skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yeah, that bothers me too, and its actually scary to think that in the future, we could all be locked out of our own machines. As it is, looking at UX trends, it seems like everything is slowly being diluted to the lowest common denominator. Soon there will be no more "pro" devices - because who needs all those ports, and who needs to upgrade the ram/hdd/etc - but hey, atleast it will be shiny!
Honest question.. Who cares about interpretability if you're optimizing for predictive power?

Also, DL can be interpretable in different domains, much like any non-linear classifier (are you hating on random forests too for the same reason?) It just takes more work vs. looking at linear coefficients.
Do you think Micosoft should have rebranded their mobile products as Skype?

Not dissimilar to what you're proposing (which may work).
How is this different from Udemy? Looks like another derivation startup.
Data Visualization Engineer | Hedge-fund | New York, Chicago | ONSITE | Full­time | $170k - $300k+(skill based and seniority based) with great benefits

World's leading machine learning driven hedge fund are looking for Data Visualization Engineers to work on real-time high frequency data visualization. You will work on the design and production of innovative interactive data visualizations using open-source technologies within a strong team of professionals renowned in their fields. The platform is internationally recognized and has won many awards. Future work would also involve data mining structured and unstructured datasets so interest in the field is beneficial.

Skills required; JavaScript, D3.js, Python, HTML, CSS. Skills desired; Node.js, Angular, WebGL.
A bachelor’s degree, Computer Science, Engineering, Mathematics or STEM background preferred.

If you are interested in discussing in more details, please send me an email at: eduardo(dot)herrera(at)njfsearch(dot)com
Thanks, Eduardo
Lol god fuck copyright infringement. What idiot company in their right mind would pursue that? Manuals are a cost sink and a resource like this is simply a cost saver for them. It improves customer goodwill if manuals are accessible by any means. Unlike trademarks and patents there is no detriment to them if they don't enforce.
There's a big difference between the right to free speech and the principle of free speech. Most especially when it comes to academia.
> Could you be denied admittance to Harvard because you showed up on campus at some kind of freshman event and started telling extremely offensive jokes in front of the whole gathering?

Probably depends how offensive you were. But yeah, sure you could. I am absolutely positive there are some prospective freshmen at Harvard who have had their admission rescinded based on their behavior during the pre-frosh weekend. Such incidents tend to be less publicized because they involve a single student, and there's normally an embarrassment factor involved.

Once you are on campus and admitted it would be more difficult...it would depend on the context. Certainly people have been kicked out (or rather, "asked to leave") based on sharing offensive material and memes, but in the cases I know of it was because that material was targeting specific individuals / people.
No, but they are saying that it's a free speech issue. It is a free speech issue, but not in the way they are saying. Your anger is misplaced if it's directed at Harvard.
Classical Stoicism (and not the "be an emotionless robot" nonsense it's often misinterpreted as) is very much like Buddhism & Nonviolent Communication.
Folks always make this argument which this kind of thing comes up. Just because you as a private entity can limit free speech, doesn't mean you should. Censorship is generally a bad idea, and I as a private entity can be upset at Harvard for doing it.
More important than the optimizations themselves is the instrumentation they built up to reliably measure and monitor the performance.

One thing to keep in mind is that python 3 is still considerably slower than python 2 (edit) in some areas such as startup times while it has gotten faster in most other benchmarks.
It wasn't just a private group.

> The founders of the messaging group demanded that students post provocative memes in the main group chat to gain admittance to the smaller group.
Two 20 oz coca cola drinks get you to 130g. [0]

I am thinking you're underestimating just how "rare" 500g of carbs make their way into peoples diets every day, for years.

