skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Can't speak for him, but I imagine his thought process was:

This is an internal matter, and the intended audience is Google employees, so to prevent attracting attention from the wrong audience and maximize attention from Googlers, I'll post it in the internal board...

It doesn't help that Google apparently encouraged employees expressing their thoughts.
I was just thinking, since I'm one of those "diversity" candidates that never made it to an interview. does it mean that I'm a worse candidate, because even though my profile is favoured as you highlighted I've never made it to an interview.
My latest laptop is from 2009 and I very very very rarely complain about pdf.js performance.
Previous AI StarCraft tournaments have put an actions-per-minute (APM) cap on the AIs, which prevents them from micro-managing individual units.
> Starcraft is a continuous game and the game state is not 100% known at any given time.

It seems to me that multiplayer games may feel continuous to a human player but are still designed around a series of discrete states called ticks where each tick is determined from the previous state plus inputs.

Why is this distinction made in the context of how difficult it is to develop an AI?
Some quick initial feedback. The bounciness of the videos on the front page was a bit jarring to me initially. Good luck with your venture!
File a Radar and someone will get around to fixing it: http://bugreport.apple.com/
The linked post talks about concurrency not being a focus until Swift 6 at the earliest. Personally, I don't want to make a commitment to server-side Swift until after that dust has settled.
> I don't see how that does anything except force logic to the server and guarantee page-by-page update and view semantics.

Which keeps the delivered document a document, and not an application.

> At least some large percentage of the code for some of these "modern" web apps is on my computer: that means a lot; and anything we can do to discourage code running in the cloud with data stored in the cloud--which absolutely implies giving complex turing complete control over local behavior and expansive state--is a fundamental win for users of the World Wide Web.

I consider it much better that only explicitly-requested actions (clicking a "submit" button, or a link, for example[1]) trigger submission of data and execution on a server than to let javascript trigger the same. Control over behavior and data is better retained, especially for lay users, if it's impossible for an ordinary web page to send every mouse movement and keystroke to a server—something that's in fact done, all the time. Retaining that control is well worth pushing web "app" logic to the server.

Programs that need local execution would just have to be delivered as... a local program, not a web page. Losing that distinction cost the average user control and safety when they're in their browser, and fundamentally changed what the web is. Some of us much preferred what the web used to be, not because we hate progress, but because progress that destroys something that was itself valuable kinda sucks. "Web apps" should have had some other delivery channel, if they had to exist—and clearly there's a demand for better cross-platform GUI application delivery. Making browsers serve that purpose has made the web fat, opaque, and untrustworthy.

[1 EDIT] and in fact I'd rather restrict submission of new data, that the server didn't already have, to form elements the appearance of which cannot be modified at all, like a "submit" button. No JS submit-form-or-add-querystring-data-to-URL-on-link-click shenanigans. On my ideal web links would be safe to click, always, with only form submit buttons carrying any risk at all (and even that far less than now, if, say, JS isn't permitted to add to or modify form data in a POSTable form, which is another restriction JS would have on my ideal Web)
As a Woman in Tech, I Realized: These Are Not My People
Satellite Eyes
http://i.imgur.com/IYXYEbu.png
disclaimer: i work at Netlify.

ping us in support and I can talk you through the setup w/the private repo (and branch deploys can be simulated with a few netlify sites attached to the same repo - no additional cost for additional sites on any plan)
Logit.AI launches revolutionary athlete monitoring system
I think Netflix looks like a less pie-in-sky, but still incredibly innovative and responsive, Amazon.

You're not paying for their current business, you're paying for their ability to execute now and in the future.
No, the number of processes is already at its intended value for the near future, as of Firefox 54. The default just varies for different hardware. If you look in the Firefox settings under General -> Performance, then it says there that it's optimized for your hardware, so I'm pretty sure that's the case and not just marketing fluff.

What I'm not entirely sure of, is how it's decided how many processes it uses. I think it's either largely dependent on the number of CPU cores or just straight-up that value. And then the vast majority of people has a quad-core, which is why it might seem like 4 is the default for everyone.
I think there is a big fallacy with this statement: "What the government cannot do directly, it now requires employers to do in its stead: police 'discriminatory' speech."

Far from it. Avoiding discriminatory speech is very much in the best interest of the companies themselves: promoting a good work environment, keeping people focused on the work at task, minimizing the chance that people's personal biases impact their ability to work together effectively, avoiding bullying and harassment, etc. In fact, these policies work very well for all involved.

It certainly isn't some conspiracy theory about the government. Good laws increase productivity and improve working conditions for everyone as a whole.

Of course it can be argued - did this memo cross that line? The biological argument was not what offended me as a woman. I imagine if I worked there it'd be highly uncomfortable to know that a coworker feels that his fellow female coworkers are undeserving of their jobs, or in surplus as 10% of developers.

