skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Basically I think it boils down to the fact that the c/cpp tooling is actually really sophisticated at this point and developers have already learned how to deal with the pain points of c/c++ so there is little incentive to change. Especially, since it means swapping out a highly advanced ecosystem i.e. UnrealEngine for the chance to spend the next 5 years building your own not-as-good system to then be able to start to program your own game. And its like this in every C/C++ industry I'm aware of (embedded devices / games / desktop apps).

I'm a rust fan, even more so of cargo (wish C/C++ had a cargo). But at the end of the day it almost always boils down to transition costs vs. benefits, and the benefits currently don't outweigh the transition costs IMHO.
I thought you were being sarcastic, but now I am not sure.
Wow, really cool page.
Heh, that for me culminated when windows released a ubuntu subsystem.

The names in order of popularity when it was originally announced (now they push for WSL)

1. Bash for Ubuntu on Windows

2. Windows Bash Shell

3. Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL)

Trying googling WSL - it's world surf league. Windows Bash Shell is impossible, so is Bash for Ubuntu on Windows. It's getting better as more and more articles are being written, but god almighty. I wouldn't be surprised if google is lending a helping hand with searches for WSL stuff.
How long did you try it? It can take a solid month to fully adapt -- you'll feel not great in the short term, but likely great in longer term. I've found my brain is much sharper burning ketones. I even stopped taking Adderall.
The threshold is whatever one feels is responsible. We are the only ones that know ourselves. I know when I feel like I'm pushing my boundaries. I really don't know what other people's boundaries are, and that's why I defer to their personal judgement.

I don't think there is a standard here unless we want to draw the line at the painfully obvious. But the danger doesn't lie in the painfully obvious, it lies in the gray area where we all differ.

And "reasonable" only ever seems obvious in retrospect.
At least in theory, soldiers risk their lives to make all their country's children safer. I think that's a worthwhile trade, in aggregate.

It depends on whether your country likes to get involved in wars that don't actually protect their populace, of course.
>But that wasn't the case for the author. He was happy to have gotten fired. He thanked his manager for letting him go. This is not a rational mindset.

Says who? Are you some arbiter of rationality?

What logical argument supports that going freelance and not wanting to be a salaried employer is not a "rational mindset"?

It's a perfectly rational choice.
I'm late to the party.

Concourse is difficult to come to from other CI tools. A little more aloof. There have been real, serious implementation difficulties.

But I kinda love it, because it's a handful of simple ideas that unlock incredible power. It goes beyond "build and test each commit" to becoming a full project automation tool, a software manufacturing robot. When I talk to people about Concourse, I tell them: your pipeline and your tasks are production code. Keep the discipline, care and engineering practices that you bring to the apps and services you create.

The problem is that most of the deep tribal knowledge about how to get started and how to best apply it is locked up inside a handful of organisations, most notably Pivotal. I had been working on a video series which was meant to walk through both the concrete business of building pipelines, as well as the concepts of how best to do so.

Unfortunately visa conditions got in the way and I have abandoned that effort. Interested persons are welcome to email me for links to the first 4 episodes that I made, but be aware that it stops even more suddenly than Firefly.

Disclosure: I work for Pivotal.
Usually in ML context generalization means anytime a model makes a prediction on unseen (not in the training set) inputs. Usually you do CV to see how well your model generalized because you limit the training data seen, predict unseen inputs that you know the answer to, and see how far off the prediction is.
I'm well aware of that but also read that health risks vs BMI is a bathtub curve where risks increase a lot above 30 BMI or below 20 BMI.
Code already written in C/C++. I don't think there's anything stopping Rust from snowballing at this time. It's built some very strong libraries for certain problem domains, and because there's package management, it's possible to reuse it. This has already substantially reduced the friction of "systems" programming since you don't run into a challenging build process. But for the majority of folks the answer for an immediate need is still a tool or framework they already use.
On the other hand, in that case he's likely to be "scared straight" now and much more careful, at least for a good while.
Check out FreeSpace 2, it's got some incredible mods and runs on W10 at any resolution if I remember correctly.
Very impressed to see the confusion matrix consist of the actual images in that deep zoom style rendering. We've implemented something similar in spirit in some image processing machine learning application but instead I have a traditional confusion matrix with counts that are "<a>" anchor links to a webpage that displays all the constituent images. Nice work Facets team.

I particularly like this language here...
"Dive is a tool for interactively exploring up to tens of thousands of multidimensional data points, allowing users to seamlessly switch between a high-level overview and low-level details. ...Dive makes it easy to spot patterns and outliers in complex data sets."
https://github.com/pair-code/facets#facets-dive

That's key functionality to drill into our data with powerful navigable dashboards and visualization tools. We're creating this seamless transition with some Python and Flask and Bokeh tooling but nothing as impressive is Facets. But we've cued in all the domain specific things of interest, but it's nice to see a general purpose feature set on display with Facets.
>It's not that hard, if you have a lucrative skill.

