skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Some people would say that the relational patterns in numbers are a kind of definition, and that such statements aren't so much truths but consequences of those patterns - and that it's only when you're using the two '1's to represent real world details that the '2' is true or false.

(and BTW, there are real-world situations where '1' and '1' do not make '2'... e.g. putting a snake and a mouse in a box. We only apply maths statements like that to the kinds of entities/situations where they will apply).
In my view, the whole concept of scientism is the last attempt of philosophy to stay relevant, and it's usually only backed up by appeals to emotion and loaded words.

So, the scientist in me asks: what areas of knowledge are out of the scope of science and the scientific method?
Under 5 years, Ariane VI could do it probably. 3 years, i don't think so.
Pretty sure Elon Musk is going to breed an army of giants to colonize Mars.
For whatever reason, it seems like every new language/ecosystem is now judged first by its web-framework bona fides. Which is kind of a shame really.
Judging by some of the 'professional' code I've read over the years, I'd say that's not a particularly high bar...! At least if you're horrified by code you wrote, it shows you care, and that shows some promise :)
Looking at this discussion, I have to say that everyone seems to want what he can't get easily. Looking at the extensive single house areas in the suburbs of the big US cities, I have a voice in my head saying "I want exactly that". Living like this costs only a fraction of housing in a similar size like here in the Frankfurt area of Germany where most ground now is small and freaking expensive. Even better earning people here essentially can now only affort living in apartments.
You haven't really explained why it doesn't.

Choosing a language allows you to automatically translate a bunch of strings used by various packages.

For examples Chapter, Section, TOC and everything that is autogenerated will be translated to a language. It has nothing to do with utf8.

You can remove babel and Chinese, German, Swedish can work in the same file regardless.

\usepackage{noto}

What's hard about that?
I wanted to like this piece. It's got some good bits in it,and boyd's been on fire the past few months. With some credit to the point that the problem isn't trivial, I get the overall sense boyd is simply throwing up her hands, and that strikes me as disingenuous.

@ericdykstra has addressed the question of definitions of fake news, so I'll just repoint to that https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14001745
In Germany we have DIN 4109 that regulates minimal noise dampening for buildings.
What do you mean? How is WhatsApp more "plausibly deniable" than saying these things to someone in person?
What areas of knowledge are out of the scope of science and the scientific method? Um philosophy.....
Yes. Thanks a lot.
The thing about Mars is that it does not solve any problem. It just give us time to solve the problem. It mulitply the chance of humanity surviving a problem that kills our only "capsule", Earth.

And that dangerous event could be external to humanity. So Mars is a part of a solution for all that : buy all the rest of humanity time to solve that problem and making sure enough humans can be born and live so that at least one find a solution. It is the only thing engineers can do. Give us the chance.
Isn't that a pure opinion, of which you simply disagree? It is hardly a rare opinion at that. It's been a problem for the field since the start:

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/is-social-s...

There's no contradiction between having views on social issues, and believing that people who call themselves social scientists maybe aren't following the scientific process as usually understood.
Most of the degree is waste if you want to be a software dev (IMHO).

The industry could do really well out of recognizing that it's a vocational occupation and switching to an apprenticeship model.
Probably T <= 0, multiple universes, inside a black hole, etc. You also can't run an experiment on your own life, not really, since you only have one life and that's not a large enough sample. So questions like "what is true for you, uniquely?"
It could actually decrease reliance on cars. If employers are widely dispersed, then housing within walking distance of any given employer is not in egregiously high demand, and could be affordable to its employees.

There are always going to be more desks than beds in central business districts.
Google Primer Android Animation Open Sourced
Works fine for me. Check your computer for viruses.
The land of the free*.
I think most people just don't know that the political game is a strategical, competitive game. Most people believe the common narrative that politics is the service(!) that should make your life comfortable on a city-wide, country-wide and global level which you pay for with taxes. E.g., $10/month to netflix for that I can watch tv shows. $400/month to government for that I don't get robbed by barbarian hordes from other countries.

It's not the smartest point of view, but it's very common.
Square feet vs square meters is pretty easy because (1 meter / 1 feet)^2 is conveniently close to 10.
To zeroth degree approximation, colleges are cert-authorities
That's an axiom. It doesn't say anything about the real world, it just introduces a framework of thought.

In other words, if you can imagine a reality where 1+1=2 for some meaning of '1', '2', '+' and '=', then a series of conclusions will hold true.
I downvoted it because spreading the myth that "mainstream media is lying" is both low-quality and dangerous, and is otherwise a litany of right-wing talking points that add nothing new to the discussion. I'll gladly reconsider if OP can give me a specific example of the New York Times knowingly publishing a statement of fact, in the last year, that turned out to be wrong.
I do wonder what's cheaper - to allow the publisher to recoup costs in this way or for the state to pay for the service up front? It's troubling though, that such a concern would somehow be more important than ensuring all citizens have open and unfettered access to the law.

