skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Thanks for expanding on that aspect! This is exactly the sort of things people should have brought up.

I feel like the suspicious thing is that people didn't react in this way.

Why was this not a glaring problem that his supporters rushed in to answer?

If I told you I had an elegant model for some chemical reactions and could predict, say, the thermal energy released in an experiment, you might look at the model and think it's great.

If it doesn't match what is measured in the real world, then it's possible the model is correct: could be an environmental factor or a problem with the apparatus etc. But I need to answer questions around the gap between prediction and reality, rather than to rely on my perceptions of the elegance of the model.

That's where I think this veers off into identity politics.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/08/07/climate/docum...
Thanks, I added it to my Workflowy account. By the way, is it added as a copy? I.e. if you change it in your account, will my copy also update or will it stay fixed?
Ah yes, I totally forgot that "males are less neurotic and have more drive than females". Silly me. Good luck finding any women to work with you when you spew such nonsense. Aka creating a toxic work place
I'm sad to see this guy fired. He tried very hard to make it clear that he believes diversity is valuable, that discrimination is real and needs to be addressed, and that he was discussing distribution at the population level rather than individuals. And he cited several references in support of his ideas - giving dissenters ample opportunity to attack his arguments on the basis of their merits. The memo had some rough edges and questionable assertions to be sure - but to me at least he came across as a reasonable person that you could have an intelligent discussion with.

But rather than discussing the ideas in the memo, people who have never met him and who presumably don't know the context with which the memo was released have twisted his arguments, made assumptions that he racist and sexist beyond hope of recovery, and needed to be fired.

I understand that his memo was extremely inflammatory and therefore probably not appropriate for the workplace (although, again, I don't know the exact context in which it was distributed initially). But now that it's gone viral - wouldn't it be better to have the discussion rather than trying to silence him and pretend it never happened? Because I am sure there are more people out there with the same views. People who are in charge of hiring decisions, are terrified to discuss their views in public, and are now that much less likely to ever change.

Personally, it's not immediately obvious to me when reading the memo or the cited references that he was wrong. There are a lot of crackpots out there who cling to indefensible ideas and refuse to change their minds in the face of overwhelming evidence - but this guy didn't feel like one of them to me. To me this felt purely like identity politics winning out over intelligent debate and the pursuit of truth.
Not an option until they fix Linux crashes and hangs. Threadripper would be pretty neat for a 4 GPU deep learning server, but I've had nothing but trouble with plain Ryzen
Having written Clojure full-time for the past 5 years while writing cleancoders.com has really spoiled me. Clojure's introspective nature makes for some amazingly fast productivity because you can hook up your IDE to the REPL and have a kind of super-REPL, which can really speed up development a ton if you design your system it right. I'm not sure if this project can keep that aspect because of how it compiles to C++. But if it does, then it could really be invaluable in the Clojure ecosystem.
You are looking only at the words in document.

What about the behaviour before / during / after publishing it?
The favicon.ico of this site - looks exactly like half life logo.

http://ferret-lang.org/ferret-styles/favicon.ico

https://www.google.co.in/search?q=half+life+logo&oq=half+lif...

What is that all about...
> Supporting a GOP candidate isn't necessarily making you a bigot.

Not exactly, but it is saying that bigotry is not a deal-breaker for your support and that's a distinction with a marginal difference. See also http://time.com/4405018/gop-platform-lgbt-issues/
I love qtorrent. They even have built in torrents search for various sites like TPB and Linux isos ;)
The US is only 25% bigger than Australia and has more than 10x the population.... soo the argument that the US is too big doesn't really hold much water.

* 3.797 to 2.97 square miles

* 323 / 24 million
It's the lambda symbol in a circle. Seems more like a coincidence than anything else to me.
> How many people felt free to discuss their support for Trump

This has nothing to do with the company, but rather with the individuals working for it. How many people, do you think, felt free to discuss their support for a Democratic candidate in the Alabama?

> People should feel free to exercise their voting privilege.

And they did! Heck, Google encouraged everyone to vote, not just Democrats. Maybe your anger should be directed to the companies and governments that did their utmost to stop their own citizens from voting. North Carolina is a good place to start, move South from there.
(1) It's not illegal to fire someone for their politics (it's not one of the enumerated protected classes under federal employment laws anti-discrimination law at least), and (2) it's not "clearly" what happened here -- arguably sure, but there are other ways to see it.
I dunno, there are a lot of nerdy leftists.
Wow, this has got to be the mother of all strawman arguments in this thread (and there have been many) !