If you have a lucrative skill you'd be an idiot to go work for someone else. You can have your own business and have clients coming to YOU, and get to keep all the profit, and grow the business too.

So, somehow your definition of lucrative skill is "lucrative, but only if you're a salaried employee".
this is exactly what happens in transfer learning. A recent paper by google ( https://research.googleblog.com/2017/07/revisiting-unreasona... ) shows that pre-training on a very large image database leads to improvements in state of the art for several different image problems. This is because the weights required for one image problem are not necessarily all that different from another image problem, especially in the early layers. There may not be as much common ground beteen images and e.g. NLP. Perhaps at much higher abstraction levels, but we aren't there yet.
The thing is that it's most likely not something anyone does per se but something that happens with enough complexity.

If you happen to believe evolutionary theory is the most convincing then we weren't built either but a byproduct of emergent complexity.

It is my belief that humans are pattern recognizing feedback loops and carriers of information. We externalized some of that into books and built libraries to be able to keep even more than humans can remember as individuals and now have technology to save even more information and even manipulate it in ways impossible up until 80 years ago or so.

I am fairly certain that a technology is part of nature and that technology based conscience is nothing like our limited conscience but something rather different. The end result will not be like humans just better but nothing like humans at all but much better at the carrying of information part.

And so with that (my personal belief) perspective in mind no one is going to be able to do it it will happen as a by-product.

Please keep in mind that I saying "we exeternalized" in the same way we say "selfish genes" it's not a conscious effort as such but rather something which happen to be favorized in the game of life.

Why that is I have no idea but I am fairly certain humans aren't the last species. But yes it's all very speculative I just haven't been able to find better explanations for now.
> that severely limits who can be a soldier

But that's an economic problem, isn't it? Maybe if children stopped working, we couldn't make enough matches? But unless we recognise the morally undesirable, why would we care to change anything?

You can recognise something as morally undesirable, yet for some other reason unavoidable. There are many things that fall into that category.

It's also a slippery slope - if something is needed does that justify all means in getting it? And to what extent does America really need (a certain amount) of soldiers? It's one thing to defend its borders, but is every military action of necessity - as opposed to national will?
> PISA is the best, administered by the OECD:

"PISA uses multiple-choice testing as the primary feature of its assessments...". http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisafaq/

> If I wanted [teaching to the test] I'd have sent my kid to school in Singapore.

AFAIU kids in Singapore also score better than Americans in both math and English.

Perhaps curriculums in both Germany and Singapore are tailored toward better PISA scores. Perhaps PISA testing is more segregated or those countries have less income inequality such that their PISA test-takers are generally more relatively wealthy.

And I've yet to see any evidence that more advanced curriculums ultimately result in a smarter, more efficient workforce. (What with diminishing returns and all.) Even within a country, elders always lament how the current curriculum is easier or less strict then when they were in school. Never do they provide data showing a worse work force; merely data showing a difference in scores for a very narrow and specific set of skills.

AFAIK, kids in Switzerland don't start a normal academic curriculum until age 7, as opposed to age 5 in the U.S. Yet the initial skills gap (such as it is) is quickly erased. That to me suggests the only reason to worry about how advanced is a curriculum is if you have a particular reason to believe it would result in a serious impediment that couldn't be easily overcome. When might that be a real issue? By your account, certainly when changing schools between jurisdictions with significantly different curriculums, like when moving to a different country. Otherwise, it's really quite hard to tell. Americans always lament how kids are unprepared for college, but that cry often sounds like the typical cry of the older generation. Certainly I don't think I've ever heard a professor praise his foreign students over similarly situated native students, particularly by the 4th year.
I'd like to see the actual distributions of foods (and micro/macros) in these studies along with the human stats (ages, activity levels). I suspect that the factors are for more multi-modal than the buckets of "low carb" and "high fat". Open source data here would allow for alternative views on the data, and likely better learning overall.
The nutrition, for mayonnaise, is "all fat with a tiny smidgen of protein"... not so hard to replicate.

I've never seen an appellation applied to mayonnaise, have you?
Maybe I'm more off-the-handle here than I care to admit. I don't know why I still get constantly surprised by the crazy idealism of HN. I'm a 100% dyed in the wool hacker, coded BASIC in grade school, but there are aspects about the culture that still elude me, mostly because I have a lot of other identities and can't constantly keep tabs on what this particular community feels.

So yeah, I'll concede the logical points you raised.

But you have no idea how many really and truly irrational people I've run into in my day. Life wasn't kind to them, and I'm expected to fix it, and if I don't, I'm the irrational / disloyal one. I am very very attuned to the irrational mindset.