It's especially galling that local governments routinely incorporate copyrighted "model codes" into law. These model codes are created by unelected, unaccountable groups that have their own agendas. You also end up paying to get a copy of important things such as plumbing/electric codes.
Braid? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braid_(video_game)
The house where I used to livewas extremely poorly isolated. The computer was in the bedroom (no heating) and during the winter we had to bring in a space heater and direct it at the PC for half an hour or so. Damn thing wouldn't start up otherwise.
I didn't say the legs were going to be re-used. I just said they were painted in a way that the paint can burn away, just like the grid fins. If you're coming down through your own exhaust you don't want to risk damaging the things you land on a few meters above the ground.
Stones don't communicate among themselves, and only change state under the entirely external effort of the entity that moves them. I would argue that the stones would need some mechanism for modifying their own state to even have a slim chance at consciousness. Seeing as stones are inatimate objects that can't possibly operate any mechanism, I think the idea is dead in the water.

Another way of looking at it: the significance of any particular arrangement (or sequence of arrangements) of the stones is only meaningful in the mind of the entity that is moving them around. Or perhaps any nearby viewers with the patience and far-fetched ability to make sense of the iterations of stone arrangements. The internal/external distinction between the stones themselves and the stone movers/viewers seems critical to me.

Software on the other hand... that is a bit harder to categorically dismiss. I think I can imagine software that produces an experience somewhat analogous to the human one.
How do you go about testing the hypothesis that 1 + 1 = 2? Not just showing that a particular physical representation obeys the logical laws of arithmetic, but to test the actual laws themselves.
didn't the uk have an insanely large finance sector for the last few decades?
I don't think australia has one.
Not a strict replacement, but I am really enjoying Elm.

The architecture is very similar - I think it was the inspiration behind Redux. You get to use a more succinct syntax and there is a compiler underneath it that supports the whole process. I have only recently started with it, bit I am finding the adage that 'if it compiles it will work' is proving remarkably accurate.
Large areas of philosophy are routinely demolished by the strangeness revealed by science. Concepts like Time after general relativity, the reach of maths after Godel, existence being coexistence after the discovery of multiverses. Philosophy very often assumes things that the real world ends up proving aren't true.
I got a similar sense of unease from the linked interview, but then found the paper itself to be surprisingly solid: http://faculty.washington.edu/kstarbi/Alt_Narratives_ICWSM17....

Based on a quick read, it seems to have a solid methodology, clearly defines its terms, and is refreshingly upfront about possible shortcomings. I particularly liked this disclaimer: "It is important to note that the first author is a left-leaning individual who receives her news primarily through mainstream sources and who considers the alternative narratives regarding these mass shooting events to be false. This may have affected how the content on these domains was perceived and classified."

So while your criticism is appropriate for most of the "fake news" coverage I've seen, I think this paper gets beyond that to some points you'd probably agree with. Personally, I liked that it didn't try to force the findings onto a linear Left-Right scale, and instead noted the need for a distinct "International Anti-Globalist" cluster as well.
The point is that it's not a hypothesis. Or, at least there are views about maths where it's not a hypothesis.
> If you write your own configure, people may expect to be able to [...] It's a tedious task and easy to get wrong.

The author's point is to do <em>without</em> a configure step entirely, not write your own.

A standard Makefile is perfectly capable of implementing these things in a manner which is clean, reasonably portable and without the level of indirection that makes things hard to debug.

My own experience is that autotools has evolved to feel less standard than the modern platforms it purports to smooth over the differences in; I seem to frequently find that I can't generate a 'configure' for a 3rd party software or libraries from Git repositories because I of the wrong autotools versions. Efforts to investigate this by unpicking the various macros etc. provided in the build have almost always been unsuccessful, leaving me building from distributed .tar.gz files. With something that feels like such a moving target after 30 years, I'm glad to see people realising the benefit of a simple Makefile that's easy to customise for the edge cases.
There is a Small Claims Court in England, with a maximum claim of £10K. I got as far as issuing a Letter Before Action to the tenant's London-based guarantor (the tenant himself hadn't left a forwarding address, and his father is based in the Republic of Ireland where the Small Claims Court has a EUR2K limit), but ended up settling out of court and eating most of the loss.
> in the abscesses of government incentives.

Nice typo. (And nice image.)
Lots of countries don't allow foreigners do buy property in this way to prevent exactly this sort of Bubble.

