skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"I have a theory that there's always at least one big web portal - AOL started as a dial-up ISP and turned into a portal. Yahoo started as a search engine and turned into a portal. Facebook started as a social network and turned into a portal."

It goes deeper than that ... the trend is not to become a portal but rather, to become "the phone company".

Everyone is trying to become "the phone company" in which they attain a central, monopoly position through which all communication takes place.

Google and Facebook are currently fighting for that spot. They're trying to become AOL, but more deeply, like AOL before them, they're all just trying to become ma bell.

This is very convincingly explained in the very highly regarded book _The Master Switch_, by Tim Wu.
Would recommend using Tensorflow instead. TF already has 59k stars in GitHub and is going to be easier to find answers to questions and find tutorials, books, etc. Would say TF is already close to being the canonical ML framework. Think MS was just too late.
Thats way too much complexity to get into game programming. Just start with something where you can draw shapes and images to some canvas, and make it interactive. No need to start with 3d, and at least not the low level 3d stuff. Then you will never actually end up creating something.
Constexpr quicksort in C++17
Arthur C Clarke wrote a funny little short story called "Travel by Wire!" 80 years ago that speculated about a form of commercial teleportation
Depends on what you are hired for. If you are hired to create a web application and you spent time trying to create a stable environment with proper build processes it might be looked upon poorly. Everyone has different priorities and some have limited budgets.
Assuming I'm interpreting you correctly, this is an argument I've had with my own father for decades. I'm strongly of the belief that there's no line between child and adult. You simply get better at pretending. We're all just a bunch of highschoolers dressed up in adult clothes hoping no one calls us on our bluff, and no one will because they're all doing the same.
I'm not the poster, but I'll take a stab at the answer - mostly drawing from my experience being a housewife and in a relationship where things weren't split very evenly.

Small places are usually good for one person. The more folks you add to a small space, the more work there is for a single person. This is especially if folks happen to have a lot of things they aren't using, have hobbies that require a fair amount of physical space, or have differing hobbies/interests that take a smaller amount of space.

Additionally, some things make for daily frustrations, depending on the housing situation. Fighting with your own storage space to put the dishes away, for example. These sorts of frustrations add up and affect the quality of life. One person winds up having to deal with it most of the time, and there aren't coworkers there to vent to. There is no one.

One solution is to gain more space and more efficient "work" or "duty" areas (laundry, restrooms, and kitchens). Another solution is to do things that make the other's daily life easier, hence the picking up after oneself. Making sure to split the chores up fairly evenly so that both parties get days off or simply doing it more often so a homewife/husband gets some time away from the monotonous daily grind.

The answer is both yes and no.

Edited for clarity.
Wikipedia Equality Notability Discussion Paper: Maintaining Encyclopedic Scope
I did the same thing early on in my career. Shut down several major ski-resorts in Sweden for an entire day during booking season by doing what we always did, running untested code in production to put out fires. Luckily, my company and our customers took that as a cue to tighten up the procedures instead of finding someone to blame. I hear this is how it works in aviation as well, no one gets blamed for mistakes since that only prevents them from being dealt with properly. Most of us are humans, humans make mistakes. The goal is to minimize the risk for mistakes.
It's not that this shouldn't happen, but that it does happen and has to be dealt with as the potential impact scales up. Having production creds on day 1 isn't the same as day 500.
So was the one I was responding to. And I doubt that whatever personal anecdotes you have can be applied to unions in general as parent did.

And yes it matters as the parent wanted to dismiss unions based on these false claims.

Unions are neither good nor bad. Some of them have too much power, others have too little. Some should have a union (like uber drivers) etc.

My own father tried to start a kind of union for a group of self-employed drivers working for one company. The result was that the company he worked for simply stopped his contract and scared everyone else off from backing him and a few others up.

I have seen unions be both really bad, really good, unnecessary and not existing where they should.

They are no different than consumer interest groups and other collections of people trying to reach some sort of balance.

In many industries today they aren't needed but in some they still are.
You can solve by finding the point <x, y> that minimizes the distance from any point in any input circle: \sqrt{(x_p - x) ^ 2 + (y_p - y) ^ 2} + r_p for p ∈ L. This is the center of the smallest enclosing circle. Once you have the center, you can iterate over every input circle to compute its radius.
Some examples would've been nice.
So I guess the whole car thing is probably going to be this cycle's mortgage bubble? Considering car sales are falling off a cliff I guess we're in 2007 right now.
Sure its absurd, but at least the Feds & state of California are going to get a rather large chunk of it.
In New York I used a lawyer who represented me and the seller had no agent. Price was lower than 'market' and I think everyone was happy. No Agents involved. (2016 purchase date)
Very distracted by the lack of the accusative case in the name of the site. Unless he is instructing the water to seize, I think it should be carpe aquam.
$ cat my-config.xml
<root>
<!-- i am a comment -->
<thing attr="foo">
<!-- i am another comment -->
<setting>value</setting>
</thing>
</root>