But HN has its crazy idealism, so the second I call one person irrational, everybody here jumps on me like I'm a crazy job Nazi. I attacked your idealism, I must pay. I get this crap with my roommate, who pissed away 3 jobs since I've known him and have to give a break on the rent because he's satisfying other obligations that he took on at least partly due to idealism.

So let me state, for the record, that not wanting to have a 9-5 job is an eminently rational thing to want. Wanting it against reality, however, or without a realistic plan to accomplish it, or settling on stupid ways of getting there, like just quitting without a game plan, is a recipe for pain, not prosperity. You're not dealing from a rational frame, so your outcomes will not be what you want them to be.

My strong reaction comes from many many years of dealing with people who beg for your help, but just can't be helped. You can't talk sense into them, you can't give them anything that would meaningfully help them.
AirPods and Magnetic Strips
Technically, the idea behind HTML was that the HTML simply described a document which the browser then decided on how to render/style it.
"This ability [...] to perform abstraction and reasoning, is arguably the defining characteristic of human cognition."

He's on the right track. Of course, the general thrust goes beyond deep learning. The projection of intelligence onto computers is first and foremost wrong because computers are not able, not even in principle, to engage in abstraction, and claims to the contrary make for notoriously bad, reductionistic philosophy. Ultimately, such claims underestimate what it takes to understand and apprehend reality and overestimate what a desiccated, reductionistic account of mind and the broader world could actually accommodate vis-a-vis the apprehension and intelligibility of the world.

Take your apprehension of the concept "horse". The concept is not a concrete thing in the world. We have concrete instances of things int he world that "embody" the concept, but "horse" is not itself concrete. It is abstract and irreducible. Furthermore, because it is a concept, it has meaning. Computers are devoid of semantics. They are, as Searle has said ad nauseam, purely syntactic machines. Indeed, I'd take that further and say that actual, physical computers (as opposed to abstract, formal constructions like Turing machines) aren't even syntactic machines. They do not even truly compute. They simulate computation.

That being said, computers are a magnificent invention. The ability to simulate computation over formalisms -- which themselves are products of human beings who first formed abstract concepts on which those formalisms are based -- is fantastic. But it is pure science fiction to project intelligence onto them. If deep learning and AI broadly prove anything, it is that in the narrow applications where AI performs spectacularly, it is possible to substitute what amounts to a mechanical process for human intelligence.
>It's relevant because it is another way in which the assertion that Apple is responsible for getting rid of DRM'd music is at best misleading.

Apple is responsible for getting rid of DRM'd in music sold legally.
> focus a lot of his time on the data itself... from where he intends to collect it? how is it structured? is it reliable? is it "enough"?

What's the best books on this subject? I suppose it's a very broad topic and thus more difficult to talk about than a single "neural network" algorithm.
Applied Cryptography is pop science. It's a book written breezily and unseriously, a sort of whirlwind tour of a subject its author is fascinated and engaged with, but without rigor. Approached on those terms, it's a fun read. I sure enjoyed it when it first came out.

Unfortunately, it's also a showcase for what can go wrong if you provide too much technical content in a pop science book. What happened with A.C. is similar to what you'd think might happen in a book about home anesthesiology, complete with resources to show you how you'd put someone under from first principles and household chemicals.

On the whole, because it's generally taken by its readers as authoritative and prescriptive, A.C. has done a lot more harm than good.

Cryptography Engineering is imperfect, too. But it was written seriously, accepting and engaging with the fact that readers will use it as a guidebook to serious implementation. It's a much safer book than Applied Cryptography.

Moreover, if you're serious about engaging with crypto in your career, it's a better book. You won't learn much about what goes wrong with crypto from Applied Cryptography, which happily documents a number of weak or even broken constructions and describes protocols and techniques that were obsolete years before the book was published. Cryptography Engineering is aware of much of the cryptographic literature, and almost every chapter concerns itself first and foremost with what goes wrong with crypto constructions. You can read it "inside out" as a sort of first course in attacking cryptosystems.
This is brilliant. It kind of reminds me of hy (https://github.com/hylang/hy) in addition to Norvig's lis.py that the author cites as inspiration.

I feel like lots of folks in the R community secretly or not-so-secretly pine for lisp. My own "someday project" is to implement some portion of R in Racket—"Arket". Of course all the native libraries that have been wrapped in R are the tricky bit.
We can debate, but I don't think another AI winter will happen again in my lifetime. AI work is just earning way too much money for its funding to get cut, and a lot of funding is currently private too.
The problem with most jobs (well, at least the kind of jobs those who frequent this site typically get) is not that they are bad. In fact most of them are quite comfy and well-paying. By the standards of previous epochs they would qualify as leisure.