What might be happening (I think, seen no evidence yet) is that asset managers in banking have moved "safe" money from treasury debt to real estate, because return from treasury debt has moved to close to 0 since 2008. The result is billions of dollars have moved into real estate across the world, fueling what seems to be an increasingly global real estate crisis.
This is not an answer to your exact question, but when people say "falsifiable" they usually mean something much more rigorous than what is possible within qualitative research[0] (and I'm not criticising qualitative research here), yet insights can still be gained from it.

I switched from physics to art to (ultimately) design and programming. You have no idea how much ignorance many physicists have of research that isn't easily quantifiable and turned into predictive formulas. I had to go through a period of growing more "aware" of my tunnel-vision myself. As a result, flat-out rejection of entire fields of research, claiming they do not create "real" knowledge is common.

On the flipside there's people trying to apply physics-style reductionism to problems that simply don't fit, because human societies aren't built up of spherical frictionless humans in a vacuum[1].

Example: I did my master thesis of interaction design on gesture interfaces (the waving-hands-in-the-air kind, not the touchscreen kind), a topic that has been researched over forty years but has yet to really break through. One paper I read mentioned that on average the right index finger was raised one-point-zero-something times more often than the left. Sample size twenty or so. I still don't know how that is supposed to help me design better interfaces; right-handedness being the norm is a known, and I cannot conclude anything from these numbers. But hey, it's quantified and measured, therefore "proper" knowledge!

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualitative_research

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_cow
One trip in which it's the journey, not the destination.
Thanks but it was just web/browser based. No graphics just black and white with a single stick figure.
I like Seeking Alpha. The app is pretty decent.
Is philosophy knowledge? Can I use it, for example, to take an informed choice about the real world? Does it at least contain a set of verifiable, falsifiable statements that every practitioner can and has agreed upon?
Well, news that are truly false can amount to propaganda and I've regularly seen it used to polarize and/or antagonize - so I find your comments about fascism kind of ironic.

I think this whole thing boils down to people not being able to or not knowing how to discern truth from falsehood, rather what people associate with "censorship".
Lots of people left Greece because of tremendous unemployment still being an issue.
They already produce various simulation tools for simulation aspects of factories (robots, production lines, etc). Adding a "RTL simulator" company seems like a logical step, the verification problems share a lot of common and you get to claim that you are able to simulate the industrial robot including its custom microchips, or a car seat (they have custom chips for the airbags for example).
But all that says is that 1+1=2 is too obvious. How about some other, less straightforward mathematical theorem, then, like Fermat's Last Theorem.

You can hardly accuse that of being an axiom, or just introducing frameworks of thought.
The bubble pops when property is not as safe/lucrative of an investment as other instruments, and the foreign investors sell up. House prices go down, but no one can move because their mortgages are underwater (proceeds from selling the house don't match the outstanding debt). Developers stop building because no one will buy the new-builds at a price which will leave them with a profit. The situation is as before the bubble pops, but now everyone is poorer since their (inflated) home equity has vanished.

Usually this happens when interest rates go up, because then it's better to keep your wealth in a more liquid investment like cash. Mortgage payments go up as well, turning the (imaginary) loss of equity into concrete loss of income.
Alex Jones is basically a journalist that mostly does opinion pieces. There is nothing wrong with that.
If I were you, I would use the word "fact" a little less confidently, facts are only facts until disproven and they are always tied to other facts which can in turn be disproven.
Its maybe a matter of taste but I find his other work to be rather pretentious, although geb is entertaining and somewhat useful (I half liked le ton beau de marot).

I really think k there's something useful.in fluid concepts that maybe can help with low data learning. I think geoffrey Hinton hints at it in his lecture about trying to do pca on learned neural states to find manyfold correlations which in high dimensional states are stronger to be nonrandom.
By “scientism,” Pigliucci (2010, p. 235)
means, “the intellectual arrogance of some scientists who think that, given enough time and
especially financial resources, science will be able to answer whatever meaningful questions we
may wish to pose—from a cure for cancer to the elusive equation that will tell us how the laws of
nature themselves came about”

Hm. Is it possible to construct a (sensible) physical correspondence to the incompleteness theorem or to an undecidable problem?
I swear, iOS autocorrect goes back and changes words after you spell them correctly…
> meaning it needs to ask for less from the taxpayer

Or they could align their charges to their costs, and have the users pay for the service.
No bullshit – just news simple RSS aggregator wirh a bit of Machine Learning
A year? Sometimes, a weekend is enough. ;-)

Sometimes, of course, you write code that is just right, and it still is after a year.

