skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This article makes the assumption that we are learning a complete model that goes from sensor inputs to control outputs, but I don't think anyone is doing this outside academia. There's a whole lot less controversy when we use deep learning to do scene understanding, where we understand at a high level the model is recognizing entities in its sensors, and we can evaluate whether that subsystem failed, etc.
Life Below the Surface of the Earth
This Dystopia Is Completely Ridiculous
Hmm. I may have been unclear--the PDF reads fine, but if I copy and paste some text into a text editor, I get the messed-up spaces. It seems as if the PDF doesn't encode text as text but just as a series of characters and locations, leaving spaces unrecorded, so when copy-pasting the reader has to guess from the distance between letters.
Tangential, but it's "per se"; the phrase comes from Latin.
Have you seen these examples yet? It's not the exact same but maybe you can use it to the same effect?

https://wiki.nftables.org/wiki-nftables/index.php/Maps
[\]^_` included, or is that a special case?
Interesting, thanks. Control with Polkit makes it flexible.
Well, the other key is so obvious: be nice to each other.

The couples I see that fall apart complain about each other behind each other's backs to their friends. They're snarky, disrespectful, when they fight they fight dirty. When they get resentful they retaliate instead of talking.

Just. Be decent. Like each other.

It's not that hard if you can work on not being selfish, self-centered, or self-righteous.
I believe we are all "pirates" at heart, which is why they so easily assimilate into society and why we usually ignore them around us as long as they no longer overtly act in that manner.

Obviously, the magnitude of our decent in piratehood varies from person to person, and at some level (murder being obviously a issue) we stop accepting them post-haste.

I find a close analogy to doing drugs and drug dealers in modern society. A lot of upstanding citizens enjoy doing drugs and actually like and feel safe around their drug dealers, but rarely if ever does popular culture show that side of reality.

I don't think its any coincidence that TV and movies show the murderous and thieving side of piracy as to condition us to be appalled by them, in general.
An open-source cloud based encrypted diary platform
Err, shoot the balloons?
Something to be tucked in the back of one's mind is that in France most French eat normal French food --not fine dining French food, some people do take their time to cook somewhat complicated dinners. In China people eat regular Chinese food, not fine dining Chinese food --based mostly on: fried noodles, rice or soup stock. Each will have some kind of meat and wilted veggies --not many people cook at home. It's greasy, it's tasty (in the way salty greasy things are tasty) --but it's not by any means great food. For fine dining they will go to a banquet dinner, or some foreign fare --even tacos are exotic, if you can find them.
Sounds very cool and useful, but I think the site needs to do a better job of explaining exactly how it works.

Do you need access to my Uber/Lyft credentials or app? Does this integrate with Uber/Lyft apps somehow, or does it find a ride and then hand it off to one of those app? I assume that I still pay via Uber/Lyft, is that right? Do you make any money from me using this app; if yes, how?

Congrats on getting something out there! I'd love to see it on Android so I could try it :)
for heavens sake someone put a tiger in there, sort of a cat amongst the pigeons
Google has an office in LA and they do some systems level work there.
Chinese Migrants Have Changed the Face of South Africa. Now They’re Leaving
You might think so, but the difficulty doesn't scale linearly with size and weight. For example there's a practical upper bound on airbags to absorb landing shock; we can't just build larger ones for a capsule carrying humans.
Macron wins French election
Almost every link I click leads to register/login. Instant turn off. Military encryption?
The "Machine Bias" report that ProPublica published about the Northpointe software (and that is cited in OP) has been shown to be wrong.

Source: Flores, Bechtel, Lowencamp; Federal Probation Journal, September 2016, "False Positives, False Negatives, and False Analyses: A Rejoinder to “Machine Bias: There’s Software Used Across the Country to Predict Future Criminals. And it’s Biased Against Blacks.”", URL http://www.uscourts.gov/statistics-reports/publications/fede...

In fact the ProPublica analysis was so poorly done that the authors of the above study wrote in the conclusion:

> "It is noteworthy that the ProPublica code of ethics advises investigative journalists that "when in doubt, ask" numerous times. We feel that Larson et al.'s (2016) omissions and mistakes could have been avoided had they just asked. Perhaps they might have even asked...a criminologist? We certainly respect the mission of ProPublica, which is to "practice and promote investigative journalism in the public interest." However, we also feel that the journalists at ProPublica strayed from their own code of ethics in that they did not present the facts accurately, their presentation of the existing literature was incomplete, and they failed to "ask." While we aren’t inferring that they had an agenda in writing their story, we believe that they are better equipped to report the research news, rather than attempt to make the research news."