$ cat c.py
import lxml.etree

doc = lxml.etree.fromstring(file('my-config.xml').read())
for setting in doc.xpath('.//thing/setting'):
setting.text = 'set without screwing up the file'
print lxml.etree.tostring(doc)

$ python c.py
<root>
<!-- i am a comment -->
<thing attr="foo">
<!-- i am another comment -->
<setting>set without screwing up the file</setting>
</thing>
</root>
Patent issues also didn't help for jpeg2000.
People are buying cars they can't really afford because the monthly payments seem to be affordable. I think they know it's an expensive way to have a nice car but the alternative (because they don't have the capital) may be buying an old banger or having no car at all.
I would argue that no machine should be allowed to talk to each other unless their operation depends directly on each other. If I want to talk to the database, I have to either SSH to a worker machine and use the production codebase's shell, or directly to a DB machine and use a DB shell.

We've made things so reports and similar read-only queries can be done from properly firewalled/authenticated/sandboxed web interfaces, and write queries get done by migrations. It's very rarely that we'll need to write to the database directly and not via some sort of admin interface like Django's admin, which makes it very hard to do bulk deletions (it will very clearly warn you).
You can still use wavelet compression to encode the residual from MC, but I think the biggest problem is performance: DCTs have been optimised far more than wavelet transforms.

Even in still-image compression, the difference is noticeable --- I have some high-resolution PDFs containing JPEG2000 scanned images, and they take significantly longer to render than the equivalent containing JPEG images.
How do they work? Are they just difficult to write quantum algorithms for or is there some fundamental mathematics involved that stops a quantum computer enumerating the solutions?
The examples of moral codes I gave were not meant to be used on AIs but by AIs working for/with humans.

> The problem with your first statement is you assume that human morality is the pinnacle of morality and all other forms will be lesser to that standard.

To be clear, my first statement was meant to read as:
"AIs without human morality, which would put certain restrictions on them, will likely have less power than amoral AIs in the long run."

And "power" here means the ability to effect things in the world. I did not assume that human morality is the pinnacle. I agree with you that it is likely not an optimized one.

My whole argument rests on the principle that AIs that do not incorporate human morality into its utility calculus will have negative consequences on us.
That's not a fair statement... He has accomplished a lot by most peoples standards. If you're are implying that marital success is worth more in life than career, I wouldn't argue with you but I do disagree that one is objectively more valuable.

It really depends on the individual.

Clearly Elon made his choice, but he has kids he loves and a business empire. I wouldn't even go as far to say that he did it just for the sake of business success. I think he has long ago dedicated his life to the human race as a whole and his success in business came as a byproduct.
Only if people start losing their jobs in high numbers.
The same thing could happen to senior. In particular, to tired overworked senior. It is more likely to happen to junior, because junior is likely to be overwhelmed. However, mistakes like this happen to prole of all ages and experience levels.

Seniority is what makes you not put the damm password into set up document. That was the inexperienced level of mistake. Forgotting to replace it while you are seting up day one machine is mistake that can happen to anyone.
I just went to see what you meant, and the current front-page comic on xkcd[1] doesn't convey that to me at all. Fudging statistics isn't part of geek culture (even politicians do it :P). I went back and of the past 10 comics, you could argue 3 of them reference "geek culture" so heavily you can't understand the joke unless you know what they're on about.

I'm not going to pretend that it's not true (after all, the author is a geek and wants to share that with other people -- there are plenty of comics for "non-geeks"), but it's definitely not true of _every comic_.

> The emotional response they evoke in the viewer is based on, "I know something that other people don't"

Personally, the xkcd comics I find funny are the ones I relate to (the same with any joke). In particular, this one on Machine Learning[2] was especially funny to me because someone in my research group recently started looking at neural nets to analyse stellar spectra and we had a similar conversation with a similar conclusion.

Just because very few people might relate to a particular comic doesn't mean that they relate to that comic because they like feeling superior (they might, but that's not what the comic is trying to do).

[1]: https://xkcd.com/1845/
[2]: https://xkcd.com/1838/
"This is more of a "does anyone else get this way?" because I'm having a hard time relating with the real world in this issue."