But, yes, that "What-was-I-Thinking" moment happens on a fairly regular basis. ;-)
It's the direct result of anti-government propaganda. If you starve the state of financial resources, they will, sooner rather than later, have to cut corners knowing that it will cost more in the long run, just to make the numbers work in the short term.

Sometimes those costs are incurred by future governments (lease-back deals), sometimes by the citizen (here). It's the collective version of living paycheck-to-paycheck.
Sometimes the transit quality matters. When there's traffic but we hit consecutive green lights, we don't go fast but it's smooth, there's not much break in flow, people don't rush and time feels good.
GP said we need a contest – not that we have one. And when New Glenn starts flying in a few years, we'll definitely have that contest. You're right that New Shepard doesn't compare to what SpaceX is doing at the moment, but Blue Origin is working on much, much bigger rockets...
Which should lead to riding slower and being more careful, surely. Experiments have proven time and time again that the more confident we are in our surroundings, the more risks we take - so if a helmet makes it more difficult to know what's around you, it will make you more cautious. If someone riding with a helmet on is not cautious, then surely they wouldn't be cautious without it on, right?

I'm clearly playing the devil's advocate here, but I guess assuming what you are saying is true, it would be choosing between "less accidents, but they are more severe" or "more accidents, but they are less severe". Which one is "better"? Is there a "better" here?
Hi mate, fellow Aussie here. I see you're currently living in China. I'm considering a move there in the next few years. Any chance I could ask you a couple of questions over email?
Oh, he was not saying that there are bad social scientists. This is a completely valid statement to make.

However, calling a discipline unscientific is not a matter of taste or opinion. There are a bunch of scientific methods and as long as you stick with them, you are scientific. No matter how well received your results are. (This, by the way, holds also true for climate science.)

There is a clear contradiction between calling social science unscientific and then relying on their concepts (trust, institutions, applied law, globalism, groupthink, etc.) in the very same argument.

edit: I can not answer to anyone anymore since I'm "submitting too fast. Please slow down." Sorry.
It's not an axiom, it's a theorem (or maybe a definition of "2"). The more usual definition of "2" is "S(S(0))" (the successor of the successor of zero). "1" is "S(0)". "S(0) + S(0) = S(S(0))" is a theorem, a consequence of the axioms "for all x and y, x + S(y) = S(x + y)" and "for all x, x + 0 = x".
Introducing ‘Nadia’, our new virtual assistant“
Got it!!

http://continuitygame.com/playcontinuity.html
So it's something that's not a scientific hypothesis, but is considered knowledge!

(Or, if as in the other comment chain, 1+1=2 is too obvious, you can take any sufficiently non-trivial theorem of your choosing).
As a 2nd semester cs student, that was pretty helpful. I have to design a battleship game in Java and have no idea what I'm doing actually. I'm just staring at the cursor and don't even know where to start, and it's comforting to know that other people struggled as well
The Atlantic writes that launch costs are expected to be 30% lower (40 Million instead of 60 Million), butt customers currently only get 10% off: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/03/spacex-r...
The West Highland Way Trail
How does a CPU work?
There are any number of software entrepreneurs (and, for that matter, insurance agents) who widely vary the amount of time they spend on the business and include many weeks where they look gainfully unemployed.

In terms of what to shoot for, a) recurring revenue (BCC didn't have it and _believe me_ did that radically raise the savviness bar required on the customer acquisition front), b) B2B where something is important enough to need but not enough to require a long sales cycle or urgent support if the thing hiccups, c) a well-understood marketing and sales model that you can semi-automate.

The third thing is probably hardest to build, and as your time scale gets longer, it is the most likely part to require your sustained attention to improve. (I have no information how BCC is doing these days but I rather suspect the original organic SEO strategy which served me well for 5+ years will not continue operating unaltered for 20.)

In terms of where these folks hang out: business owners who have priorities in their life other than the business are still business owners. I think the great mistake in the "passive income" community is failure to treat running a business like running a business; it becomes aspirational for lots of folks who have neither the skills nor the inclination to run a business nor, unfortunately, the desire to change either of those two things.

This makes "passive income" spaces into a whirlwind of depression and hucksterism. Meanwhile, if you ask around the table at MicroConf, you'll find some folks who had a really good year and worked really hard for it and you'll find some folks who phoned it in while taking care of parents, getting married, throwing themselves into a home-building project, starting a new business, etc.

MicroConf, BaconBiz, and DCBKK are three conferences which all had folks who were at many points along the spectrum here. All have online ambits to them, too. (I suppose one could run a not-awful conference about software businesses in maintenance mode but if you have one then flying out to a conference would absorb a few weeks of maintenance mode and be probably a lot more boring than going to MicroConf.)
> Unregistered HyperCam 2

This is legit af