, has little to do with the degree or the technical material you learn.

the value of attending college and completing a four-year degree at an accredited university comes from the environment you're ingrained in for that time. The people you meet, the conversations you have and experiences you expose yourself supersedes the raw material in the curriculum.

Don't get me wrong, the stuff in the textbox are important but I think you get your real value from the experiences and the relationships you make with your peers and instructors.

Is it worth going into debt? I'm not sure, I'm Canadian and was able to get a CS degree for 50K (Not that crippling of a debt). For me, it was worth the time and money.
How is this worse than the "gifv" that Imgur introduced?
... from 2005
I can only comment about the years I spent in school there. I think Soviet era of education pretty much ended with my generation when the old school staff reached retirement years. I have no idea where Russian schools rank nowadays. I heard pretty low.
It's never quite clear where the back button will take you

I have an Android phone where the back button is drawn on the screen, not a hardware button. Why can't it display some additional information about where it goes when I tap it?
Ask HN: Startup competitions with cash prizes (not notes/investments)?
I heard of one with a $x00k prize, all cash, not an investment. They didn't know the name of it.

Anyone know of things like this?
You can study from 3 to 8 years depending on how much free time you have. There are only three deadlines each year - two for coursework assignments and one for exams. It takes me at most 5 days of study per course before each coursework and before an exam, so 15 days of study per course. You can take up to 4 full or up to 6 half courses per year.

And yes, you have to be physically present at an exam, but not necessary in London - there are examination centres all over the world.
Crypto assets
What are the legal implications of running a crowd-sourced 'hedge fund' for digital assets?
In the near future: "To provide optimum security and privacy for your internet browsing, you must now install our Comcastic™ Special Magic Certificate®. Failure to install our certificate will result in browsing being restricted. If you don't like it, go to a competitor."
Underrepresented != Treated poorly.
Beware of blaming the system when the more likely problem is that enough people don't care about the issue.
Rather than answering a direct question, you have replied with a hypothetical action by a hypothetical president who you don't know personally. This is the sort of behavior that drove me away from politics as a useless exercise. Please, get more involved. I think it would suit you.
If SV is actually a great place for women to work, then front-page stories about it being awful isn't going to help increase the number of female CS students.
I was expecting Raspberry Pi
There is no contraction, engaging the world, especially those that may not agree with you, is potentially dangerous and if you're afraid to do so, then don't.
Very nice! I'll shamelessly add a little Game of Life comparison in SVG[1] and REGL[2].

[1]: https://sketch.expo.io/H1Z4WGIix

[2]: https://sketch.expo.io/HkjUrfIje
> maybe a treatment similar to the ones used to treat opioid addicts

This would have made it illegal for over consumption of food, illegal for supplying to much and eventually arrest if you did not comply.

You would have been offered treatment, but like opioid abuse it would be far from perfect.

I'm not sure it's a better world this way.
Love these stories. That's the way you do it. No whining. Pick a goal and work harder than others to achieve it. Plain and simple.

Also very much related to another discussion where the top n% (the rich) are blamed for just about everything. Here's where I get pounded [1] for daring to say opportunity in the US is what you make of it and the top n% have nothing to do with it.

I am sure there are a thousand people who want to be Bill Mei. Yet few are willing to take the risk and invest the time and effort he did in order to rise well past the average. What's sad is when some choose to blame people like Bill for their own failings.

Want a formula to be rich by the time you retire at, say, 55 years of age?

Work your tail off so that by the time you are 20 you can start to put away $1,000 per month.

In other words, be Bill.

Be frugal.

Invest the money somewhere relatively safe where you can earn at least 7% per year on average. If you pay attention that is not difficult at all in the long term.

Marry well.

Be frugal.

Do this and you'll reach 55 years of age with around two million dollars in the bank.

Continue to do it until you are 65 and you'll have nearly four million.

Or, if you actually start drawing $25,000 a year from your investment at 56 years of age, you will reach nearly $3.4 million by age 65.

It's actually better than that because I compounded interest annually in my calculation.

With the opportunities available today in the US (and other places) almost anyone can work hard for a couple of years and get to the point where they can save $1,000 a month. This is particularly true for a couple. The key is not to burn cash on stupid shit, which can be hard. After a while you make it part of your normal process. I drive a car with over 200,000 miles. I can go out and pay cash for just about any new car in the market today. Waste of money.

Not that hard folks.

I wish they taught kids about finance and money in high school.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13848530
> If it is used in a proprietary product, and never given back, from the perspective of the open source world, that use of the code might as well have never happened.

