skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> sometimes avoid outings unless another woman will be there

I do this, regularly, in the UK. I really, really don't want to be the sole target of the one bigot in the room who none of the other men think is a problem (or at least not enough to speak to) - I'm meeting people to enjoy myself, and navigating the social complexities involved in accommodating people who attack me based on gender (plus other visible things I can't do much about) is not fun. Having another woman present tends to result in such behaviour being dialed down a tonne, or at least the ability to step out with her for a few minutes.
I don't find the debunking article persuasive. It says, "Imagine you take a blob of warm air from the surface up to some height... this transformation has to change the temperature of the air in the blob."

No it doesn't.

The nearest it gets to supporting that claim is, "It turns out to be very easy to derive an equation that says that the temperature decreases by 10 degrees C per about 1000 m of height with no vertical motion. That explains why the air above the surface is colder than the air at the surface."

I'd like to see the assumptions of deriving that equation. Without seeing how the equation is derived we can't jump straight to the "That explains why" part. I guess the equation he's talking about assumes the atmosphere is static and is simply deals with how the upper atmosphere is colder because it can radiate into space, whereas the lower atmosphere can only exchange radiation with warm ground or the cold-but-still-warmer-than-space upper atmosphere. If so, it says nothing about what happens when you "move a blob of warm air".

Maybe building these things is not feasible or maybe the effect is not significant, but it doesn't look physically impossible to me.
Something Is Broken in the UK Intellectual Sphere
The "jury of your peers" exists to provide a contextual moral component to the law. If your peers think you did no wrong, it doesn't matter what the letter of the law says: a crime that is justifiable to society deserves no punishment.

Conversely, if what you've done is not justifiable to society, you should be punished for it even if it is not a crime. The easiest way to understand this is when first-mover advantages run amok. If you're the first person to think of some dastardly evil, you should not be permitted to do it just because nobody has yet written a law prohibiting it. Like, say, the Coca-Cola Corporation is not innocent for putting addictive substances in their drinks simply because it wasn't illegal at the time. And Shkreli's price gouging doesn't sit well with anybody either. A person's ignorance about some harm does not constitute permission to commit that harm against them.

>When has the average person been able to grasp complex matters relating to say, securities fraud?

The defendant has an attorney whose job it is to explain these matters to the jury.
Correct. Which is why I stay on the ball.
Or you could hire the best for a given role in a given context.

Sometimes you need the whiz kid who can rewrite Torch from scratch in a weekend. It's OK if they eat the gunk between their toes.

Sometimes you need the gregarious former athlete. It's OK if they got an A- in real analysis.
Oh, another C compiler! I like collecting these - thanks! :)

Question for anyone handing out unofficial legal opinions:

This one is dual-licensed. There are a small kerfuffle of custom licenses that say "no commercial use", but everything is also variously covered by the GPL (v2 or later), LGPL v3, and BSD 3-clause.

Ref: https://github.com/AbsInt/CompCert/blob/master/LICENSE

I'm curious if I could use this in a commercial setting if I perfectly comply with the various GPL and BSD licenses.

If I could, that could be a problem for this group, because the repo readme (at https://github.com/AbsInt/CompCert) explicitly states "this is not free software."
I remember the main language of CryEngine is c++.
And Amazon Lumberyard is a fork of CryEngine (so also c++).
Maybe I am wrong.
shameless plug: I run a weekly, curated newsletter for keto/low-carb enthusiasts. Niched, interesting content.

https://keto.fm
shameless plug: I run a curated newsletter for keto/low-carb enthusiasts. Nichd, interesting content.

https://keto.fm
It's nice to see that Indian Ron Swanson doesn't hate computers as much as his US counterpart.
[DEF CON 25] Garry Kasparov: The Brain's Last Stand
I remember one of the wiki leaks releases from last year implied that google/Facebook had the capability to shift political opinion by selecting what people are exposed to.