It simply breeds an unfriendly work environment so I think Google acted well.

As interesting as the biological argument is - it isn't really a good justification for changing policy. First off it's very hard to prove what is due to biology and what is due to social influence, thought patterns, expectations, woman gravitating toward comfort zones etc.

At my university on paper more woman were in the Biology major than men while I was in the 30% percent that was in computer science. Why? I did it on a whim because I like to try new things I don't know much about. What I found was that computer science was far from being more technically challenging or rigorous than Biology (or the medical field) but people's general assumptions about it were more deeply engrained. Anyway I could go on but basically it's a complicated topic. Companies should not alter policies due to biological arguments- they should continue to seek applicants which are qualified for the job.
Interesting timing for me. I just yesterday read an Atlantic article titled "How America Lost Its Mind" [0].

The tldr; of that article is that Americans have had an increasing tendency to create our own realities and to believe anything we choose. This includes conspiracy theories like the government is purposely allowing cancer treatments to be withheld, as well as the idea that vaccines cause autism, etc. The article then goes on to suggest that choosing what to believe is part of being American. I don't necessarily agree, as I think the article was woefully inadequate in assessing the damage that financial interests play in willfully misleading people and creating a post-truth world.

Here on HN, I've had "debates" with people who nearly suggested that glyphosate is the greatest thing that ever happened to mankind. When I cautioned about safety concerns due to overuse, I got the standard pointer to the studies, etc. If you question the studies, then you find yourself being painted as some sort of anti-science conspiracy-theorist. This, when we essentially all know how research is done and the degree of rampant regulatory capture that exists.

I guess my point is that when many of the institutions we're supposed to trust are largely captured and firms that have direct financial incentive to mislead are allowed to decide what's real, then it is an assault on truth and reason. When we ignore this fact and encourage blind-belief in these institutions (worse, allowing them to act as proxies for "the ultimate truth of science"), then we are aiding in the creation of the very post-fact world we claim to abhor.

[0] https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/09/how-ame...
If there's no APM limit you can do things like micro every worker's resource gathering. See http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/brood-war/484849-improving-m....
Language detection via the command line (2011)
Bitcoin won't free people who won't lift a finger to learn it just like the US constitution won't protect people unwilling to defend it. I've yet to meet someone who is unable to understand the basic use of bitcoin (sending and receiving) and if we are trying to cater to the lowest common denominator we have already lost. It is worrying that we have resorted to scrapping a new technology just because lazy or incompetent people are unable to completely master it.
Cool idea. In terms of adoption, I found there was too much information to know what to do right away (like, instinctively.)

As a suggestion, cut down on the UI components for choosing to book a class. As a comparative, take a look at the approach by AirBnB.

Good luck!
Bitcoin is a store of value that will long-term net-increase as true monetary bubbles, like this: http://imgur.com/a/0ZoDu, pop and cause their base currencies to long-term net-decrease.
For SC1 BW, you can already watch https://www.youtube.com/user/certicky for a weekly highlights broadcast / commentary of AIs. Right now there is an AI arms race where the previously dominant AI (Iron Bot) is being beaten by challengers. It used to happen when Iron Bot did something silly. Now it is happening because the competitors have really stepped up their game.

The current board leader (krasi0) has a strategy similar to their predecessor (Terran Mechanical units: Tanks, Goliaths and Vultures). The alternative strategy I really enjoy watching is a Mutalisk heavy build by Arrakhammer.

The bots have styles and differing capabilities. tscmoo is one of the more fascinating ones to watch in this regard, as they mix it up better than anyone else (and tscmoop, the Protoss variation has the best High Templar storm going).

The AI APMs get into the 10k ranges at times. Watching the minimap can be like watching insects swarm.

If you want to see a game between two AIs in progress, you can watch: https://www.twitch.tv/sscait

While these AIs can pull off tactics a human player could not (what they can do with Vultures is incredible), at this point they wouldn't be able to compete with the professionals. Going back to an earlier example, I think I could use High Templars more effectively than any AI I've watched.
Can I have your lawyer's contact information to request him do the same for me?
No... it's pretty clear that there are exactly n ways to get each particular single-cycle permutation, given by the n rotations of the fisher-yates shuffle. For example, if you rotate the parent's shuffle by one:

2, 4, 3, 0, 5, 1

you get the same single-cycle permutation.

I think this might actually lead to a easier proof than in the article.
I think the reason Damore mentioned those jobs is because they, like software engineering (can be), are high pay/high stress BUT are considered undesirable, UNLIKE software engineering, because you die a lot less on the job as a software engineer.