Nobody said anything about discouraging or discriminating the many women who are interested in STEM fields. In fact, if anybody seems slightly obsessed with using discrimination to twist reality's arm into matching some "magical speculated" EQUALITY_RATIO (0.5), it's your side of the debate. And that's the whole premise the memo wanted to question.

I strongly believe and care greatly that any individual interested in a field of work should feel welcome to enter it regardless of gender, race, age or other personal factors unrelated to their ability. I have personally always tried my best to remove any specific hurdles my minority colleagues might encounter, and I will support anything that helps in this respect. But no more than that : make people welcome, but stop short of forcing them in or blaming the system if they don't come. This is where some diversity programs go IMHO too far by trying to fix what ain't broken, if their aim is social justice (the best defence for them is actually a business argument : greater diversity does make for better functioning teams, so it might be worth artificially forcing it)

The dogma that needs to be questioned (not least because the scientific evidence against it is overwhelming) is the idea that the gender imbalance in STEM fields (and in nursing/care/humanities) is more likely the undesirable outcome of sexism, discrimination and hostile environments, rather than the desirable result of free choices made by liberated western women following their hearts.
Obviously, if it turns out to be the latter, it follows that the whole fight for parity at all costs (the "magical speculated number" of 0.5) looks like a rather moot and quixotic endeavour. How about just letting people be whatever they want to be ?

Occam's razor is again helpful here : on one side we have a very straightforward biology/hormonal influence-based theory supported by evidence. On the other hand we have something much more complex, bordering on conspiracy theory : "the patriarchy". While I agree that further replicated studies are probably required on both sides, as things stands I'm pretty confident which one is the more likely explanation that scientifically-minded people should reasonably lean towards.
Go away. The US has been aggressively non-interventionist in Venezuela through this entire crisis -- no wide sanctions or anything.

Chavez and his cronies made their own bed, and now the whole country has to sleep in it.
He didn't make it public, he was advocating for something he thought was for the better. Of course work places can be ruled in any number of ways. I think a lot of peoples perception of Google is that they are pro-intellectualism and encouraged diverse opinions. This shows otherwise. I'm sure he'll be fine, I'm actually not to worried about him. I'm more worried that something like this, something so rooted in good faith and scientific basis, could get someone fired.
The problem it that they're "punching up" against people that could very well have had their own challenges in life, some of which may be even grater than group doing the punching. Don't expect a white guy that grew up in a trailer park with alcoholic parents to feel like an upper class black woman is punching up to his privileged position in society.
If I could get the bank financing, I could buy 5 properties in the market I am in and all would generate 25% cash on cash returns after a few months of renovations. With the scale I could hire full time staff and centralize laundry.

And before anyone jumps down my throat for this, it would be a social good in this particular market and help the local housing market (there is a surplus of housing and ample very affordable housing, the problem here is lack of jobs)

And if anyone thinks this would be a soft option, it would be a lot of work and a lot of responsibility and a lot of value added.
Actually you do get some added security, because it prevents the length extension attacks sha-2 and related hash functions have thanks to the Merkle-Damgard construction [0]. Specifically, by truncating the hash, the output no longer contains enough state to perform the attack.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Length_extension_attack
As long as they don't upgrade them to "kill list" then that's fine!
It's belief. Pay people (indirectly or directly) to not understand something and they will do a fantastic job.
> WASHINGTON — The average temperature in the United States has risen rapidly and drastically since 1980, and recent decades have been the warmest of the past 1,500 years, according to a sweeping federal climate change report awaiting approval by the Trump administration.

If that's the case, then wouldn't it already be born out in other widely available temperature datasets? No credible person denies that the global (and U.S. local) mean temperature has increased, this is not news.

> The draft report by scientists from 13 federal agencies, which has not yet been made public, concludes that Americans are feeling the effects of climate change right now. It directly contradicts claims by President Trump and members of his cabinet who say that the human contribution to climate change is uncertain, and that the ability to predict the effects is limited.

These are entirely separate claims. The author of the article is saying that the United States are warmer; then implying that the change is entirely man-made and detrimental to make a political point (in this case, a hit against President Trump, though I suppose it's a step in the right direction that NYT are now allowed to refer to the President as the President). (Edit: I should clarify that I'm talking about the link between the two clauses in this paragraph, which makes it seem like one supports the other when this is not the case)

> and that the ability to predict the effects is limited.

It is limited, the report details the limits, as do many other great sources. The climate models we have are about as good as the economic models; that is to say, they're basically useless for genuine predictions. They do not fit historic data without piles of corrections, some of which are dubious. There is work to be done.

If you have data to back up your points, show the data. If you are making a point which is not supported by the data, don't use slight of hand to make it seem like it is.

