skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I agree and think that is the main point here.
Within our social norms, any type of generalized genetic comparison between groups of humans is very much frowned upon. I think that's because it bring back past traumas such as Slavery, the Jewish Holocaust and female oppression.
This is so strong that almost any grouping statement is quickly labeled as racism, sexism, profiling etc.

Imagine the popular reaction if it's discovered that these "intelligence genes" not only exist but are more prevalent in one of our go-to easily labeled human subgroups such as women, men, whites, blacks, rich, poor, brown-eyed. It'll be proof that that group is objectively genetically more intelligent. What would be the ramifications such a discovery? What should be the ramifications of such a discovery?

I think it's quite tricky to research these things objectively without it being explosive. That's why even suggesting that "the genetic influence on intelligence is likely non-zero" is a big thing.
You might wanna check out the story of Edward Lampert (the CEO of Sears). Ayn Rand inspired him to pit departments against one another. Sears devolved into a battle royale and profits dropped like a rock.
Mud bugs
Is this not FUD? Why do you assume that Chinese billionaires are any less philanthropic than US ones? America has the richest people on Earth currently, how successfully are you taxing them to take care of your needy?

This is reminiscent of the prisoner's dilemma in a way. All the rich of all the countries in the world will make the same claims: "look, we don't want to fall behind big scary China or Russia do we? So cut me some slack on taxes and regulation, let's all pitch in to bail me out when I fail (just a few billion here and there--I'm too big to fail, remember?), and we'll see about redistribution once we've won the war. I promise to remember you all."

A country that follows this path ends up like Korea, selling its soul to Samsung.
I would like to reply tangentially to your comment:

I have just been fired by my boss for pretty much no reason other than cost cutting and "I wasn't one of the guys"

I brought in plenty of revenue and profit for 3 years.

But since I didn't play golf with my boss, they downsized me and gave my responsibilities to someone much less competent but more politically alligned than I.
Why would federal judges care about the vested interests of the state of Delaware?

I'm not trolling, I just don't get the argument.
This is thinking along the right lines, but the only non-arbitrary solution is a land value tax. The effects are profound.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax
Livestream: AlphaGo vs. Kejie
I have read those cases. They're nowhere near as inconsistent as you believe them to be. Diamond v. Diehr was a ruling in the time-honored tradition of "let's overturn precedent while extolling how much we're not overturning precedent," but its actual text only pushed the boundaries a little, basically saying "having software doesn't make the thing unpatentable."

It was the CAFC's State St. decision that turned everything to rubbish, basically saying that patentability was a creative writing exercise in showing that you could tie the patent to something concrete, no matter how tenuous that part is to the core patent. In Bilski, SCOTUS went well out of its way to trash State St. at every opportunity. Alice reiterated that decision by making it clear that the machine part can't be an incidental afterthought but must be rather fundamental to the process, reinforcing rather than overturning the ideas in Diamond v Diehr.
Average daily volume of VOO over the last 60 days is about 2,000,000 shares. At ~$200/share (it's actually about $220 right now), that's about $400m dollars daily, so unloading $1m would be well under 1% of shares traded in a typical day.
> But those students at community college who are aged between late 30 and 50? Really driven. It's embarrassing to compare typical college students to them.

I'm in that age bracket (30-50), and trying to transition from tech-support/helpdesk into something like coding/linux-admin/devops/etc, anything that would pay enough to allow raising a family in/near a major US city.

I find it daxx hard to even get a phone call back because of my age.

I spend a lot of time learning this and that and have s small portfolio that can be viewed. But still no joy.

So I keep on pressing myself to learn new skills, putting in 10-30 hrs a week, ON top of my 9-5 job. I did not I work this hard with this much focus in college. Honestly much regrets.

Posting this with a disposable account.
From what I understand, this is the nature of the software. It's old fashioned and does minimal things. New features do not get added since they increase maintainence burden. The author of pinboard is active on hn and has a good following even...
Alright then, your maximum intelligence is purely genetic. Everything else, or lack of certain things, lowers it.
Hoff and OWOX BI:  Increase PPC Advertising ROI by 17
You can't just hand-wave stuff away and assume some rational actor model. Every IP lawyer I know disagrees with you, and I talked to a number of them today about their take. Their phones are blowing up and they're already making preparations to move the cases to Delaware and NDCal.
Automation is a good thing, even when it reduces jobs.

If a human is doing some work that a robot could do, the human is essentially being used as a substitute for that robot, and economics will inevitably result in them being treated as such.

If the sole point of having a human do that job is so that they can collect a paycheck, this is a thinly veiled form of a broken window fallacy - in this case, the hypothetical robot is "broken" to allow the human to step in and "fix" the problem. This is inherently an inefficient arrangement - it reduces overall productivity, which in turn reduces the total surplus value generated by the economy, that could have been used for things like welfare.