[0]http://www.coca-colaproductfacts.com/en/coca-cola-products/c...

edit: 20oz, not 16
REST Calls Made Easy: Sniffing Elasticsearch
I mentioned this in a comment above - Harvard is a private university that is blessed by favored government status. The exemption on endowment growth is worth more per undergraduate than public colleges receive from the state (apologize for no cite, I read that it is worth 3x more per undergrad than what Berkeley gets per undergrad from the state). Harvard also gets a massive amount of its funding from government research grants, and it does divert a substantial amount of it to general operating funds.

Harvard is pretty far from a purely private organization. I understand we live in a complicated world, and almost nothing is "purely" private, but there are still degrees of public and private, it exists on a continuum. Harvard, as far as "private" institutions go, is heavily supported by government money and favored status. It's nothing close to your analogy of a privately owned house.
Yours is the argument posed by employers who posted "Blacks need not apply" adverts. Are you sure that's the hill you want to die on? Anyway, by "oppression", I was referring to the OPs implicit suggestion that were prohibit unpopular speech, which is oppression.
Is there an analysis/post-mortem on the QuadrigaCX snafu anywhere? I would be very interested in reading a detailed account of exactly what went wrong.
No that's not true. The polls were within the margin of error. The polls were exactly right. The problem is the result landed within the margin of error, that the predicted error itself meant it wasn't possible to know with any certainty what was going to happen.
See my comment above. It's not any more racism than joking about dead babies means you actually want to kill babies. It's not any more racism than playing cards against humanity makes you an unforgivable monster. Black humor is extremely common and as old as time.
As with many social reactionary trends, it seems like one flawed system (all spoils to the "winner") was replaced with another flawed system (there are no winners).

The former system tends to reward those who have inborn or socially provided advantages, and makes the prize the end goal rather than the process. This can result in winning-at-all-cost behavior, even if results in damage to oneself or society (i.e perf enhancing drugs).

The reactionary​ everyone-is-a-winner approach robs people of signal they need to optimize their efforts to succeed.

IMO a saner approach would be to encourage competition but not make suffering via social exclusion or destitution the cost of losing.

Intra-group competition within those bounds can make the group stronger, but left unchecked can do the opposite.
Yeah, the idea of the books is great... but I doubt I'll ever get around to reading any of them very closely.
> The odds that they'll "learn" from their "mistake" is highly unlikely.

Learning that your actions have consequences and that no one is responsible for facing those consequences but you is more valuable than any other single lesson they'd have learned in college. And they didn't even have to pay tuition to find that one out.
Why would I want that? The government funds private institutions all the time. Doesn't make them less private.

If the government wants to run Harvard, then it can tell Harvard who it can and can't admit.
In the 2014 fiscal year, Harvard received $608 million in research funding from the government.
It's exhausting to me that there are huge swaths of commenters that immediately jump on the legal protections for free speech and lecture us on how that First Amendment only protects you from government retaliation.

Everyone knows that. Nobody (except the most ill-informed) dispute it. But the First Amendment is not and was never intended to be the end-all and be-all of free speech. Freedom of speech is a value held by society. The First Amendment is a legal protection afforded that value in law.

When people and organizations start clamping down on speech, yes, that is a violation of the principle of freedom of speech, even if it has nothing to do with the First Amendment. Yes, there has to be a reasonable balance between your freedom to associate with people who say obnoxious things and their freedom to say obnoxious things. Nobody disputes that either.

But there's been an increasingly clear trend of people being banished from workplaces, universities, and other spaces because of their speech, people who would not have been so punished in the past. Part of it is the Internet puts our words in a public space, accessible to everyone. Part of it is the Internet foments mobs of offended people who come after you. Part of it is that people seem to be becoming more and more intolerant of dissenting views.

This is an extremely dangerous long-term trend. It points to a more factious, divided populace. It points to eventual government restrictions on speech. Authoritarian governments rarely start out by banning speech everyone supports. They start banning speech everyone finds dangerous and offensive. Having Brownshirts beating up Communists for their speech ends with Nazis rounding up Communists.

> There are already numerous hate speech laws covering the fact that the first amendment does not mean that you have a right to say whatever you want in a private space.