The reason that there are so many people skeptical about the alarming claims, is because the presentations have been so dishonest and manipulative. Public figures frequently grossly overstate the certainty of statements which are not really settled, and some climate scientists and academic administrators have been caught basically ganging up on people who do not present alarming news.

I understand why some of you feel, as Fej says elsewhere in this thread, that "At this point, mass panic might be more effective than mass ignorance.", but it's important that we be honest in presenting what we know to the public.

Every time you present an opinion as a fact, somebody somewhere no longer trusts you, and those people will be vocal and active in letting people know that you've been dishonest.
You can't take a critique on hiring personally. For example, Google skips for phone screen interview for new grads of elite schools like Stanford and MIT. If somebody claims that this is a discriminatory practice that lowers the bar for MIT candidates, no MIT grad is going to get offended.
I would say it's way too low.
If they were still making a living farming, they were not 'displaced by mechanization', of course. But there's obviously been a huge urbanization wave in many/most parts of the world over the past 100 years.
Open Source Community Imbalance Theory
Nobody tries to stop hurricanes, tornadoes, tsunami, or earthquakes because there's no way to stop them. Fire needs to happen and forests are being destroyed by the lack of it.

And, no, we shouldn't be bailing out people who build stick-built homes in flood plains. There are house designs built to withstand occasional flooding; you don't want to spend for that, then you shouldn't be bailed out.
Right, in BitTorrent v1 the size of the .torrent file is O(number of files) + O(number of bytes), but with this it's just O(number of files) with a higher constant factor.

Piece size is still baked into the file (as piece length), and is used for presence bitsets, which are a crucial part of the swarm algorithm. Clients download the rarest pieces first to boost efficiency, and this information is handled as bitsets shared between clients indicating "I have chunk {1, 2, 3, ... 50, 52, ... }".

Merkle tree roots will only be unique for each piece length. Piece length should still correlate with total size, to prevent huge bitsets-- a 16KB piece length on a 64GB torrent would have a 4 million item / 500KB bitset (!), so it could take 500KB of RAM per connected peer to maintain state-- or maybe compressed bitsets make this problem irrelevant in practice?
And you will also get a stack overflow for free.
This makes me a little sad. I love my job and wouldn't leave. In general, I've been very happy working for SFBA companies for the last five years. What I don't like is the greater political culture of our industry and a feeling that I will be targeted if I somehow--even casually or unintentionally--identify/signal as conservative around my peers. We now live in a world where conservative views are equated with violence--see responses to my top-level post. This is one small moral and logical step away from advocating violence against conservatives. It's quite scary and makes for an uninclusive environment for many of us.
You don't think there's another way for the memo author to criticize diversity programs other than a 10-page memo of broad, sprawling arguments? Why should the author get to privilege of asserting his worldview on top of his critique of diversity programs without his worldview getting challenged?
We absolutely do need better scientific understanding in politics. But the whole point of politics is to deal with issues where objective fact and science are not enough to make a decision. Some questions require making a value judgement. Science is useful in helping to predict the future, but it has no opinion on what we should actually do. A lot of these questions are moral, and the science is just used as an excuse.
It still prevents regular fires from being set in that area.
What aligns with this would be the fact that women in developing nations are more likely to choose a career in technology[1]. An overlooked factor in why there are few women in technology might very well be that women feel less pressured to earn a high wage due to remaining housewife/working husband stereotypes.

[1] https://erzaehlmirnix.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/unterschie... (from the ROSE project, excuse the hotlinking)
Do you know what causes men and women to be unable to compete based on merit? Institutionalized discrimination such as quota based hiring policies.
I view:

Google's actions in this matter (recrimination against an employee over an internal discussion that leaked), which may be a violation of labor relations,

and

AirBNB's recent actions in doxxing and banning users, and canceling their reservations over their political affiliation, which may be a violation of housing discrimination laws,

as linked.

Companies are trying various ways to enforce their chosen behavioral norms upon users/employees.

Is this par for the course over the last 70 years and we are just noticing it now? Or is it something new?
San Diego and LA appears to be the place to vote... (where voters exceed eligible pop) but Alabama has historically been democratic and I am pretty sure people in AL felt more at ease to openly have Hillary campaign signs than a Trump sympathizer would feel at company like Google which likes to keep things googley.
god I hope we don't wind up with a SWE labor union because of this
Practical Machine learning for coders part 2
> If an Asian guy wrote a similar article for arguing why Asian people are over-represented at Google compared to white people

If a woman at Google had written this, the conversation would be similar to what you describe. This is a man making a
generalization about women. Key difference.

> A cry bully is someone who tries to get other people fired or de-platformed because they claim personal offense.