The problem is that a job robs you of that tiny bit of fuel that you can use to change the world in the direction that is yours alone. I don't know the exact word for it, so let's call it agency. I would argue that it is in large part what makes you human and not an automaton. You didn't have that problem when you worked that warehouse job because you used it to save up for doing something you wanted. But for some senior engineer at the BigCo polishing the internals of an ad-serving backend in exchange for a hefty paycheck the problem is real.

It is especially tantalizing for us software developers because we are constantly bombarded with reminders about how much leverage and power we have. This makes the pain of wasting our agency on someone else's crappy vision even more acute.
But that's a principle that comes from personal choice. When you have kids, there's a third party involved.

> I don't think there is a standard here

Has such a proposal been investigated?

> And "reasonable" only ever seems obvious in retrospect.

I disagree.
Asking people to debate what is likely to be a quasi-religious opinion is asking for a flame war. The problem with parenting and the implications of the responsibility thereof is that everyone who has to parent has to have an opinion and has to believe theirs is correct. There really isn't the societal barrier we have regarding discussions about religion and politics keeping most of us, who otherwise wouldn't contribute because of the radioactivity, silent. Of course, this can only result in a thread which spirals into arrogant "you don't have children, so your opinion is null and void" territory and other such nonsense. It's very unlikely to be a thread of any illustrative value other than the value of illustrating how closed minded and dismissive people can be. I'd rather not deal with that on HN.
Alexa-ready digital alarm clock radio takes to Kickstarter
I have used it in the past for automated regression testing in the same vein as https://github.com/twitter/diffy

It obviously did better than a naive text diff algorithm.
> Despite not being required to cut calories, participants were eating an average of 500 calories less, and what they were eating was high quality.

This could also be simply attributed to being watched. That to me is a huge confounding factor that needs to be carefully isolated in all diet studies.

The huge success of personal fitness trackers suggests people tend to have healthier lifestyles when they measure their actions, even if it's for their own personal record (let alone for sharing on social media or being studied).
Windows is the most superior operating system in existence.

See that? See how untenable a statement like that is without any sort of evidence, sourcing, or even general thoughts beyond the initial contention? See how it adds as much value to the conversation as shouting "star trek rules!" at a star wars convention?
Thanks for the heads up, we are investigating this now.
No they aren't? RNNs have state that gets modified as time goes on. The RNN has to learn what is important to save as state, and how to modify it in response to different inputs. There is no explicit time-stamping.
Google's CDN is huge and extensive. See https://peering.google.com/#/infrastructure
Silicon Valley's ultimate status symbol is the sneaker
Inertia. You don't rewrite an existing codebase unless the current one is simply not capable of doing what you need it to. And there are a lot of existing codebases in C and C++.
Do somebody know how the images where created? I haven't found a tool that creates ascii art with that color quality.
Bloody hell, this looks like Bitbucket, but purple.

Compare:

Gitlab final prototype: https://about.gitlab.com/images/blogimages/redesigning-gitla...

Bitbucket server:
https://confluence.atlassian.com/bitbucket/files/304578655/5...

The resemblance is uncanny.
1. I found my first few clients literally through happenstance -- people were describing problems they were having with enough clarity that my 20 years of dev experience made it fairly clear that the problems were recoverable. Now, I mostly find customers through referrals and by attending networking events and talking to people who sound like they have both money and problems.

2. My customers have the expectation of confidentiality. I will make these generalizable statements though: understanding ORMs and understanding SQL are related but not identical; CAP is hard; picking keys is hard; confounding your data model and your interface is painful for users; sharding is hard; pick UX libraries based on how consistent they are not on how new they are; developers that are producing 10x the code may not be producing 10x the value; if week on week, your project is consistently n/n+1 * 100% done, you have a estimation problem and just the fact that you're agile doesn't help with this; the whole point of tags was that not everyone agrees on categories; queuing theory is real; your spreadsheets aren't as consistent as you think; the fact that an engineer can figure out the bigO of a sort doesn't mean they understand efficiency in real life.
At what exposure level?
Girl Shocks the Crowd at Open Mic Night
I wouldn't say they're a Civilian organization, the NSA directly falls under the department of defense. I would say their mandate and mission is more of a passive intel (clandestine) style operation vs more overt military action though. As for "cyber attacks", it's nothing new, it's only recently though, the past few years, that mainstream media is becoming more aware of these activities. The D.o.D. has been deploying warfighters with network exploitation skills early into the Operation Iraqi freedom, and only grown since then. There is definitely two sides of the digital battle field though. There's the sit and observe method (the NSA) and the smash and grab method (the Military components).
You are assuming he is a good father. Capacity to reproduce in no way whatsoever guarantees that one is any good with kids.