In Google's ideal world where ideal means all jobs are distributed evenly matching the population of men and women, there would be an equal push for women taking those undesirable jobs. However, there isn't, and everyone is fine with that (I personally haven't heard any rallying cries to get more women into garbage collection, at least). What this translates to (in my interpretation of what I believe Damore's point was, as a disclaimer) is "men take dangerous, stressful jobs because women don't want them, even when they are high paying, due to differing pressures on the sexes."

The problem is when you remove the "dangerous" part (and software engineering one could argue is also not as stressful as these other jobs, if only for its lack of danger. The worst thing that can happen to you on the job is to be fired), women supposedly want the jobs, and so there's an artificial push for them to be employed by employers like Google. So now the market is smaller for qualified men to take these jobs, and theoretically they are more incentivized to take lower paying/more stressful/more dangerous (worse) jobs that may also be male dominated, but where there are no pushes for artificially increased diversity.

The result is a net loss for men overall, and not necessarily a net gain for women, when you consider his other point that most women may not actually want software engineering jobs (this is a more controversial statement in my opinion, but not the one you chose, and I still believe it deserves to be responded to respectfully instead of with ridicule and outrage). Additionally, this could also lead to a reduced average level of talent if less qualified women were being hired over qualified men, but I won't argue that and Google is an elite enough company that everyone they hire is likely supremely qualified.

So to me it seems like a reasonable (or at least not inflammatory for the sake of being inflammatory) assertion to make. I don't think that specific passage was there to provoke (although his original intent with the entire memo was to spark dialogue, which I suppose you could call 'sparking controversy' but I wouldn't). I believe you missed the point.
And here I thought I was just a capitalist who believes that people should all be given an equal shot to choose their own path in life and that how things have been does not necessarily dictate how things should be.

Turns out I'm a hateful, dogmatic, sexist racist as well as a malevolent nihilist, postmodern feminist, and a Marxist to boot.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Those -isms really snuck up on me (they really are an insidious bunch, aren't they?). Good thing there are people out there that know way more about people's position and why they have them than they do themselves. Otherwise, we may have to picture the world we want to live in and work toward it without thought to all of the pseudo-cruft attached to specific iterations of ideas throughout history in various places and times by specific individuals that some people might highlight and promote as The One Truth of an Idea to further their own political agenda. It's all very obvious, now that you bring it up.
Home our pale blue dot
Bad press and complaints aren't sufficient conditions for legal firing.

e.g. Employee reports OSHA violation. Company gets bad press for workplace conditions. Company can't fire employee for reporting unsafe work conditions.
Right. But fiat currency will never disappear in favour of Bitcoin, nor will it be replaced by Bitcoin. Taxes will also have to be paid in fiat, etc.

The comparison is akin to someone in Europe exchanging EUR to USD as an investment, because he's betting on the fx rate. But why would the average European ever need to hold USD? Not that many situations that make sense either.
I think it's perfectly reasonable to fire someone for expressing personal opinions counter to company policies. How is this not a classic example of culture fit?
It is true that Spanner and FaunaDB partition a cluster's dataset across multiple nodes but it's handled transparently by the database. Whenever I've heard the term "sharding" it's usually in reference to the application-level sharding described in the article.

Partitioning the dataset isn't really novel these days (Cassandra, Riak, Mongo et al do the same of course), but what is a significant difference is that both Spanner and FaunaDB implement ACID transactions distributed across partitions. It no longer matters for application correctness what partition key you choose if you can involve any arbitrary set of records in an single transaction.
Sam Altman once said that YC only accepts applicants if they have the potential to become billion dollar companies.

What is CocuSocial's growth path to 9 zero's?
Low-Level Software – Reverse Engineering for Beginners
As an expat(who doesn't know how long until I might move again) it's not just about gaming IMO.

Anything you buy is just more weight to move to the next place. If you enjoy technology and novelty it hurts, think about all interesting that can come out of IoT, you can't just get a new thermostat or put a smart mirror in a place you don't own and need landlord approval.

It gets worse if you are living as a hardcore nomad moving from place to place within a few months, you need to have a limited supply of clothes, shoes and other similar things.
Fortunately, this isn't communism and you're not a dictator.

People aren't awarded money arbitrarily... Nobody will pay you more than you're worth. If a good hedge fund manager is able to make 1000x as much as a good doctor, he is worth 1000x as much as a good doctor, by definition, no matter how distasteful that might seem.
How are you so sure the commenter is a person? ;)
Weekly Kernel Development Summary – Aug 9, 2017
Have you read his books (not just the summary but all the chapters)? While he has good points, he is so egotistical, self-absorbed, and full of pseudo-scientific theories (e.g. that one should go between gorging themselves on food and fasting) that it makes it hard to actually extract out the good parts.
There are plenty of social policies (religion, civil rights, education, right to die, abortion, war and diplomacy, federalism, policing, vaccinations, research priorities, ) with left right vectors.
Currently trying a web framework, developping on a mac and running it on unbuntu ( vapor framework). I'm extremely positiely surprised by the user experience. Installation is easy, xcode is working fine with autocomplete, libraries seem good enough ( db querying on postgres using a default ORM seems to work).