When the government does this I think it's actually less harmful because people are aware the government wants to manipulate opinion.

The capability to individually tailor propaganda like is already done with advertising is much worse I think.
Bitcoin: Evidence of spoofing, wash trading, and a scheme known as ‘Tether’
Set reminders, forget time zones
Funny, I always interpreted it as Google lending the credibility of their name to whatever Kurzweil says. I guess it's a win-win for both of them.
This is mainly because academia - the humanities primarily - in the US has been infiltrated by postmodernists and cultural marxists and colleges pump out social justice warriors like crazy nowadays.

After it became obvious that the classic marxist idea of proletariat and bourgeoisie and the practical implementation of ideologies based on this idea led to some of the worst crimes on humanity, marxist academics replaced the whole thing with oppressed and oppressor, which has now become the basis for the ideology these SJWs operate on today. Everyone who belongs to a group that does well for themselves is now an oppressor, while the people belonging to groups that do badly are the oppressed. That's why White people, Asians and Jews (who usally count as White) are the oppressors who need to be diversified to ensure social justice, while women, "Minorities", LGBTQI+ people etc. are the oppressed "diversity". Skill and abilities take a backseat.

Of course these SJW bullies find an easy footing in software development, a discipline that is not exactly known for being pursued by the most assertive and confident males (or women for that matter).

In Europe the problem isn't quite as bad yet, though here in Germany it's getting worse with increasingly more university activites relating to feminism, diversity, history revisionism through marxist lenses etc. popping up. But since (at least in Germany) we don't have the admixture of humanities and STEM many US colleges and universities have, this stuff is mostly contained within the social sciences so far.

The Twitter feeds of some of the people linked in this article read like a Conservative's caricature of an SJW btw.
Why?

I can imagine using voice when driving perhaps; but it's not really usable when other people are around, since voice commands would disturb them.
I've installed Tor just to check it... was not disappointed :)
A different (more modern?) cryptocurrency could serve all of those needs, which is a threat to the fundamental value of Bitcoin.

For comparison, the "fundamental" value of USD is a trust in the US Government to maintain its value. Comparing that to the fundamental value of Bitcoin would be a fun discussion to have, but the fact remains that the US has done it for 225 years and Bitcoin has done it for less than 9 years.

Actually, by that reasoning, I guess the fundamental value of Bitcoin is the distributed self-interest and capability of Bitcoin holders to maintain Bitcoin's value, which is obviously a powerful force.
I am not jumping to anything. I am answering your general point with another general point.

I did not addressed specific point you raised "is the author jerk", because I find his jerk-status irrelevant. There are plenty of charizmatic sexists and plenty of jerks that are not sexist.
You are probably right. Governments and financial institutions are separate entities. And the process of starting up a compliant financial institution to compete against entrenched interests is almost frictionless.
Indeed. One thing we tend to overlook when we get excited about technological progress towards some not-too-distant happier/easier life is the commercial framework these technologies will reside in. Yes, predictions of cheap ride sharing autonomous vehicle pools may become a reality; but cost vs price will still be an issue. All this will be great for those who own the cars in the pool, but not so much for those who must pay to use it.
Every Fan Needs a Cheap Authentic Jersey
Matthias Felleisen: Programming at Northeastern University
Guix is a GNU project. This means:

- It uses Scheme rather than Nix. Advantage Guix: Nix wasn't intended as a general-purpose language, and is only reluctantly letting itself be pushed therewards.

- It's philosophically pure. The package repository doesn't allow any kind of non-free software, whereas Nix allows it behind a global allow-unfree switch. Advantage: Nix?

- It's smaller. Perhaps as a result of the first two items, Guix has fewer developers and fewer packages.

Beyond that, they're basically the same design implemented two different ways. The Guix project is nice, and if NixOS wasn't around I'd use it. The communities have cordial relations, with a lot of overlap.
Earn money, reduce risks.
Ballmer and not steve jobs did that.