That's exactly what they would do, taking offense on all kinds of "liberal messaging." And yes, I'm glad they were ignored.

> You are making up the straw man because that is not what he claims they are doing

Then what is he claiming they are doing? (It's a trick question)
Larry Summers didn't merely say they were different, he used that to argue that it helped explain what others attribute to discrimination - that's different. (And from doing some googling, it's also apparently not why he was fired, even though it did cause controversy.) My point is that merely pointing out that men and women are different doesn't weaken any of the arguments that people tend to use to justify diversity programs.
> Male privilege exists. That is a power dynamic over women

This doesn't necessarily follow, because insofar as male privilege exists, so does female privilege (such as no draft, "women and children first", the "women are wonderful " effect and the fact that women represent the majority of the voting base), so it's really hard to say one sex is more privileged than the other, rather than just privileged differently.
Don't ask me.
Any doctor that can be replaced be a computer, should be.
I love this comment because both sides will strongly agree wit it for completely opposite reasons.
This is exactly my point. Currently the right can't even agree what it is to be a member of the right - while the left pulls of a full on shunning for not carrying the party line - as a minority of sorts (and someone who has lots of opinions, and who is generally liberal minded) - this scares the snot out of me. Reaching the point where even questioning dogma is considered a form of attack is scary. Don't get me wrong, the right has it too - every time the christians scream persecution this comes into focus - but as you adroitly pointed out - the right can't find its ass with two hands and a flashlight.
In the context of hiring why is this even brought up? You have a certain skillset needed for a certain job. Some people have it, some people do not. Why is there a need for attributing this to their genes, upbringing, psychology or anything else for that matter?
Clicking that link is like clicking to TVTropes...
> If you have data to back up your points, show the data. If you are making a point which is not supported by the data, don't use slight of hand to make it seem like it is.

The New York Times has made the 545 page report available (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/08/07/climate/docum...) and at a passing glance, it contains oodles of data. The article links to it.
When the military threw out the elected Chavez in 2002 and replaced him with the head of the business federation, who promptly dissolved the parliament, the New York Times applauded.

The 2009 coup of the elected Honduran government, by military officers trained in the US and financed by the US, followed by the murder of many candidates trying to run in the subsequent election, didn't elicit hand-wringing by the US administration. The flow of money and weapons to the Honduran military continued. Murder and political repression in Honduras skyrocketed. All you really heard in the US news was complaints about how Hondurans and Honduran children were now crossing the US borders.

It doesn't even rise to the level of farce that the Tribune/Tronc corporation's expression of America's military ambitions in its Monroe Doctrine backyard has some lofty motives or whatever nonsense they're putting out.
>There are ways to present opposing viewpoints in a workplace without offending half of the people who work there.

Ways like not sharing your opposing viewing at all? From a professional perspective Google's management should have ignored the note. It's unprofessional to become wrapped up in minor drama (posting a note to a message board threatens nobody) and to act in carelessly hurried manner.
There's plenty of ways to style a lambda. And plenty of colors to choose from.

That's the Half-Life logo, not a coincidence.

(And, just to prove how much I love Half-Life, my username is a Half-Life reference)
> Women find it easier to take the family route and possibly make a career change post child rearing, while poor Dilbert with his Y chromosome is stuck with the pointy haired boss.

Ah, yes… the smart man's burden.
You mean a deterministic state machine? Sheer number of states makes the approach less than useful.

Tree recursion is often also easy to prove. Kd-tree operations (incl. quadtree) are tree recursion. The only problem with it may be cache locality.

The only trouble is you have to prove you're walking the tree in one direction for correctness. To prove that in a row system rewrites some pretty interesting monads.

It greets even trickier once the recursion tree is uneven or lopsided, like in R-trees. Then you get to think about upper bounds etc.
If a doctor wants to give me a vaccine for something, and I'm paying cash - they should be able to tell me how much it is. They can't. My mechanic can tell me how much a new alternator is and labor without looking at my car.
PXC-550 from Sennheiser.
> And more generally, believing that there's a contemporary responsibility to correct for historical imbalances leads you down a fantastically absurd rabbit hole.

It amounts to collective guilt, which is generally considered to be a violation of human rights.
It says a great deal that some people won't concede that a company like Google doesn't have "hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for 'diversity' candidates" even if the author was much more politically correct in their verbiage.

Forgive me if I'm conflating two groups, but isn't it the same people saying Google is incapable of doing such a thing whom are also defending the practice of affirmative action at universities?

I don't understand how affirmative action is deemed acceptable and even encouraged and at universities to improve diversity numbers, but somehow it's inconceivable that a company like Google could lower the bar to hire employees whom have already had the bar lowered for them since the day they were accepted into college?