That's obviously not how it works in the real world. Out of ten people, 5 might give back, and 5 might not. You're essentially saying then that the contribution of the first 5 isn't worth it, because the other 5 wouldn't be contributing. Any contribution is great. The more a library is being used (commercially or non commercially), the more contributors it'll have in the long run. It's not a zero sum game.
Another phase, another chapter
Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom to Pitch Universal Healthcare for California
The studio's newest game, Abzu, is on PC as well and is gorgeous.
Did I say otherwise? Underrepresention is a problem worth addressing in its own right.

There's also evidence (e.g. in the linked article) that women are indeed treated unfairly.
Comcast is now a massive company that offers a lot more than telecommunication services. A lot of people really like many things that Comcast owns.

While we've set up a complex representative government to try and hold the people in power to account, that is still much more rigid and manipulable than the fluidity of a highly-competitive commercial market.

We need to focus on making the markets run well organically, not trying to make things happen by fiat.

Net neutrality is arguably part of that, but it's not the only, or even the major, part of it. The biggest part is finding some way to allow open competitive access to the in-the-ground infrastructure that runs modern telecoms. Net neutrality is a band-aid to cover up the fact that most Americans are beholden to a single ISP for data services. In a functioning marketplace, it wouldn't be necessary, because if $ISP_Y slowed down $Site_X, $ISP_Y's users would, in theory, move to $ISP_Z.

In reality, most consumers would probably happily accept a plan that allowed universal access at 5mbps and "turbo access" to some sites in exchange for a lower monthly fee. I understand that makes some people unhappy, but that doesn't mean we should deprive people of the freedom to make that tradeoff if they wish to do so.
And rightfully so, since taking care of it would mean the Ministry of Communications has deemed the current available bandwidth sufficient for serving the government's approved content (propaganda), thus eliminating the need for improved infrastructure. People should be in the fields growing food for their comrades anyways, not sitting on the internet.
No one wants to see our true self? Maybe not. Or maybe you are missing the fact that friends who say, "be yourself" have probably seen bits of your true self and liked it, and are just trying to cut through your anxiety. You're coming to someone saying, "I want them to like me. Should I be like this? Should I be like that?" If you're lucky enough to be talking to someone who genuinely likes who you are, they are not going to tell you to be something else, just "yourself."

In the advice context of the article, the goal is (for an arbitrary person) to be successful and liked by an audience (whether the TED audience, or an audience of employees, or an audience of TV viewers, or in front of friends and acquaintances). In that context, I'd say being authentic doesn't make you likable, but if you can be authentic while simultaneously being likable, people love that.

Brutal honesty, which is a different thing, will not win you friends. No one likes the person who says, "What? I was just being honest!" Social interactions are transactional and layered with meaning. "I want to have sex with you right now" is not merely a random act of stating a fact, and neither is a personal criticism (e.g. "you're ugly"). An exec who asks her employees for emotional support is making an ask that may not be comfortable.

My advice is to learn to be more authentic (with fewer self-inhibiting inner dictates), for your own personal reasons, and simultaneously to learn how to better relate to other people.
What do you think a consciousness is?
It must be a very small subset of English speakers for whom the word "excellent" can only be read in a Bill & Ted accent, so I suggest this is bogus argument.
It’s Possible to Hack a Phone with Sound Waves
I don't mean to hijack the thread but would you mind sharing how you got to where you are?
SpaceX, despite all its geek-cred, is still solidly an enterprise B2B provider. At this point, however much I'd like to comment, I have nothing to say except that if the been-counters in the DoD (and the other satellite companies) approve, they probably know what they're doing.
Ha! Ironically enough, the namecalling part you're pointing out now, is the result of my loosening-up on my own self-editorial controls, because I knew this part of the thread wouldn't end up seeing much daylight, and I started treating it as a one-on-one correspondence! (And I was still rushing a bit.)

What I'm getting at is more that making offenders into victims is precisely the intent of the whole system. It's not that the categories are supposed to be mutually exclusive, it's that we are trying to make them as close as possible to 100% mutually overlapping. (If they were 100% mutually exclusive that would mean one class of people was victimizing another class and getting away with it.)

Now... is it cruel to do this? Probably. It might be nothing more than vengeance. Does it lead to recidivism ("cycle of violence")? Yup. But it exists for the benefit of the victims. (Does it actually benefit the victims? Not necessarily. It doesn't bring back their murdered relatives for example. But at least they have a sense that they live in a just world where someone's looking out for them.)

