skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
These people arguably changed the world. Early psychonauts and LSD use are tied to the beginnings of the electronic frontier foundation, and the concept of an open information space and an alternative reality for all of humanity to use freely. There is a documentary which shows in interviews that these ideals were at least partially inspired by LSD use.

I hope someday to conquer my anxiety to a degree sufficient to explore beneficial LSD use without fear of so called bad trips. Having tried a small dose, there is without question a power in LSD (and other psychedelics, e.g. shrooms) as a tool.
“All you need to know about Cassini–Huygens‬‬.”
“All you need to know about Cassini–Huygens‬‬.” https://medium.com/lifespark/all-you-need-to-know-about-cassini-huygens-71d8491c4449
On who's part?
DL's optimization is pretty simple SGD. But I would suggest that the type of optimization in deep learning is actually a lot more like geometry than calculus. This was more of a hunch until recently, but some results such as the successful application of tropical geometry and less exotic Riemannian geometry to the analysis of DL loss surfaces are showing some evidence for that hypothesis.
maybe it's better explained by the fact that never before did the social circles of children and adults align so closely.
> First, legal problems: you can't have a unisex multi-stall bathroom in the USA. I'm not sure if it's actually illegal (it probably is in many states), but it'll never fly even if it is.

It is illegal in the US, see 29CFR1910.141(c): "...toilet rooms separate for each sex, shall be provided in all places of employment [...] Where toilet rooms will be occupied by no more than one person at a time, can be locked from the inside, and contain at least one water closet, separate toilet rooms for each sex need not be provided."

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2016-title29-vol5/xml/CFR-...
You have to go a long way down that list, well outside the top 10, to find an airline that offers domestic flights in the U.S.
It could have been flagged by an algorithm, or may be some over-eager Discord developers to remove this post from public appearance.
This is a nice thought exercise...but that this is often treated like one of the great tribulations of our time as developers...it's a bit pathetic. I'm not saying things can't be better, but as a working people, we're not exactly oppressed.
Bad experiences give light to possibly unrecognized problems. As someone who likes using psychedelics, nothing has pushed me more into good experiences and away from bad ones than having a good understanding of the arising and ceasing of mental phenomena as taught in buddhist teachings of meditation.
Whats so scary about bad thoughts if you have a place where they arent there?
My (and many others') objections are that ISP's in the US have been known for a while to be lagging behind the curve across the world in terms of quality of service and pricing. On top of that, they actively lobby against competing startup ISP's and pull dirty tricks to prevent anyone else from entering the market. Now, they want to roll back laws preventing them from charging for traffic based on content. This will make it more difficult to guarantee consistent quality of service to consumers and may also prevent new technology businesses from getting off the ground. It may even lead to a de facto form of censorship if content that large players don't agree with can be throttled. I've heard the argument that it's their business and they can do what they want. The problem with this, however, is that they are providing a service that is essential and not a luxury. Historically, organizations whose main purpose is to benefit shareholders have not been very good at keeping the public's interests in mind. That's why the government needs to regulate services which are essential and why the ISP's have no argument here.
Twitter employees call themselves tweeps, which might be the worst of the corporate self-nicknames.
I always wondered how they benefit from this...

If it's anything like NYC, they (I'm assuming you mean landlords) benefit through tax write-off. They can write off the lost income while they wait for a (hoped for) higher paying tenant.
"not many problems that aren't solved by deep learning"

The problems that deep learning doesn't solve aren't solved by anything else either. There's still lots of computer vision that we cannot do.
Starting Is Easy, Finishing Is Hard
Phoenix, here. If I wanted to move from my grandfathered rental in 85377(VN part of town) to 85020(crack central), I would pay more for the same sqft. My landlord mentioned raising rent back in December, I told him to list it & give me 2 weeks notice. He never received a single call in 30 days. But, yeah, it's "demand" pushing rates up.

From 2013, 25% of acquisitions made by funds:

http://archive.azcentral.com/business/realestate/articles/20...

edit: no shortage of For Sale & empty homes up here, too. Multi-million dollar homes are stagnating on the market for years, and subsequently, plenty are for rent, too.
Thanks; I'm glad it was valuable (and thanks for your contributions too). Just one point in addition to yours:

> I had not checked that ...

I don't want to take those words too literally, but I want to make a point: The implied modus operendi, that the listener checks the validity of the claims, doesn't work IMHO. It's too inefficient - the speaker can make up or repeat or simply be sloppy about many claims in seconds, and you the listener would have to spend hours validating them.

The only efficient model is that the speaker has to substantiate the claims or have them ignored (which is the method of more formal forums such as courtrooms and science). Imagine the signal-to-noise ratio with and without that requirement. Without it, false assertions simply get repeated endlessly because nobody has the time to check them out (and of course repetition is confused with truth). With that standard, much of the noise goes away; rants repeating nonsense quickly dry up. You can focus on the good stuff.