So i guess the answer- besides CEO-people manipulation skills is too think ahead of societys development, anticipate future demands, and invest there, while ignoring the crowd yelling insanity.
Obligatory bit from Greg Wilson's "What We Actually Know About Software Development, and Why We Believe It's True".

https://vimeo.com/9270320#t=1525s

And the book recommendation: "Why Aren't More Women in Science?: Top Researchers Debate the Evidence". (researchers from either side of the arguments debate each other in the same book.)
The listening approach is, perhaps, more complex overall, but most of the complexity is in software. The hardware is simple commodity hardware.

The put an ESP8266 in each device approach puts the complexity in hardware, and in interfacing the hardware to the smoke detector. If you ever replace a smoke detector with one from a different manufacturer you may have to change the interface method.

In addition to that, the ESP8266 approach is harder to manage. Whenever you change your wifi network in a way that requires updating login parameters you have to update the firmware on all your smoke alarm monitors.

With the listening approach, you just have to change login parameters on the device that is doing the listening (if it is using wifi...I'd probably actually have it on ethernet)

Furthermore, the listening approach can be expanded to listen for other things besides smoke detectors just be changing software. You could add listening for your doorbell, or your telephone, or your dog barking, or glass breaking.
Like I said, I stay on the ball. I'm not going to lay out my investment thesis here.
That's the thing. You don't pay the bank, the bank pays you. Otherwise no one would have bothered.
Interesting point. Never realized the government has a monopoly on bringing criminal charges.
Do you have any data that suggests that monoculture is bad? My anecdotal evidence suggests that monocultures are the most efficient and effective teams. An important note here is that culture != skin color. Being from the same culture expedites a lot of communication and results in easier/greater team cohesiveness.

A study recently came out about diversity in communities (not workplaces). Diversity and civic engagement are inversely related. The more diverse a neighborhood fewer people vote, fewer people volunteer, they give less to charity, etc. I can't imagine there aren't similar impacts in the workplace.

http://archive.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/...
> "wow, 60% of North Carolina is literally horrible, terrible people."

The worst thing here is the suggestion that there was 100% turnout, instead it was closer to 30%, so only about 20% voted for it. The amendment was found unconstitutional a short time afterwards anyway, finding that marriage is a fundamental right for everyone.
nix-env has its uses, but at least while you're learning it's better to put anything you need into systemPackages. Mainly because /etc/nixos should normally be a git repository.

There isn't a good story for doing declarative package management with user packages (nix-env isn't it), though there are a hundred hacks.
The same way someone accused of murder qualifies as not-a-murderer.

"Accused" just means someone said it, it doesn't make it true.
Well, technically PSC (Planet Source Code) isn't dead either. There still new VB6/etc code gets uploaded even in 2017. https://www.planet-source-code.com/vb/scripts/BrowseCategory...

GitHub is the current thing, PSC/Sourceforge/GoogleCode are still technically (at least read-only) around.
Epyc crashes quite often, see segfault screen shot.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/6rmq6q/epyc_7551_minin...
Which is why already on the Win16 days only masochists would program in straight Win16, let alone when Win32 arrived.

The sane of us were already using OWL (TP, C++), MFC(C++), VB, VCL (C++, Delphi), Visual Fox Pro (xBase).

And the reason why on Windows world C was mostly relevant for kernel and drivers programming, with other languages taking over actual application development.
Agreed. The writing can be downright terrible at times, and it's usually when they deviate from the source material.

I've noticed something similar with Westworld. I love the premise, and I'm a huge fan of Anthony Hopkins in particular. But the writing just feels so bad most of the time. I don't think it's a coincidence that the best scenes involve Hopkins, and what makes them good is not primarily the dialogue.

It's really... jarring to be watching something that clearly cost a lot of money to produce, involved a lot of very skilled people, and yet manages to be absolutely atrocious when it comes to dialogue or plot. It always makes me wonder how the showrunners managed to get the gig.