So in other words it is intentionally cruel. Which is why, if anyone is worried about the cruelty of the system, there are ways of staying out of its jaws, mostly involving not being a jerk to your fellow man in the first place. (Does this guarantee you won't be wrongly convicted or even stop-and-frisked? No.)

Anyway you're doing your editorial job and I don't particularly mind being detached from the thread -- actually I'm sort of enjoying this part now. But there are basic parts of who I am that don't fit in with Hacker News, too.
If truthful news reports make SV look bad, the problem ain't the news media.
Haskell: avoid success at all costs.
> orthogonal

Do, by chance, mean to say irrelevant, tangential, or independent? Orthogonal is a $10 word and really does not help in contributing to understanding during a discussion.
Once you understand how videos are encoded, it's pretty obvious why gif (and apng) are not and will never be as small as videos. Videos use temporal data. You have one key frame (where the whole image is stored) and the following frames are encoded as delta (difference) from the previous frame. So a still video could basically be the size of a single image.

Animated images aren't that smart, they're just a bunch of images, so you're storing every single frame.
Some technologies are not used by the vast majority of people (e.g: Erlang, Oz, Haskell, Prolog) but working with them will always offer you a valuable lesson if they teach a different paradigm.

e.g: the actor model, dataflow concurrency, logic programming and so many more stuff. Those are extreme examples of different paradigms.

So, the question now is: are you cultivating skills related to an obsolete paradigm, or a skill that you cannot trade in the market? If so, that's not good.
Wow! I did not know the dropout rate was so high for the OU
Linux and Windows Kernel Comparison (2003)
> For example, there are folks that want municipal police powers curtailed and the EPA unleashed, while other folks want the opposite.

Curtail them both. I'm building a barn, not a running an open pit mine. A federal agency shouldn't have a say in what kind of barn I build for my own personal use on my own personal property.

Less is more when it comes government.
Enlightenment is basically just being woke on a much larger scale.
gifv isn't a new file format at all. It's simply an mp4 video with gifv as the extension.
> going out and engaging the world is potentially dangerous

Do you think this is reasonable in the context of expressing your support for the leader of your nation at your workplace? I certainly don't think so.
Try replacing those with videos and stand back as the CPU fan spools up at full power.
IIRC, original name was "Standard Markdown" which the original author had issue with... "Common Mark" or "Github Flavored Markdown" not implying such.
Maybe I'm a lazy asshole, but I how can anyone cram-learn like that? 8am-9p everyday? Come on?! I applaud your effort. I really do. As long as your employer, and you, have the proper expectations about your skill set then I guess it's the perfect match.
> Did this company violate their own privacy policy?

The original suit claims "Defendant never informed Plaintiff that it would monitor, collect, and transmit her Usage Information" and "Plaintiff never provided her consent to Defendant to monitor, collect, and transmit her Usage Information".

And the proposed settlement requires changes to disclosure statements.

> but didn't actually do anything beyond collect standard usage data.

Leaving aside the disclosure question, the product category itself raises the question of what do we consider "standard usage data" in this context? (We talk a bit about this aspect in our DEF CON presentation follow-up TEDx talk here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxRSjC1rPmA )

The app transmitted: time of use (ergo duration); internal device temperature; and, real-time pattern & intensity settings. It was also aware of geographic location of the people using the app. Why does the later matter? At a minimum because adult toys are illegal in some locations.

There's already examples of home automation units, car telemetry loggers and heart pacemakers being used in law enforcement investigations so it's not a stretch to imagine real-time sex toy data also being used.

I believe that developers and manufacturers have a responsibility to the people who choose to buy/use their software/devices to not just "collect all the data" particularly when their product is of an intimate & personal nature.
I don't understand how it's 'more moral' to abdicate responsibility to the toss of a coin than to choose as best you can based on what you know. That seems like saying the 'moral' answer to a trolley problem is to run away from the lever so that whatever happens is 'not your fault'.
Is there a need for Braille beyond historical or nostalgic concerns?
Will Keras2 support PyTorch as backend, in the future?

Answer: [0]
No, there are no plans to support PyTorch. There is nothing to be gained in supporting every novelty framework that crops up every quarter. Our goal is to make deep learning accessible and useful to as many people as possible, and that goal is completely opposite to building up deep learning hipster cred.

[0]: https://github.com/fchollet/keras/issues/5299
If the dropout rate is 87% with 100,000 enrollees, but if a university is 90% with 5,000 enrollees, the Open University still wins. And then you take into account the number of people who enroll for OU who enrolled because of the lower barrier to entry vs their level of commitment.
Everyone has a bias, plain and simple. You don't overcome the bias with programs or incentives, it takes a fundamental change of attitude among the people perpetuating the bias. Its something that should be acknowledged and pointed out but not forced down people's throats.
Remote DoS vulnerability found in Bitcoin Unlimited, 75% of BU nodes are down
> there's nothing exceptionally ignorant about voters of _today_

What makes you think that? It certainly doesn't seem true based on direct observation.