In essence, restricting automation for the sake of job preservation is welfare - except it's a very inefficient form of it, because you're wasting human labor in the process, and then there's the social cost of unhappiness for all those people forced to work shitty and meaningless jobs.

The only reason why this approach is even seriously considered is because we, as a society, can't divorce ourselves from the concept that you must work to earn a living. So when faced with technological progress that plainly invalidates this notion, we construct elaborate schemes that allow us to preserve the veneer of "propriety" as we understand it, while substantially redefining it - and we do so at the cost of considerable overhead.

It's insane. I don't expect it to change anytime soon, however.
That was a different era, where physical labor was still valued and needed.
This is contradicted directly in the article re the BBC logo. It says the globe and mirror setup was rotoscoped/traced over to create the final cartoon look that was broadcast. Or is the article wrong?

Edit: The article is wrong! The colour was added to the camera's output live!
Google Earth Enterprise
Because people are afraid of what they might find. Because people are afraid it will be used to justify scientific racism. Because people are afraid of being cast out of polite society. Basically everything that Charles Murray predicted 20 years ago has come true or is coming true, but he literally gets physically assaulted if he tries to speak on college campuses.
Because it justifies scientific racism which people decided is a bad thing.. mostly after the second world war.
I am an engineer, and used to do sales. I never liked sales enough to get really good at it, partially because I wanted to spend more time figuring out how to automate by job than do my job. But I have some general observations based on my experience:

- the lower the base salary, the crappier position (until you are so good you want a lower base and higher commission)

- a 100% commission job is not a job, it's "I decided to start a business AND give a huge piece of my earnings to someone else!" (until you can value why splitting your revenue is a good deal for you)

- finding people to sell to is not the same skill as getting them to buy from you

- if someone can teach you everything you need to know about the sales job, you are also easily replaceable

- if you have to pay to work there (such as paying for a desk, professional licenses, etc.), that job is gonna suck

- you're more likely to be successful if you don't have to convince yourself people need what you are selling

- some sales jobs are not pure selling (for example a full desk recruiter brings in clients/jobs to work on AND finds the candidates to fill those jobs)

- while this is a sarcastic comment, on some days you will think to yourself "the world is full of stupid people, and I talk to all of them"

- if you don't get motivated by making tons of money, sales is gonna feel like a real grind
TiDB in production: let's see how NewSQL works in real world
i didnt say anything about that. what i'm saying is if you're some 25 year old and you know you have millions of impressionable 12 year old fans. Maybe stay away from blatantly anti-semitic behavior, even if it is a poor attempt at a joke. Or be prepared to be called out by newspapers.
Minimum wage policies exist outside of the Jim Crow southern United States.

They, in fact, exist outside the United States, period.

Interesting retro-rationalisation, but patently false.
Barry silbert can do it privately but any exchange can handle it
Is this any different than advising 18 month depreciation for GPUs?
The arguments apply equally well to others and to life under capitalism in general.
Good question... unfortunately it tends to conflict with various socio-religious-philosophic categories.
What Is Consultative Selling and How to Be a Consultative Salesperson
I agree.

People who shoot down science because it's racist/sexist/etc. are shooting down the truth. People who make overreaching claims are just as detrimental. I think intelligence is very largely genetic. Claiming its "purely genetic" only gives more fodder for the "that's racist"-types to shoot it down.
There's an update at the bottom of the article for this:

> UPDATE: It turns out the BBC Globe ident wasn’t rotoscoped or animated, instead it was recorded live using the Noddy camera system and the color was created by adjusting the contrast. Thanks, Gene!
In the most recent podcast (I think released today or last night), Harris discusses the Vox article and why he thinks it is exactly the sort of intellectual dishonesty that they were pointing out in the first place. He also gets into the topic a bit with his guest Sidartha Mukherjee in the second half of their discussion.

https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/the-moral-complexity-...
The problem is that a month of GPU time on a cluster can buy you the hardware itself. If you are doing serious deep learning work it's just not cost effective at this point. If the costs come down by half or more, it may start looking viable for people who need a lot of resources.
When people talk about "genes for IQ" they mean genes that account for differences between people.

The genes that all humans share (most of them) contribute a lot more to intelligence. That's a different subject altogether.
The biggest problem with minimum wage is that it amounts to a half-assed universal basic income implementation, but one that is funded by a regressive tax (i.e. the poor you are, the more you pay).

The reason is straightforward - a higher minimum wage disproportionally affects goods and services produced by employees that get paid said wage, or close to it. These tend to be the cheaper products on the market, and so the poorer you are, the more such products are in your consumption budget. Obviously everyone has a substantial amount, so the tax is still spread around - but poor still end up paying proportionally more of it.