I don't - moving generally fills me with excitement, even when it was to a new country. But I have friends that react in such a way, so it definitely isn't just you. I'd say the other reply here is correct, however. I think the best course of action is to talk to a professional - therapist, psychiatrist or medical doctor. If you can get rid of the anxiety that leads to a near-panic attack, it'll make the decision making and the stress involved in such a decision easier to navigate and talk through.
Ringless voice mails from telemarketers
If they don't need to fill the position immediately it makes sense for them to wait for an ideal candidate. It doesn't necessarily make you "really, really bad".
I am the only one who is surprised that he can get the keys to the kingdom on day 1?

Day 1 is when you setup your desk and get your login. Then go back to HR to do the last hiring paperwork.

It should take a good week before a new employee is able to fuck up anything. Really.
"Show me country & city as rows, year as a column, sum the amount of population for country/city combination, show the YoY as a column and the subtotal for city".

Really? That's 3 clicks a way with a well-designed UI.

And what if I have those 3 fields in different tables? Even more verbosity...

P.S: My job has nothing to do with designing UIs, just to dispell any doubt :)
That's very nice. I'll have to give this a try in my work. Never thought about that.
This post is a dupe because https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14473243 was earlier and more informative on the same topic. Often there's a comment linking to the earlier submission, but it's easy to figure out in any case:
https://hn.algolia.com/?query=google%20capture%20the%20flag&....

Your other claims are impossible to respond to concretely. The one thing the users who write such lively critiques have in common is that they never supply specific links, because then it would be possible to answer them.
I worked for Aflac for over five years. They do not do major medical. They provide supplemental insurance. When I was there, 75-80% of their income was from their Japanese division. Japan has a single payer system.

Most insurance companies have multiple products. When the landscape changes and undercuts some current product, you come up with new ones and retrain your people. Plus, the government would likely hire some of those people to work for it once it took over payments because those people already have HIPAA training, are familiar with Gramm-Leach-Bliley Etc.
I think it's hyperbole. I don't see how it's possible, even for a super athlete. I'm sure it's highly inflated numbers, there would also be not benefit for Kobe to come out and say, Na that's wrong... I train half that.
I agree. I'm not one of he people who think that no one could have done better than MM. On the contrary, my cat could have done better. My cat would have also chased a laser pointer around the room instead of pissing a billion dollars away on tumblr. Then he would have insisted that yahoo offset the capex on internal clusters by entering the cloud infrastructure​ field. This would offer another revenue stream not tied to eyeballs.

Newspapers had been consolidating since they didn't know how to make money from the web. So I expect chairman meow to have also bought some papers. Cats love sitting on paper. And getting yahoos ability to make money from the web and the natural draw of journalism it seems like a good fit.
I agree that we need to implement postquantum computing algo's for both hashing (proof of work function) and signing (transaction authentication). I don't agree we should build a QKD network of p2p fiber to er this. SIDH is looking the most attractive for the postquantum signing, at least.
I believe the community name is Rustacean[1].

[1]: http://www.rustaceans.org/
I fucked up a table once by setting the column of every record to true, but I had asked about changing the code to require a manual sql query a few weeks prior so it could have been prevented.
Isn't this new person deserve a peer bonus by discovering a production risk?
NPS I think is really for employee motivation.
Halo mcc
> because i'm convinced the "next big language" will have to run on mobile and server

Wouldn't it also need to be cross-platform in that case?

It's sad that Kotlin and Swift are so similar but not similar enough.

(Although I'd prefer a dynamic language to be the "next big language" - it seems the pendulum is currently swinging back towards static typing...)
Oh course, it's en vogue
No one buys a car expecting the value to go up so the vehicle market probably won't unravel in a collapse (vehicle debt is also about 1/10 the size of the mortgage market).
Another stupid cto... You did a great job!
Sounds a bit like mortgages circa 05
Aside from growing up in silicon valley, he's the only other inspiration that rich is attainable and accessible.

you mean growing up in the worlds best tech city isn't the reason he was able to be successful?

i get your point but i think your point is about .5% as correct as you think it is. at the extreme end you could take the same person and have him grow up in a slum somewhere virtually no chance. he could have grown up even in like richmond cali just an hr. away from silicon valley and his chances of success would be like ten thousand (10,000) percent less.

you have a point but it's such an insignificant point almost to the point of being completely fucking wrong and a show of extreme ignorance/dumbassness

stupidass
"The CTO abdicated his responsibility" would be okay, but "This doesn't abdicate the CTO of his responsibility" doesn't work.
plot twist: but the backups are 6 months out of date, so the dev has no recollection of the incident
> the thought process of the company was probably not so much that he messed up the database that day, but that they'd never be able to trust him with actual production work down the line.

I think that they simply acted emotionally and out of fear, anger and stress. The vague legal threat and otherwise ignoring this dude bother suggest it. The way events unfolded, it does not sound like much rational thinking was involved.
There is never a better time to make a breaking change than right now.