I've now started to investigate deployment on ubuntu, and the only regret so far is that cloud platform don't support this language very well at the moment ( app engine with dockerfile is a pita, and i gave up to more regular engine instances).

I think starting to develop very basic web apps on this language is beginning to make sense.
https://www.slideshare.net/seosmarty/google-home-page-evolut...

It did evolve, and yes, Google constantly experiments with/ tweaks it, as a matter of fact. I never claimed that sudden radical changes are a good idea - they are very risky, at the very least. And generate dissatisfaction even when done right.

> The rest have pretty categorically disimproved with each iteration. I doubt many would disagree here.

What? That's crazy. Both gmail and google maps have radically improved over their original versions. You're of course free to disagree, since these sorts of things are subjective; but I'm confident that you won't find a majority of users to share that opinion.
Give me the real data about women claiming to leave because of harassment, please. Anecdotes are not data - harassment stories might just get disproportional attention. At the moment every Tech harassment story refers to Ellen Pao, even though her claims were dismissed in court. If there are so many stories to choose, why don't the media outlets pick some more convincing ones?

And even assuming harassment is the reason women leave, I'd maintain that is actually female privilege. They can leave if their job sucks. Men have annoying jobs, too, but they can not leave as easily.

One of the mainstay of feminist narratives is that they never mention the baseline. The story would be "women leave because of harassment", implying that men never get harassed. To discern if harassment is a major factor for fewer women in CS, at the very least one would have to compare the plight of women to the plight of men.
I've never really thought this argument was a good one. "Hey, we've got a pretty terrible system in place, so instead of fixing it, or replacing it with something better, lets just give up and replace it with something worse!"

I think WASM can and will bring a lot of cool stuff to the web, just like JS did. What worries me is that we learned virtually nothing from the mistakes that we made with JS.
This is something I really dislike about the use of 3rd-party wikis for documenting software.

They always seem like a good idea at first, but then they slowly become misleading as contributors move on. You can't even call them "irrelevant" at that point because readers don't know they've become irrelevant.

And, by spending energy on the wiki, people don't try improving the upstream documentation. I assume they were motivated to make the wiki due to some problem with the upstream doc but, in the end, the upstream docs don't get improved, and you have a confusing wiki.

Please work with the upstream project on documentation instead. And if you are the upstream, consider a policy of rejecting patches that don't amend the docs appropriately.
If the USA government used BTC as default then people would probably use it without caring too. Early adopters need to understand things to be sure they're not falling for a con; people getting electric vehicles are probably much more interested in the technical and financial details than your average car buyer. Once they've established the system works then others can get in.
"If you were able to pickup every store in town, randomly shuffle them, and place them into a nice straight line down one side of a road, then any old shuffling algorithm would work to get you a "random path" through the stores."

Isn't this always the case in software? Any set of entities represented in software can be hashed into a "straight line", in other words, you can assign a unique integer id to each one. And this works with your example of the street addresses of stores too -- just hash to a 32-bit value and sort them.

Certainly, if you can only see the paper in the box in front of you, the Sattolo solution makes sense. And it doesn't use any additional memory apart from one pointer per item (one piece of paper per store, in situ). There must be a more compelling application, though.

Incidentally, it's possible to use a maximal LFSR to generate a permutation (with only one cycle) without using extra storage and without using a shuffle. For cycling through very large numbers of elements this can be a great shortcut, if it's OK for the permutation to be the same each time. (Maybe could also use s-boxes to get a family of permutations)
So, based on this[1] they've just wrapped the calls with their own…not sure if there are any real benefits here.

[1]: https://golang.org/src/syscall/syscall_linux.go
I don't know the technology, but I assume that system could be built.

The bad part about that is that if I can validate my vote after the fact, someone else can also demand to see what I voted for, and that opens the door for vote buying, intimidation etc.
Bitcoin makes arrogant developers realize they don't know everything?
The whole 1.x to 2.0 stretch was a rough ride. I had to maintain software without From 2 to 3 was pretty OK since very little changed in the language only API's got updated. From 3 to 4 mainly adds stuff and doesn't break much.
So people were running away from loans that were about to get way more expensive? Who could have ever seen this coming?

IIRC you can't refi if your house value has dropped below your equity in it, meaning those people didn't really have a choice.