Care to point these laws out?
I think for Netflix it was more pragmatic than that. I don't think they were ever really committed to Net Neutrality -- it was just a negotiating tactic to get lower rates for the interconnects that they would inevitably need once they saw their transit rates going through the roof.

Keep in mind that Netflix is somewhere around 40-50% of peak internet traffic volume. Operating without edge caches located physically within the ISPs network was not feasible. It is not reasonable to expect the ISPs to integrate/operate those edge caches for no cost. Netflix always knew they were going to have to pay, the question was "How much?"

Once you start dealing with network architecture for video distribution at the national ISP scale, strict principles of net neutrality don't really make a ton of sense. You need edge caches, you need a place to put them, and it's expensive and complex for ISPs to manage the hundreds (yes, hundreds) of vendors who want to put edge caches in their datacenters. Netflix just wanted a better "volume price" than they were paying before.
Running Nextcloud in jail on FreeBSD
Of course you can sell it. But talking it up won't make the valuation increase. Anyone can talk about the potential a site may have... but you need to show actual traffic, retention, and revenue if you want it to have value.
Yeah but the line gets greyer the closer your 'private company' gets to being a public institution, whether in law or just in public perception.

The fact that you're saying "if someone found out about the private contents of the private group means it wasn't private enough" is kind of disturbing tbh.
It's an easy way to ascertain what group is the dominant political power.
> So what you want is authoritarian control of speech.

Nope. Say anything you like. Learn to live with the consequences, which can and should include rejection by widespread parts of civilized society, and bask in the solitude. The crickets will surely enjoy your free speech.

You shouldn't go to jail for it, but you can't demand that other people like it.
Show HN: BlastEm – A highly accurate and moderately fast Genesis/MD emulator
Its worth watching the video in its entirety. That's not true. Python 3.6 beats 2.7 in most benchmarks, its just that there are a few places where 3 is slower (like startup time) that make a lot of things look bad, but that don't actually affect "speed" as most people would consider.
They met through the university's group, but they created their own chat.
I recently setup Nextloud 12 https://nextcloud.com/ inside a FreeBSD jail. My Nextcloud instance is externally accessible, and yet if someone were to get inside my Jail, I could rest easy knowing they still didn’t have access to the rest of my host server. I chronicled the setup process including jail setup using iocage https://github.com/iocage/iocage, https with Lets Encrypt https://letsencrypt.org/, and full setup of the web stack.
It doesn't matter that it's on the holdout, he's partitioning an already small dataset into 5 partitions and talking about the accuracy in using 80 points to predict 20 points. The whole argument is usually that in the law of large numbers you can now have a statistically significant difference in accuracy. When you're predicting 20 points each with 5 (potentially different) models you likely don't have enough to talk about statistical significance.
Authoritarian measures are the name of the game. The point of all this is not to increase inclusion, it is to to increase the power of those who decide what is or is not inclusive.
What keeps them from doing it? Internet communication is not private. Everybody with access can record and sell it.
I bought the BLU R1 HD-16GB [1] as basically a throwaway for travelling. I was surprised at the value for $80-150 CDN of the Blu line. It wasn't a horrible experience at all and even has dual-sims. I would definitely recommend as a basic device that's unlocked and near stock Android (albeit, the OS is out of date, so security might be a concern).

[1] https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B01H2E0KVA/
If you're not posting under your confirmed real name, in a facebook group under the control of the private university, there's probably nothing they can do.
Bretebart - The Internet's Finest Fake News Source
In addition to that paper, I raged against COBOL for a long time.

It wasn't until on my first consulting gig writing RPG III for a year, that the IBM guy installed COBOL on the system 34, and Presto COBOL wasn't all that bad.

For its time it was better than alternatives. After a while, not so much.
Yeah, I don't see what's wrong with a souvenir to remember the season by. That's not coddling kids, it's just giving them a trinket that will hopefully bring back nice memories. Amateur adult teams do the same thing in the form of t-shirts etc.