Both Westworld and GoT are HBO shows, so maybe that has something to do with it. While I do enjoy both shows, it's more for the cultural buy-in and the budgets involved. The writing pales in comparison to that of many other shows on other channels (FX being my favorite, followed by perhaps AMC)

(Incidentally, this is something I've been confused about for a while. How was Moffat allowed to ruin Doctor Who so utterly over multiple seasons? How did Braga/Berman get to be showrunners for Enterprise when at least one of them (don't remember which) was generally disliked for his contributions to earlier seasons?)
Go for DevOps
> I just want to work with people that I like and who can handle the job.

As do other people. People just want to do work in an industry they want to work in with people they want to work with and don't want people to use use their gender, sex, racial or cultural background to prevent them doing it.
> Whatever it is, it doesn't affect every chip the same way.

Such uncertainty is bad. segfault is not the only issue, the risk of having some interally corrupted data is the biggest risk.

I've stopped using the Ryzen junk I bought on its release day.
But the point is that a "strong fundamental" means that there is a widespread long-term belief in whatever backs the currency. Bitcoin is too new to have this in human timescales.

Can you make money speculating in Bitcoin? Obviously. But it is not fundamentally backed by something that people have long-term trust in -- it is only worth what you can trade it for at that moment.
Github link: https://github.com/kidosoft/Morelia
No, the reference is to Paul Joseph Watson, the Infowars editor who started this thing.
No, "the guy" is Paul Joseph Watson, so it's perfectly accurate.
This manifesto may or may not have a valid point, without seeing the contents we will likely never truly know. Apologies for the lengthy post to follow.

Let me start by saying that diversity is always important. Without diversity you tend to end up with an echo chamber that produces things that are only worthwhile for the subset of people represented within the group.

However, it is important to think about the cost that diversity targets can have on both the under-represented and over-represented groups within a company. Diversity targets for hiring or promotion will mean the over-represented group(s) will tend to view those who are hired or promoted with disdain. Meanwhile the under-represented group(s) may well doubt their position within the company, worrying that they are in their position only due to belonging to the flavour of the month diversity target. The other part is that members of the under-represented group who were previously employed on their own merits are likely to hold a similar position to that of the majority group(s), for similar reasons.

Now it's time for an anecdote... My girlfriend works as an engineer in an oil and gas company. Her company is fully on board with the current gender diversity push, and has created several new positions at a fairly high level specifically to meet their diversity targets. These are high level positions with no one reporting to them in the current structure (which was defined by the massive restructure following the fall in oil prices). Her issues with the positions and their seniority boils down to education and time in the industry. If they were being filled by candidates based on skill, a large proportion of them would be male (and probably white). This would be because the vast majority of the people with the relevant experience are white males. By pushing the female agenda, she fears that not only will these roles be filled by poor candidates, it will also promote the stereotype that women are unsuitable for the job.

There is room for diversity targets, but they must be mindful of the talent pool available for the specific job. Whilst it hurts at this point, the most reasonable course is to promote equality in education. If your company is hiring on skill, then the equality issues will resolve in time, without making anyone resentful of the first year grad who got promoted to team leader because the company needed to meet a quota.

To derail myself slightly following the above wall of text. Would the current white, male disgruntlement be as bad had there not been the GFC etc, and the subsequent (and continuing layoffs/stagnation of wages?
This does anticipate the anxieties that we feel about cryptography in the modern age so closely!
I thought it would be about teaching costing nothing to the educated or something along those lines, and trying to visualize how a rebuttal about the trade-off in time spent could apply to the candle simile.

Come to think of it I don't see how the positive people were similar to the candles — that simile is about making use of the positivity in your life, while the blog is about either the benefits of finding and reciprocating the positiveness in others (the candles don't choose to be lit in the first place) or reducing interaction with negative influences (the receiving candle can't choose to surround themselves with lit candles). I don't believe the simile really works with either, even though it's a nice image.
Can I do FP in my language?
Apparently everyone at google is too scared of getting fired for leaking it. Either that or they're all in bed.
Could be. Linux has a very efficient mutex implementation, and as a result concurrent programs tend to spent a lot less time idling, and thus potentially load the cores more.
I feel like a bunch of people are skirting right around this but this was unclear to me.