For another perspective at the same problem, consider what happens when the wage gets raised. Now your paycheck is higher - but so is the cost of your food, most likely, because the people producing it were also paid little, and are now paid slightly more. So the actual increase in purchasing power is less than the nominal dollar amount - and the difference is proportional to how many cheap (= produced by low-paid labor) products you consume. Whereas someone on the high middle class end of the spectrum will see some minor increases in restaurant bills and such, but it's a blip on the radar compared to their income (and their mortgage, education costs, car loan etc).

The obvious conclusion is that we should stop being half-assed about it, recognize that our existing arrangement, between min. wage and unemployment insurance, is already a kind of UBI, acknowledge that it means that we as a society are already okay with the moral argument behind UBI, and work on implementing it ASAP.
FWIW, I only read the first couple of sections of your first Wikipedia link (the overview). I didn't find it excruciatingly technical, and have no training in biology other than high school. Anyone who knows words like allele and phenotype from high school can feel free to click. It's interesting.
We found scorched tinfoil in the wastebasket. Someone has secrets and is not covering up.
Seems like the developer just spends all his time on tweeting and politics.
Call it what you want, but all you want to do is censor anyone that disagrees with your view! There is nothing ideological in my post, and the only ideologies are ones perpetrated by your kind and type of person.
Spot the contradiction:
- the patriarchy teaches men to bottle up their feelings
- in the patriarchy, women's issues are systematically ignored in favor of men

Men generally don't hang out on sites to talk about their burrito shits, they don't bond over their gender, lacking a mechanism for in group preference based on it. They bond over shared interests and hobbies. Unlike women, for whom "X For Women" is inevitably created as an end in itself.

If you want to talk about privilege, the fact that your gender has a political movement, media sector and academic faculty dedicated to it is probably relevant. As does the general ability to damsel, act childlike, and shy away from conflict without paying a price in respect.

When you turn all this privilege theory back onto the originators, the result is loud and vicious protest, and the insistence that you just shut up and let women speak. Backed and enforced by sympathetic ears in the halls of power. It doesn't add up.
That's good. Although that's a bit wrong. You can't take a monochrome image and add colour just by adjusting the contrast. I'm also not sure you can say it was "recorded" at all if it was broadcast directly, but that's a language question.
Airpods not airport
I believe there is at least a partial influence from a culture of "men don't talk about their problems" that pervades the gender.

Probably an unhealthy situation, but my understanding is that a man talking about his problems is seems as undesireable/unattractive/not-manly by both men and women.

(This post is not meant to any claim of "which gender has it worse" or anything of that nature, as I find the whole "my suffering is worse than your suffering" line to be counterproductive)
Guessing this is a major reason that "big" brains are extremely rare. There's strong selective pressure against such an energy hungry organ and most of benefits (ooh, we can discuss issues on HN) don't accrue until much later. ;-)
"All association studies were performed on individuals of European descent; standard quality control procedures included correcting for population stratification and filtering on minor allele frequency"
Depends on whether you want to hide the fact of the transactions. Going the legit way, suppose you don't

Then it is the matter of registering on an exchange and buying out all the bids. With 1m even now, you'll make a whole lot of turbulence in the market. After that just withdraw it to your bank accounts, you might have to have a chat with your exchange before that though
Interestingly, previously, you did see spur lines to many facilities which today are served by truck.

Low-speed (15 - 30 mph) tracked autonomous vehicles for local ("last 10 - 20 mile") delivery might very much make sense.

It's a lot easier to focus on things like traffic control and hazard detection (including people on tracks) when your wheels literally hold you to the road.
I did something similar by piping ffmpeg into a numpy array, with each frame updating the average RGB value of each pixel in the array.

Here's a three-second clip from 'Logan' of a scene where Hugh Jackman's character is leaping through the air from right to left: http://i.imgur.com/EIp56LX.jpg

I like the results better for short sequences, but here's the entirety of 'Logan' (not sure what's causing the dark line down the middle): http://i.imgur.com/3QW6zPj.jpg
Whether we'll get Star Trek or Blade Runner depends entirely on us. Automation enables both of these possibilities, but it also requires political action to adjust the economic system accordingly.

Whether said political action takes the form of ballots and bills, or torches and pitchforks, remains to be seen - it could go either way.
> because it makes people uncomfortable. They dont want to believe that their own intelligence is deterministic.

It's not about my own intelligence.

If genetics can be conclusively shown to determine intelligence how long before someone tries again to build a 'master race'?