I agree that this has been blown out of proportion, as csydas said in the parent comment. Criticising participation trophies is mostly a way for certain people to signal that they don't buy in to "all that millennial snowflake bullshit". How much harm can it really do?

Having said all that, having to play soccer while secretly keeping score does sound crazy!
> They're smart/accomplished enough to get into Harvard and they'll all likely rebound from this.

only the part that is messed up with this is after you get enrolled you usually send out a letter to other colleges/university to decline their offers... in my past experience after a decline their isn't a second chance. this puts all of them on a 1 year stand by. Really this is fair? - and they still have another 4 years to grow up and grow before joining a professional 'salary' job 18-23 year old? generally they would be between 17-18 years old and for such an petty issue will now have a hell of a time rebounding.
They are allowed to speak. Harvard is allowed to withdraw their acceptances. No legal charges have been pressed against them.

There you go-- freedom of speech.
So, you want to contribute to a specification?
Why does it sound like that to you? I'm all for freedom of association, I just don't think we should suggest that entities which don't prohibit offensive speech (E.g., the government) are necessarily supporting it.
I think it's a nice article, no problem with it appearing for an umpteenth time again. Any article that speaks about Lisp is a good article for me!!

There are some pretty good points, however there are one or two things that i take issue to, because they can be misleading:

1. The "lone wolf Lisp hacker" is not the only kind of Lisp hacker. Lisp has been used on important codebases at space missions and there are codebases of million-lines Lisp code at work right now, for example for airline reservations.

There are some Lisp projects on GitHub being contributed to and forked. The amount is small because popularity of Lisp is small compared to the main languages GitHub users prefer (i.e. Java, JS, etc), but they do show there is collaboration between "lone wolves".

2. You write "Unless they pay thousands of dollars, Lisp hackers are still stuck with Emacs."
I have used many IDEs (Visual Studio, Visual Studio Code, Eclipse, Netbeans, IntelliJ, and many Borland products) and the combination of Emacs + SLIME is pretty good, to be honest.
Innate differences.

Its time to accept the fact that some things are simply more fit for man and some for woman and that there is nothing to be done about it.

If we take gaming as an example, man are simply more devoted/involved, generally. Do they like to play more with things or they have better spatial ability or whatever else, its irrelevant - it is clear to anybody who actually does games what the situation is. Sure, I played with some woman that are better then most man, but that only strengthens the point.

There is no reason to be politically correct about it or ashamed to admit it or make a strategy about it. Just acceptance.
But but.. granite countertops.
Harvard: We can revoke your admission if we see that you are an asshole.
Students: Let's be assholes over here in the corner, because stuff is totally private on Facebook.
Harvard: You're assholes, and also stupid.
> Doesn't make them less private.

Doesn't it? "Who pays the piper..."
<Doesn't make them less private>

Ok, now I can see why we disagree.

Private/public is, to me, not binary. There are degrees. A homeowner, for instance, does get a favored tax status where it comes to income taxes (though the home owner also pays heavy property taxes that largely offset this). Yet we wouldn't regulate what people are allowed to talk about in their own home.

But on this continuum, Harvard is pretty far toward the "public" side of private. Massive amounts of government funding and tax exemptions.

And anyway, the government wouldn't need to get in the business of running Harvard, it could just say "here are the criteria for receiving federal grants and the tax exemptions". Harvard would be free to choose.
What I'm saying is Bezos & Co. might be gaming for the next generation of the handset. Bezos loves his 2-year runways so I doubt he's interested in any current smartphone ecosystem but in making inroads with consumers and developers.