The design calls for an absolutely enormous taper at the bottom called the collector. That land area is covered surface, so there is a huge volume of hot air that isn't mixing around the column near the base. I assume this is how they get around the symmetry issues of a uniform cylinder.

I had to go to one of the publications to find a close up photo with much clarity, maybe this will help others to notice.
It would have been equally sloppy in the circumstances to use "Mr Beard" had Taleb been arguing with a man. When arguing with someone on their academic specialism using an incorrect title looks like a subtle (but deniable! how cute) insult. No gender politics required.
All boats, except for the ones with holes in them. And some of those boats don't look like they can handle stormy weather…
"I went to stock market today. I did a business" :)
cool article, thanks a lot for sharing.

it mentions something that I really worried about - Intel knowingly requested its own validation efforts to be reduced so they can place half baked products onto the market faster. pretty sad that both Intel/AMD are seem to be cutting corners to just be a little bit faster in the competition.
I was never a fan of the goody-goody two-shoes Storks. The real heroes are the non-house-affiliated characters like Persistys and Smalltoe. Perhaps Aria too.
Implementations is the keyword here, it doesn't have anything to do with the language itself.

GCC was for almost twenty years quite bad versus other commercial compilers, yet it is worshipped nowadays for its performance.
I trust cryptography & networks. I've lived a large part of my life on networks. Never talked to a politician.
The point of depicting a "typical" scenario is that you don't represent the 1% dark. In the same way that a representation of a "typical" household doesn't include a homeless man, a billionaire, and someone in between. The billionaire and the homeless man are not included because they are not representative of what is typical.
QUIC has not yet been fully standardized. If you integrate a current draft you risk that your claimed QUIC support is broken 1 year from now. Google risks that, because they control all parts of the system (services & brower).

However I generally agree that HTTP/2 might only be short-term milestone on the way to HTTP over QUIC, as only this really fixes head-of-line blocking and therefore maybe justifies the increased implementation complexity better than HTTP/2.
Is this Average Consumer News?
It's not difficult to imagine an alternate history in which the nazis did a little better and the allies a little worse, in which the end result was a ceasefire and peace - which would see the allies recognise the legitimacy of the nazi state, based on, exactly, it's possessions at the time of the ceasefire.

Come to think of it, possession by the red army was exactly how eastern Europe ended up vassals to USSR after WW2.
I haven't tried the Spectrum TV streaming service. I'm recently on the one month DTVN trial, and I've actually been quite happy with the mix of channels offered by DirecTV Now, whilst no DVR, and half way decent on demand (although not even close to the on demand provided by the corresponding individual channel TVEverywhere app). It offers ESPN1/2, all the Viacom channels, a good news lineup, OK locals (depending on your region) and a pretty good lineup for the younger kids (Disney Jr, Nick Jr etc), plus essentials like AMC, AE, TNT, et al, all on their entry level $35 plan. The quality of picture and streaming consistency has been excellent on the Roku 3 app, and haven't noticed any buffering problems aside from the normal few seconds when you load a channel. You can access the app away from home (excepting locals if out of region), and you can use DirecTV Now as authentication for any TVEverywhere channel app for which is included in your plan. HBO (or Cinemax) is $5/mo, and you get access to HBO Go with that. I don't have any affiliation with DirecTV Now, I just think it's gotten kind of a bad wrap with the likely premature rollout of the service where most everyone complained of near useless functionality and constant buffering etc. I just haven't seen any of that. Yes there is no DVR, and the UI leaves a lot to be desired and lacks polish, but I think it's the best bang for your buck for a TV service for the entire family, where everyone gets most of what they want, for a very competitive price point.