People worry, 'I might miss something important.' You only have time to read a tiny fraction of what's written, and even a tiny fraction of what is well-substantiated. You might as well invest that time on the best knowledge available.
I try to be the last one one the plane even with assigned seating: it gets really hot and unpleasant on the tarmac, and I'd rather spend less time there.
We use both Backbone.js and React.
LLVM is a compiler construction, not a compiler.

If I understand, no languages offer the same assurances, I remember GodBolt is a nice way to explore how it's compile to assembly code you can compare.

https://rust.godbolt.org
https://gcc.godbolt.org
https://go.godbolt.org
I've always been confused about the part of The Matrix where they still bother to grow the whole human, rather than just the brain.
Have you had a look at Korg Gadget on iOS? it's not perfect, but maybe it's model works better for you than GarageBand... I'm a fan.
We must hang out with different folks. Everyone I know thinks that an author deserves payment for their work if they wish.
Working on a gender problem
I'd be interested in a project like this if it was targetting FreeBSD.
From personal experience, telling tech support too little about an error will result in no solution. Being able to tell them too much, oddly, often results in the same.
Because Rust (the language) makes you reason about and define the concepts of ownership, borrowing and lifetimes of variables, and enforces this to the degree that certain classes of bugs are not possible. C does not require (or natively support) that, so this information is not available to the compiler.

It's just like typed and untyped languages. Typed languages require more up front work in that you must define all the types and data structures and which functions can accept them. This is more work than just creating them ad-hoc and using them as needed, but it prevents certain types of errors by catching them at compile time. The ownership and lifetime information for variables is loosely equivalent to that. It prevents certain types of problematic usage. It isn't perfect, and sometimes you have to work around its limitations, but the same could be said of most type systems.

There are plenty of primers on this feature of Rust, I advise you to take a look, you might find it very interesting.
Religion and Education Around the World
Facebook marketing to promote an iOS app
Cool post. A few issues I see:

- 30 people team?! I find 10-12 or so to be the max size before things descend into chaos

- 3 person office seem like a wrong compromise to me. If you want to optimize for focused time, individual offices are best. 2 people offices can be alright, but you'll necessarily have moments when someone comes to talk to your coworker for 30 minutes about blablabla. If you want to optimize for in person collaboration, pick a studio/lab like layout for the whole team (topping out at 10-12). But 3 people is just an odd middle of the road approach that's too awkward in practice, in my experience.

- The wall covering the door is a good idea in theory, but in reality it would probably mean distraction every time someone knocks at the door. How does the visitor see whether the person they want to see is in or not without entering and potentially distracting everyone?

- Bathroom stalls would work if they were fully closed stalls, European style. If this is in the US, then it'd get really awkward as you hear loud farts next to you and recognize the shoes of Jerry from accounting. Individual bathrooms would be much better.

- Those "quiet time" seats seem awfully tight, and the library inconveniently narrow.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ One can only evaluate their own environment and try to improve it. I think this is an entirely valid enterprise
Cassini has been the most incredible mission… so many fascinating discoveries and wonderful imagery. We really need to do more (far more) missions like this.
Lawsuit: State of Oregon doesn’t own word ‘engineer’
Your comment does not address the second clause of the sentence you quote: "...or making available information via telecommunications." Which is cited as a reason to classify it as an Information service.

Your third paragraph, "ISPs object to..." claims that the telecommunications portion is separable from the services provided (such as email, etc.), and yet the document you are critiquing claims the opposite in paragraph 11.

I'm trying to find the reasoning as to why they claim inseparability. It's worth reading a relevant supreme court opinion to get an understanding of the opposing viewpoint [10].

I find that paragraph 67 of the universal service report (USR) to congress from the fcc (Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, FCC 98-67 [20], seems to be a counterpoint to yours. Specifically, the idea of an ISP apart from the physical connection -- ISPs make use of telecommunications but are not themselves the telecommunications service.

"67. With regard to the lines leased by Internet
service providers to provide their own internal
networks, the analysis is straightforward. We
explain below that the Internet service providers
leasing the lines do not provide
telecommunications to their subscribers, and thus
do not directly contribute to universal service
mechanisms."

Paragraphs 80 and 81 of the USR states

"The provision of Internet access service
involves data transport elements: an Internet
access provider must enable the movement of
information between customers' own computers
and the distant computers with which those
customers seek to interact. But the provision
of Internet access service crucially involves
information-processing elements as well; it
offers end users information-service capabilities
inextricably intertwined with data transport.
As such, we conclude that it is appropriately
classed as an "information service."