It seems to me that Americans today a lot more certain of various false things than they were during the 1970s, 80s, or 90s.

Not that people haven't always believed lots of incorrect things, but if we could (magically) get the data and find out, I'd be very surprised if it didn't show people believe more incorrect things today than in (say) the 1980s and they are more confident (sure they are right) in their wrong beliefs as well.

Of course, this is one of those very tricky subjects, and I am not aware of any high-quality data on it. So I could be wrong, my experience may not be representative, and maybe people were historically as ignorant as they are today. But I doubt it.

The "filter bubble" and the explosion of authoritative-looking-but-totally-full-of-shit sources are probably major contributors to the phenomenon.

Also, I think that the ratio of basically correct, informative information to garbage info has inverted. For example, IIRC in the 1970s and 1980s, seems to me people had maybe a dozen or two dozen regular news sources. Most news sources -- major newspapers, ABC/CBS/NBC news -- were mostly accurate.

That's certainly not the case today. The overwhelming majority of information most people intake is completely inaccurate or fabricated. It's not really "news", it's advertising, propaganda, for-profit clickbait, whatever. And yet, many people seem to have the same confidence in it and it seems to shape their beliefs in a similar way.

It feels like people know more things than in the old days, but if they know more incorrect things, then I think that's "more ignorant" when you tally it up.
Widespread platinum anomaly documented at the Younger Dryas onset
Discovery of widespread platinum may help solve Clovis people mystery
> Is it really that hard to come up with something new these days?

legitimately "new"? sure, for the most part.

however, "something new" isn't always the ends of game development.
Speaking about battling ourselves: I recently started questioning whether we're truly free – as in, do we have complete control over the decisions we're making.

There are certain things about ourselves we simply can't control, such as our parents, where we were born/raised, our genetic makeup, the structure of our brains, etc, and these things highly influence our decision making.

So it looks like there is constant battle between who we want to be and who we truly are.
If you don't accept the GPL license, then the code is not open to you. Treat it like you would any other closed source code: don't use it.

If you have such a noble use of the code, feel free to ask the authors to be charitable and license it to you under different terms.
There is giveaway going on for it - https://gethealthpack.com/giveaways/the-legend-of-zelda-brea...
Maybe you are right and there is some subset of mathematics so complex and lengthy that it becomes incomprehensible without a concise shorthand. I don't know enough about high level mathematics to refute that. I do know that the original article we are commenting on is not an example of that.

I do think by switching to code we don't need to lose the ability to declare new semantic meanings. But instead of inventing new ways to draw things, we can rely on our existing language. We define new functions. That's the beauty of having a standardised flexible language.

You write that mathematicians like to declare new notation. I think that's actually a liability. Like another commenter pointed out in this thread, mathematical notation is sufficiently freeform that there are different "dialects" in different fields of mathematics and it's not trivial to understand one even if you know the other. There is no formal definition, no formal grammar.

At the same time I just don't know if "H^ * (pi_1(RP^2)) with a line over RP^2" is actually better than
inducedHomology(fundamentalGroup(OnePointCompactification(Projectivization(RealAffineSpace(dimensions=2))))) nor that it's desirable to want to compress it down to 6 small symbols. Obviously if you are going to use such a formula a lot, just like in programming, you'd "refactor" it into a parameterised function. Now you have reduced the cognitive overhead of understanding every use of this formula going forward. As a reader, you understand that function once and when you see it again you don't have to reparse it or scan for differences from previous similar incantations. DRY applies to mathematics too.

Expressing the math in code, to me, means to express it with a small library of primitives, unambiguously and formally. (Regular mathematical notation is ambiguous, like the multiplication example I mentioned, for example, and can define new primitives as it goes along.)

Now combine that formal code expression with best practices for programming like sensible variable naming, DRY and so on and I really feel there should be some kind of tangible advantage. (That's before we even start to think about the possibility of unit testing parts of a greater work. Have there ever been instances of someone writing a physics paper and having a calculation error somewhere deep inside?)

At the risk of paraphrasing you badly, you write that you just don't think it's worth the time to express all the varied mathematical concepts in code because the math is too complicated. I feel the opposite. Because it's complicated, it'd be good to take the time to express it plainly.