What I find remarkable is that in the ongoing coverage ProPublica has published on this subject in December 2016 they interviewed a bunch of more people, but none of the folks that have criticized their analysis (published in September). Make of that what you will.
Its growth is not a cancer, but there are many problems growing within wikipedia. It is not the same as it was a decade ago. The energy within the community of contributors is very different. It is now very difficult to break into the club. New contributors have trouble setting up new pages, and suffer profoundly negative experiences when those pages they do start are removed on the basis of opaque rules. Pages about minor historical figures are removed as stubs, while extensive articles about minor fictional characters live on. This shift from 'knowledge' to 'quality' has changed Wikipedia. If there is a cancer, it is the rise of powerful contributors and the disillusionment of people who simply want to share their knowledge of a subject.
Just a note this was penned several years after the acquisition.
I'm not an expert in logic, but I can help a bit here.

For reference, here is the theorem in the blog post:

There is a Turing machine program e, such that
(1) PA proves that e accepts only finitely many inputs.
(2) For any particular finite subset A of N, there is a model M of PA such that inside M, the program e accepts all and only the elements of A.
(3) Indeed, for any subset A of N, including infinite sets, there is a model M of PA such that inside M, program e accepts n if and only if n is in A.

What you call the "loose" definition of finite is indeed what's being used here. The way (1) is stated, it implies the definition of "finite" must be within PA itself (otherwise PA couldn't prove it). Your "loose" definition is the only way to define "finite" within PA itself.

You are correct that in the presence of non-standard numbers, a set that PA proves is "finite" could actually be infinite in the model. Indeed, that explains how (3) is even possible!

As for whether A can contain non-standard numbers, the answer is no. Note that A is a variable defined in the meta-theory, since it is in the statement of the theorem (2) and (3). Therefore the "standard" versus "non-standard" label doesn't apply to A. The trick here is that there's an implicit "conversion" that needs to happen when going from A in the metatheory (where it is a subset of N) to A as a set of numbers in M. When that conversion happens, all the elements will be standard. This is a more precise way of phrasing (2) that might help, where I've used quotes to indicate exactly what's a statement in PA (as opposed to meta-theory):

(2') For any particular finite set A in N, there is a model M of PA such that the statement "e accepts n" is true in M iff n is in A.
> But you can reason about what any possible transaction can do by reasoning about all possible inputs to your code; you don't need to know anything about how other contracts were written, since even if they are formally provable, they could send you literally any input.

I also have to reason about the transactions that invoke other smart contracts that, through one or more subsequent calls, will call into mine. These transactions are inputs to my smart contract as well. Recall that the DAO was hacked by an "attacker" contract that called into it, for example.

> I'd point out that you're totally free to either write those contracts yourself if they're not already provably secure, or write your own code such that it's formally proved to work regardless of what those contracts do.

If formal specification and verification were practical, we'd be doing it in every programming domain. Normally, few people bother since (1) it takes a lot of work, and (2) the consequences of bugs are small in most domains, especially compared to the consequences of not shipping code on time. If you have not tried to formally specify and verify the correctness of a non-trivial program before, I encourage you to try it before recommending that strategy (especially if that recommendation includes telling developers to rewrite other peoples' code).

Since smart contracts have other peoples' money attached to them, the developers' first priority must be user safety. Ethereum does not appear to take this seriously, since (1) its default programming languages are not designed to be amenable to formal verification, and (2) smart contracts are allowed to call into one another.

I would much rather program on a blockchain that kept smart contracts completely isolated from one another, and required me to submit a machine-checked proof that the user's money (1) will be sent to an address of the user's choice automatically no more than X blocks after the deposit, and (2) cannot leave the smart contract at an earlier time without a one-time-use signature from the user. If a smart contract cannot be proven to do both of these things, then the blockchain should prevent it from running.
How to Use AirPlay Mirroring to Stream iPad Movies to HDTV?
> I wonder how much of this could be counteracted simply by capping profits, such that all net revenue in excess of some fixed amount is forced by the corporate charter to be turned into either employee compensation or stockholder dividends.

That seems likely to cause the exact _opposite_ effect of what you intend. Apple is sitting on a pretty big cash pile right now. If the only legal options they had were to invest it or return it as dividends, the original article's premise is that they would find ways to invest it (buying factories in China, bringing app development in-house, etc) rather than risk the shrinking of the bureaucracy.

The problem seems doubly bad with Wikipedia and other non-profits. The problem isn't that they have too much profit. It's that they are growing their expenses to match income (rather than capping expenses at some "rational" level and trying to maintain enough income above it). In theory, in for-profit companies shareholders will start to complain if expenses increase too high -- it's not clear who would make the same complaint at Wikipedia (other than the original article).
The GP said Wikidata isn't suitable for many purposes, different from any.

It's a nice agreed-upon vocabulary for linked data. But you still need the data that the vocabulary refers to. The information you can get without ever leaving the Wikidata representation is still too sparse.
60+ km straight up is a long way to shoot.
That's completely wrong. There was no serious consideration of stealing Soviet satellites. Everyone knew that we'd never be able to get away with that.