In offering service to end users, however, they
do more than resell those data transport
services. They conjoin the data transport with
data processing, information provision, and other
computer-mediated offerings, thereby creating an
information service."

[10]https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/04-277P.ZO
[20]https://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/fc...
That depends, are you day trading without knowing what you are doing, or are you just buying to hold?
I understand the point the author is trying to make, but I do want to point out, that if you lived in another country unlike USA, it would be hard to even come up with a product like the quip or the juicer (however useless you may think it is). You would have funding barriers, you may find it hard to find people who have the engineering skill set to come up with a product that works the way it does etc, or worse you may not even have a local market for your product initially.
>> I lie, you lie, what's the difference?

> Definitely not what I'm trying to say.

To be clear, I did say that I was taking it out of context and that my objection is to when it's taken too far.

> Propaganda is influence.

> Facts are facts.

Very well said.

However, I do think that comparing American and Russian propaganda is a false equivalency; they are not similar at all - that is what I'm referring to when I object to saying 'it's all the same'. I'm not naive; I don't at all trust everything the American government says, but there are many, many major differences between American news and information and Russian.
I guess that is the new thing. An entire domain for your blog post. Am I missing something? Wait this is from 2015, I guess I did.
I think I've not made myself clear. I don't vilify $100mm pay days. Honestly engineering doesn't usually take home what I think it deserves. But to get $120 mill and be building competing startups the entire time seems pretty sleazy. I don't know where I'd draw the line of "you are being fully compensated for your time" but I'd say $10+ mill a year clears it.

Also, if they valued his equity grants at $120mm and he held much, he likely netted far more.

Not many words would be written about his pay day if he made a clean break from google before building a competing product.
There are numerous examples of music programming languages. I imagine some people have some success with them, but I think they are not widely adopted because it lacks the immediacy and tight feedback loops available in DAW.

In a DAW, as you're playing the track, you crank the reverb knob until you hit the sweet spot.

In a music programming language you fiddle with values and re-compile repeatedly until you find the sweet spot, but even then it's hard to find because you can't remember if it's better this time you compiled or last time.

For musical coding to work, I think it needs a Bret Victor / Swift Playgrounds / Lighttable style IDE, and then... it starts to look a lot like a DAW, just with algorithms instead of a note grid or timeline.
I'd much rather have my account verified & tied to some data, than have 5+ fake friend requests per day where people that used to use FB for scams, said that FB would give them free ad credits. They never stopped them from adding people to groups or mass messaging them using bots.
It's not that the compiler is better, it's that the language requires you to specify some things other languages don't (or infers a default if not defined), and uses that to enforce specific conditions. It's very similar to using types in languages compared to not having types.

In the same way that type information can be used by the compiler to optimize out some operations, the type information and the variable lifetime and ownership information/rules allow for specific optimizations that are harder to assume in C.

That is, you can do the exact same operations in C and Rust, and because you were forced to define more constraints in Rust (or defaults were inferred without you defining them), the compiler can make stronger assertions about what is being done, so it allows for the possibility of more optimizations.
On the Road with Aristotle: Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance (1974)
It sounds like they're using your name, not just your face. Or are they just creating plausible fake lawyers? And what's the game? I can imagine that they're soliciting "customers", who they'll go on to dupe and rip off.

I do like your profile, by the way. It sounds like the lawyer-expert dynamic to me.
Just to the same links to your question.

https://gcc.godbolt.org
https://rust.godbolt.org
Possibly, but types can encode far more than just the structure of data. Rust, for example, uses types to encode lifetime and ownership information. Haskell uses the IO monad to encapsulate non-determinism. Neither of those have equivalent concepts at the IR level.

It's not a set law, but more expressive type systems almost always increase the class of properties that can be "easily" proved in a language. I work on a verification tool for C/C++ programs and we constantly struggle with the languages. Pointer arithmetic and aliasing dramatically complicate any possible analysis, and these problems are only exacerbated at a lower level IR/ASM level.
Super!! Bringing the Wooly Mammoth and more extinct animals is next :-D!
> and the source of those numbers is...?

GregKH, who you linked in a cousin comment. IIRC ~20% of code authors are not associated with a company. And if we go by your logic, then an even larger proportion are not "being paid for their kernel work". For a concrete example, I'm a maintainer of container runtimes at my current job but I have contributed code to Linux as part of my job -- does that count as "being paid" for it? In my mind, yes. In your mind, clearly not. But in GregKH's statistics I count as an employee of a company (not an independent).

But since you're too lazy to look at your own link, here's the article for 4.11 (https://lwn.net/Articles/720336/). 14% of changesets and 13% of lines changed are by people not associated with a company.