What good would it be for Amazon to go after Microsoft's bread and butter? Google's already made its move towards them (Microsoft) with Chrome OS so I doubt there's really going to much more room for another titan.
One issue is the prevailing idea that all/most online interactions should be shared publicly. It would still have been ill-advised to make these jokes even in private, but I’d go so far as to say there’s a big concrete difference betweeen expressing yourself privately versus publicly. Your friends have a lot of context with which to judge you and your words, but the public doesn’t. You might say something sarcastically or in jest, but someone else might conclude that you believe it earnestly[1]. And if you ARE earnestly expressing yourself and feel like your ideas deserve public platform, then you need to have thought ahead about what kinds of responses you might get.

[1] See also Poe’s Law.
The argument presupposes that we are somehow aware of some sort of perfect moral standard at this point in time and that the only thing left to do is to implement it to all of society through the method you describe.

In the era where they saw disease as a divine punishment, most people no doubt held this belief as well.

In reality, moral standards will shift around as they always do, some parts will lose their luster and others will be strengthened. New standards will emerge and make our current progressive ideals seem distant and alien, the same way we look at medieval ostracism.
Lots of companies have been publishing sustainability reports for years now (our first was published in 2010) -- it's not unique to Google. We're on track to hit 100% renewable by 2025. Here's our site: https://www.bloomberg.com/bcause/planet/
>Doesn't make them less private.

Yes, it does actually.
Then you are using a _very_ slow hash function for which there are many algorithms better than MD5.
The Internet has shown all of us that simple restrictions on speech go a long way towards creating a welcoming and friendly atmosphere. Attacking basic civility and hate speech restrictions on speech is putting principles before reality. You don't want to make any laws restricting truly public speech, but censuring private entities for that is counter-productive.
Nice paywall you got there.
Black humor can still be racist. Something being (ostensibly) a joke doesn't mean it can't be racist/sexist/whatever.
It wasn't just private.

> The founders of the messaging group demanded that students post provocative memes in the main group chat to gain admittance to the smaller group.
Also check out The Pattern on the Stone, a similar book by the inventor of the Connection Machine.
I have some sympathy with this position, but de facto governments, state and federal, impose very very few restrictions on charities and non profits. As long as they aren't outright scams they can mostly do what they like. Even outright scams can skate along for a while.

There are two ways to fix this problem--assuming one thinks it's a problem.

One would be to leverage the myriad benefits we provide to do more to ensure that these organizations are acting in the public interest. That's a pretty tall order though. We'd be looking at a ton of new laws/regulations/bureaucracies to make tens of thousands of determinations. In this particular case, it's not clear to me that Harvard isn't at least not acting against the public interest.

The other way would be to eliminate the tax advantages and let the chips fall where they may. Again, assuming one thinks there is a problem, that seems the preferable solution to me.
Algorithm reconstructs faces from monkey brain waves
This is an external reward to set the stage for internally valuing their fitness & learning how to use their body. Nothing wrong with it, as long as there's a plan for internalization. Ideally, they'll be taught those lessons & won't need the ribbons to get them out on the cold days 10 years from now.

(Take with a grain of salt. My only experiences with raising children involve raising myself & my parents over the past 1.5 years.)
One has to be even more privileged to spend time on open source work than to hold a well-paid IT job; there are additional barriers.

For instance, open source contributors need free time, which is usually a consequence of relatively short working hours (i.e. being highly competent and educated) and short commutes (i.e. an expensive house in a convenient location), and not having to spend a lot of time, when at home, on housekeeping, children, old and ill family members, hostile environment, distractions, etc.
Yet another SJW propaganda war against free speech i can't even grasp. Please read abut socialist culture marxism by ex kgb agent:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5It1zarINv0
>Yet another SJW propaganda war against free speech i can't even
No one talking about this, freemarket i don't care, BUT we the people have to fight and post "hate speach" edege memes, about niggers, muh 6 millions, lolcaust, feminist totalitarian stte and other. We won't be silenced, by bunch of jews and SJW:
8ch.net/voat.co/tor proud user
It's a pump and dump, not a Ponzi scheme.