The driving requirement was to act as a successor to the SR-71. Launch, make a single reconnaissance pass over the Soviet Union, and then utilize the cross-range capability to land immediately so that the film could be developed. But by the time the Shuttle was actually built, spy satellites equipped with digital cameras had improved so much that it became moot.
Because teachers and nannys are mechanisms of cultural reproduction. We could give those jobs to AI, but they're also some of the few jobs that are actually interesting in an economy where we have no material need for work.
The ressources required to shoot stuff that's in the stratosphere are on a whole other ballpark than what your average revolutionaries can do.
Even if you can afford to live in the city, most richer people I know move to the suburb for quality of life reasons. Not just for space either. I live in an extremely gentrified neighborhood in one of the most densely populated city in the US. My condo is worth 1.2-1.5 million (I don't live in California nor NYC, so that's quite high here).

Yet even with that, it took 3 police cars to get a dude with a ton of warrant who has been attacking local women to get off from my stairway...for the second time in 2 weeks. We keep having to call out to get drunk homeless people from my parking lot, and crack addicts hide by the door to our storage rooms.

You can pay millions and still deal with that crap. Or you can move a 30 minute drive away and have a fancy house with a yard and instead of drunk people screaming you'll hear your neighbors kids screaming at each other while playing in a pool (which most people like better).

I'm a city person, but it's not hard to figure out why people would not want to deal with the city, and why people in the city quickly become NIMBY.

Now, I hear Japanese cities a somewhat more civilized. It might be a stereotype, but if its true and people can actually respect each other in close quarters, it changes the game completely.
Wow... That live demo is a lot better than existing hn, at least on mobile.. but you can't comment =\
why should I consider python at all for a new, multi year project when there is no clear path forward for the language and there hasn't been in a decade?

It would seem that the article is out of date and there is now a clear path forward. However, I think that we also see here a problem with the BDFL model of programming language governance. Unless Python 3 is somehow well over 2X times more productive than Python 2, I don't see the amount of disruption caused by the change as having been worth it. Is that the case?
I had a deadbeat client who owed me about $10K. What I really wanted to do was sue, make his life miserable, call his investors, etc. But in the end, I just walked away. He'd burned through all of his money, and I didn't actually hate the guy. And I'd be happy to work with him again, if he pays in advance. :)

Life is too short to get hung up on small hiccups.
For one, the science is dead wrong. Just because the three body problem doesn't have an analytical solution that doesn't mean that orbits are chaotic. Case in point: the very solar system in question is now known to have at least one planet in a very stable orbit. Nor does it mean that they are particularly difficult to calculate in many circumstances. You just can't use algebraic methods. So I was turned off because the what-if proposed was fantasy not science fiction. Fwiw I had the same response to the movie Arrival, which many people seemed to love.

Second, the proposed solution that allows for the aliens to predict future seasons and therefore develop culture and technology reflects human problem solving. This is intellectually lazy and wrong. A more realistic solution, of the type I prefer to read about, would have the aliens evolve different ways of thinking that are more compatible with iterative methods than algebraic manipulation. To such a mind abstract reasoning would be really difficult, but it would be entirely natural to specify initial conditions and solve iteratively. Such a mind would find solving ordinary differential equations as easy as breathing, but solving x + 3 = 4 would need a computer. Even more interestingly, how would those differences in mind structure reflect the development of their language, culture, and societal structure? These are all very fascinating questions that seemed extremely obvious to me from the setup, and the sort of thing many hard sci-fi authors like Raynolds or Clarke would tackle. It's a book I would read and rave about. But instead we get the same old trope of basically human aliens invading earth because it is "habitable", never mind that habitability should be a non-concern to any self-respecting interstellar species, for whom climbing down a gravity well is probably a net negative. Planets are in fact shitty places to live in terms of galactic real estate, even more so when they are infected by foreign biology.

Finally, the behavior of humans across the entire books is utterly unrelatable. I'm limited in how much I can say without spoiling the story. But in short every scientist is portrayed as incurious (wtf?) nihilist easily swayed by the suggestion to kill all humans. And the rest of humanity hardly dares better -- they willingly and dejectedly walk to their own execution when they are told to later in the series. I have no explanation of this other than bad writing.

It was, in short, a really bad book.
Actually it's the register page. You need to register to keep your posts to yourself. It uses AES to encrypt posts. Source code can be found at https://github.com/malisit/munhasir
Newer things only break in strange ways because they're broken. So rather than break the old stuff, why not fix the new stuff?? - because after all, approximately the only criticism you can't level at the Windows NUL/PRN/COMx/etc. special names is that they're some kind of surprise that appeared suddenly out of nowhere! It's been this way for a very long time.