Why does make treat tabs and spaces differently? Because Feldman's original version had that bugs and he didn't want to disrupt the <10 users and their <100 makefiles. That was the wrong decision, though he didn't know it at the time.

However many users Swift has today, tomorrow there will be more. However many lines of code are written in it, tomorrow there will be more. The pain of making a change will only increase.

Apple was up front with everyone about Swift 1: there will be source-breaking changes in the future. Swift 3 was targeting source stability so it was the last chance to make such large changes.

In contrast, Swift 3.2 and Swift 4.0 are compiled by the same compiler and can be linked together. That means you can upgrade each module separately and don't have to wait for dependencies to upgrade. That's a huge win.

Swift 4 also brings Codable which will shave a massive amount of boilerplate from many codebases. The String overhaul is great too, along with generics improvements. These all affect the standard library and thus ABI stability.

The Law of Exclusivity is in, which is the core of the upcoming memory ownership model, which itself will enable async and other concurrency paradigms. This also affects ABI.

Once ABI stability lands the pace of standard library changes will necessarily slow dramatically. It is important to take the time to get things right, rather than rushing and locking bad or insufficient designs into stone.
> Leprino seems to have responded reasonably.

In line with his "ethics" principle that comes after quality and price.

Anyway, if you value the wellbeing of animals going vegan is pretty much the only to me. There's no such thing as animal-friendly meat or bio-industrial dairy.
Probably but I also get it. In startups the core team members sometimes fulfill duties that no one else is either trained, able or has the necessary credentials to do...

It sounds like OP has put himself into this situation and made himself indispensable and now he needs to figure out how to fix it.
This entire series of programs is brilliant, and watching re-runs of it on TLC (remember when they showed actual educational programming?) was one of my inspirations for being an engineer. It was produced at time which I would characterize as a technological "sweet spot" where most of the technologies and appliances we rely on today had been invented, but everything had yet to become digitized and computerized so it could still be explained even without covering digital computers in any detail (well, except the program on computers of course).
Definitely. I wonder if there will ever be an attempt to simplify (and make more consistent) the english orthography, similar to the 1996 german orthography reform.
It's fascinating to see what small nudges, path-dependency, local tradition, and merging cultures do to conventions and practices.

On another book-related topic: I've been trying to sort out when Library of Congress details started appearing on the Title Page verso of American books. Seems to be between the 1940s and early 1960s, though the practice wasn't unversal even by the 1970s (sampling from books around the office).

ISBN (and its precursor SBN) are late 1960s.

(I've become a cataloging / classifications geek.)
You mean "relevant" I think.
True, when a book is put flat with the front cover up, a bottom-to-top spine title is now upside down, whereas a top-to-bottom title is now upright and perfectly readable

If you're actually writing the title onto the spine manually with a pen and holding the book right-side-up, top-to-bottom becomes the natural consequence. I wonder if that may have been a factor in creating the top-to-bottom direction.
Yeah, rollbacks are more of adding a revert to the top of the pile so we just make sure we roll back things that can be rolled back. This is important to think about when planning deploys.
And this goes back to my original statement that AI will eventually evolve past it.

AI will originally be the weak 'force'. It will have to evolve mimicry to survive. This will lead to an increase of its survivability in a human dominated world. Eventually this will lead to AI being the dominant 'lifeform'. It is at this point a rapid cascade to a machine oriented morality can occur, and I can't imagine that it would be good for the human species as a whole.
I agree. Looping over a numeric sequence is simply a specific case of looping over any collection. A language should reflect this. It feels so natural to write:

for thing in collection: process(thing)

and very easy to move from that to a functional style:

map(collection, process)

or

collection.map(process)

The number of times I also need a integer counter is fairly small.
I agree. Looping over a numeric sequence is simply a specific case of looping over any collection. A language should reflect this. It feels so natural to write:

for thing in collection: process(thing)

and very easy to move from that to a functional style:

map(collection, process)

The number of times I also need a integer counter is fairly small.
No, it really isn't. Technically it is known as a 'management consultant'.

The CEO is an entirely different role.
It's very black and white right now (no knowledge or very constrained knowledge). The same problem exists with just plain old parameter learning, with DL models having so many free parameters it can make training more computationally expensive then it needs to be. For instance, I want to train a reinforcement learner to do some task in the real world (eg. a robot). It would be nice to be able to define a prior that puts very low to no probability on actions that are not physically possible. This would constrain the search space considerably. But it's not really clear how to do this with neural nets.
this, it looks like an hoax.
How can they do that?
Your life in maps
This App allows you to discover great places around you. Just log in and discover what other people like you recommend.
http://m.onelink.me/10ef7865