> that's 100% false. both spender and me are developing our code in our free time. what the company is for is customer support, not R&D. shocked you are? :)

"I work in an L3 support role on $technology, but any R&D work I do on $technology is completely unrelated." It's like you're not willing to acknowledge that the only reason someone would pay a two-person team for support on a kernel technology like grsecurity+PaX is that the same team is developing it. So even if your invoices don't have "development" written on them, the only reason you'd have customers is because of the fact that you are the main R&D behind what you're supporting.
The last enclosed mall opened in the US was in 2006.

I'm pretty sure this is not true.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mall_at_University_Town_Cent...

That mall opened in late 2014, and it's a very large enclosed mall. The Wikipedia article refers to it being the first enclosed shopping mall to be built in "more than five years," which suggests there was at least one other built between 2006 and 2014.

I don't think you're necessarily wrong, but I think the big issue may be that the US just has far too many malls, whether we're talking big enclosed ones like this or even relatively small strip malls. We've seriously overbuilt retail space, and that isn't a new thing. I grew up in Sarasota, where that new(ish) mall is, and watched several malls die completely in the '90s. My suspicion is that this new mall will make it, actually, but that other malls within a fairly large radius around it won't.
> That doesn't mean that public criticism of this is propaganda.

I completely agree. The problem is, and my point was, how does one distinguish a reasonable person speaking in good faith from propaganda, which by its nature is intended to appear as a reasonable person speaking in good faith - and which most often is spread not directly by propagandists but by reasonable people who trust the good faith of the propagandist?

Anyway, I think we talked about it plenty above; I just thought your well-made points deserved a response here.
Just because a language feature is hard to implement doesn't mean we should abandon it.

I'm not going back to explicit error handling.
Make sure to emphasize at the same time with making motions with your hands like you're squeezing a bag of juice.
Subercide?
Oh no, what a pity.

It's harder to make pointless, bullshit companies that add literally nothing and instead contribute to degrading conditions and pay.

I have zero sympathy for someone not being able to spin up a useless, zero-effort company. Put some effort in and come up with something worthwhile that contributes instead.
Of course. Wordpress/node.js/php + no-ambition is all the rage. I visit once a year to see if things have changed (they haven't for several years).
Nix + Nixops gives him everything he wants. He'd have to learn to write nix expressions, which does put people off.

Containers are great if you've got racks full of actual, physical servers and want to use them efficiently. Most people don't have that problem, though.
Fund Conflicts and Tax Napkins
Definitely, but the presence of high-stakes testing kills any chance of that. Not to say that that's the only thing that needs to change, but removing high-stakes testing is a necessary condition to make any meaningful change in education.
There's also old fashioned performance improvements. Most enterprise software has plenty of room for improvement there. I've noticed a correlation between people that push for distributed systems and ones that don't know how things like indexes and transactions work or the need to avoid n+1 queries.

I'm sure some apps need to be distributed systems, but I bet it's a tiny minority.
What happened to Yahoo ( 2010 )
I'm not certain, but I suspect it's because step sequencers are a fairly limiting way of looking at melodies. I've not used FL Studio's but I've used many hardware step sequencers, and it's very hard to coax music out of them that doesn't feel very... grid-y? You don't get access to the kinds of nuance in terms of note start and note length that make performances sound human and not... sequenced.

I mean, basically all DAWs have a grid view where you can see notes on a grid and zoom in and out on that grid. If you zoom out to 1/16 notes, that's basically a step sequencer view... but then you can zoom in when you want to add 1/32 or 1/64 note complexity.
The spec also explicitly addresses that (automatic objects' destructors must be called after an exception)-- see section 15.2 in the C++14 spec.

There is no ambiguity in the spec here; this is a GCC bug.
So... systemd + Ansible?

I really disliked SystemD before I got my hands dirty with it. Assuming you're developing with any modern language, the language itself probably wraps OS differences anyways (Node / Golang / Rust / Ruby / Python / anything-libUV-based to name a few), not like you can convince developers to change their habits anyways.

People act like Docker makes builds reproducible by magic, then go on to not pin any Golang deps or curl internet resources or not generate lockfiles for NPM, ad infinitum.

There is and never will be a shield operations people can put around their developers. You just need good developers. If you want SoA scaling or automatic cloud configuration, why not just use the most established tools available? Linux's init system and kernel _already do_ resource management, even outside of LXC. People act like a "cloud scheduler" is the only thing that lets multiple processes work together.

This whole idea of isolation is also really inane. Each app will have different disk, io, network, cpu requirements. I also dream of the day Kubernetes can do this "sorting" better than an experienced operations team can, but that day is _far off_ (and I will die before I put redis/mysql/postgres/cassandra/any-other-mature-datastore behind docker and iptables)
Google has Uber dead to rights. Uber needed self driving to have any hope of profitability, but that's an impossibility when Google owns them in court.

Then their money train dries up, and Uber goes under.