(I wonder if part of this is the rage of Unix fans discovering that portable means actually, you know, making an effort... and that there's more too it than just checking it builds on x86 Debian as well as x64 Ubuntu...)
even with async/await, Python is still not multicore.

Even with its channels and scheduler, Go is still not as multicore as Erlang. And I say this as an avid Go user!
Wow, this really hits the nail on the head in regards to the small company I work for. Expanded rapidly from 30-40 to 120 in two years. The higher-ups have failed to address some core issues (with some refused on principle, such as an aversion to stronger organizational structure due to not wanting to seem "corporate") while still pursuing pet projects and spending freely (of money and others' time). Communication is also a massive issue - half the company (within the current structure) knows what's going on, the other half have to either do their own investigative work or wait. Would fine with me if you're a much larger company but at 120 or so it seems pretty silly and hypocritical to their "anti-corporate" ethos. Will be interesting when/if we hit Dunbar's number.
IBM is running on the fumes of their brand. If IBM was not named IBM they'd be perceived as just another Infosys. IBM hasn't been developer friendly for a long, long time.
Orbital kinetic bombardment is a silly concept suitable only for cheap sci-fi novels. There's no benefit in having kinetic weapons permanently positioned in orbit. The satellites would be easily tracked and vulnerable to ASAT weapons. They can't strike a target much faster than a ballistic missile launched from land or sea. And they would be much more expensive. Anything in orbit is out of reach of maintenance. It takes a lot of energy to get a satellite into a stable orbit, and then yet more energy to de-orbit a missile.
> During the Vietnam War, there was limited use of the Lazy Dog bomb, a steel projectile shaped like a conventional bomb but only about 1" long and 3/8" diameter. A piece of sheet metal was folded to make the fins and welded to the rear of the projectile. These were dumped from aircraft onto enemy troops and had the same effect as a machine gun fired vertically.[3][4] Observers visiting a battlefield after an attack said it looked like the ground had been 'tenderized' using a gigantic fork. Bodies had been penetrated longitudinally from shoulder to lower abdomen

That is utterly terrifying.
Rituals of Maya Kingship
As someone who has tried the TripleByte programming questions, my recommendation is to take a look at HackerRank.

As I recall, the initial TripleByte test is divided into two segments: 1) a series of multiple-choice questions and 2) a couple coding challenges.

The actual coding challenges I got (in that 2nd segment) were not very different from the sorts of challenges you might find at HackerRank; in fact, one of the challenges I got involved the exact same task as a challenge I had solved for a HackerRank test!

I recommend going through HackerRank's algorithm problems, since those will be the most similar to the problems you'll encounter on the TripleByte test (or in any technical interview, really).

They also have a list of "coding interview" challenges that you can work through:

https://www.hackerrank.com/domains/tutorials/cracking-the-co...

You might even consider taking HackerRank's sample test or applying through HackerRank Jobs as practice.

All of that would help with the second segment of TripleByte's test (writing code), but maybe isn't the best practice for the first segment (multiple choice questions testing code literacy and domain knowledge). I haven't found an appropriate way of preparing for that first segment yet.
related: http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/science/05/09/tiger.trackin...
How about returning the islands they stole, instead? We're happy to clean the mines ourselves. It's not like they're anywhere close to London, are they?
They're called Malvinas islands, not Falklands.
Alright. Fair enough. Obviously I was not able to communicate my point in a way that was inoffensive. I apologise for that.
This is fixed now. The README now state GPL + Classpath Excemption
Oh I see it all the time. Random extraneous projects and really niche projects that don't fit well in the wikimedia ecosystem, built ontop of the tech debt ridden remains of Mediawiki while the core devs are tasked with making helper tools when they should be paid to work on continually improving core functionality of Mediawiki so anyone other than Wikipedia can use it.
Here is a character encoding issue that I ran into about a year ago.

git does not support UTF-16LE[0]. The result is that UTF-16LE encoded files will be mangled[1] by the line ending conversion. There is at least one generated Visual Studio file (GlobalSuppressions.cs) that is saved in UTF-16 by default.

[0] https://github.com/libgit2/libgit2/issues/1009

[1] https://github.com/Microsoft/Windows-classic-samples/issues/...
If you are a school and want to hire kindergarten teacher, you will put an ad and get lot of response, you may or may not want the best because you know that average teacher will be ok too. So you hire the average teacher with average salary.

If you are looking to invest your money with a hedge fund manager you want to go with the guy who has a great historical record but the hedge fund manager knows that too so he will charge a premium but you are ready to pay that premium because of his good historical record.

So the free market decides that average teachers are good enough and they will do the job with average salary. But in the world of hedge funds, average managers are not good enough, you want the best and you are ready to pay a premium to get the best manager.
Do you have some personal experience with that? If so, in what topic areas do you have difficulty adding content? What were your changes and why were they rejected?
This is from 1989, about 27 years ago. Is there any academic research on this since then?