That's what makes me uncomfortable.
Not having fast FP64 is a design decision. Space isn't free, and FP64 takes up a lot of space that could be used on delivering higher FP32 perf, which is more important for video games.
Try visiting Portland, Oregon. A small shanty town has formed in the last year about a block from my home. In the last 2 years there has been a marked spike in homeless encampments along freeways and on public land owned by the OR Department of Transportation. There has been a persistent downtown homeless encampment, I think called Right2Dream. Protests are afoot to find new / additional / different places for permanent encampments.

If these aren't shanty towns, I don't know what is. Other Portlanders beside myself have taken to calling them shantytowns.
Eek- my scanning wasn't quite efficient enough! Thanks for correcting me.
> But all of these genes together account for just a small percentage of the variation in intelligence test scores, the researchers found; each variant raises or lowers I.Q. by only a small fraction of a point.

OK. Even if you believe there's an objective measure of intelligence and that IQ tests do a good job at measuring this (both very questionable premises), it's worth keeping in mind that slight monetary motivation can boost IQ scores by 10 points[1], and the general population's scores go up about 3 points every 10 years[2]. Much more of an impact than the genes here that correlate with "only a small fraction of a point" difference.

[1] https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/motivat...
[2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4152423/
Here Are Two Sales Email Templates
I was going by the Minnesota Twin study. Is this research still valid?
In the past, a wage job like trucking wasn't a road to the middle class. It was the middle class. I grew up in what was supposedly a middle class neighborhood -- little tract houses, families with one wage earner, and one stay-at-home parent. A lot of the adults worked in the car plants, steel mill, machine shops, or other jobs that didn't require college education. Among those with college degrees, many didn't earn substantially more than the wage workers, e.g., school teachers, nurses, etc.
TiDB developer here, this is one of our early adoption user who is already used TiDB in production for over 6 months, this case is quite a 'hybrid' scenario, the workload contains both OLTP and OLAP but to the developer, only MySQL dialect.
Attention Mechanisms in Recurrent Neural Networks and Google Machine Translation
Imagine if you could choose exactly how smart you want your son or daughter to be - but only via a set of genes that also directly correspond to laziness.

This sounds silly, doesn't it? But you can't deny that this article is a firm step in that direction. It's not crazy to think that parents may make gene choices in the future.

This would be not just a new stage, but a new kind of evolution. (Not too scary in the form we're reading about, and close to everyday sexual selection of mates anyway.)
Wi-Fi can be used to photograph rooms through walls
I suspect you're simply lucky if your brain is wired in a manner that is particularly relevant to the period of societal time. In that, I mean "IQ" is related/tied to a period of time. For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSy685vNqYk
How'd you acquire them? What do you plan on doing with the profit? Congrats!
It's very interesting but the title seems a little hyperbolic as there are numerous caveats (from the "About" section):

- "Note that the security benefits of hardbin only apply when accessing it over a local (or otherwise trusted) gateway. If you access it over a gateway that you do not control, then the security model degrades to be equivalent to that of traditional encrypted pastebins."

- "The content will need to be pinned to make sure it stays around for long term (the same as any content stored in IPFS)." (though this doesn't impact the merits of its encryption)

- "You need to make very sure to use a known-good version of the code when creating pastes, as it would be trivial to create a malicious version that looks identical. The best thing to do is write down the hash the first time you use it, and always use the same hash. If you want to upgrade to a new version of the software, you'll need to update your hash."

- "I don't recommend using hardbin for highly critical stuff as the code has not been thoroughly audited by anyone but me."

The last is perhaps the most worrying thing.
Why is this being downvoted so heavily? Given the forum it seems like a very reasonable expectation.
It would completely upend the belief that "all men are created equal"
Yes, it's a politically charged subject, but if you want to know what some actual scientists think about such things, it's not a bad place to start.

Consider that the issues involved (and the flaws they see in Murray's arguments) are fairly subtle, so this "bickering" as you call it is actually pretty important to understanding what's going on.
<3

(Y u no support emoji, HN?)
However, I rarely see personal gripes.
I'd invite you to actually make a personal gripe, because it will be more topical than dragging up an age-old trope.

Scott Aaronson tried this.

They tried to destroy his life.

This surprised no-one.

Maybe that's why more people don't do it?
Ag labour was replaced by the same fundamental change which made the factory work which replaced it viable: more energy per worker.

A farmer with a 15 - 30 HP Ford or John Deere tractor could do the work of a team of men or horses. Rather than 40-horse combine-harvester rigs (with swingletrees to transmit force evenly through the harness), you had a draw-harvester and PTO off the tractor.

Factory productivity tracks virtually linearly with kW or HP per worker, in the form of power tools and equipment.

Humans were the control elements of such systems.

Now we're swapping out the control elements -- computers for people.

If humans don't have either muscle or brainpower to contribute, what's left?