skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't think "let wildfires burn" is an accepted strategy anywhere that those fires could be threatening homes. It's a policy for wilderness fires, where it threatens a community it's not better in the long run for everyone involved. It would be disastrous to let a fire rip through a town just to reduce the fire hazard.

It's entirely possible to do proactive controlled burns and fuel reduction near towns, and let the fires burn when they aren't threatening a town. Letting fires burn and controlling, directing, and managing the fire are not mutually exclusive.
the "open sourced" their patents. Basically they just promised to not sue the pants off anyone that used their patents.
What could she have gained from that conversation? A written admission of plagiarism from the adviser and a lollipop? Very unlikely. I'm inclined to believe the OP verbatim, well, ok, 90% of it at least. I doubt Dr. Mao would have done anything but try to throw the student under the bus even more. I mean, come on, they flippin published the material while knowing that there were tons of emails proving they plagiarized the material. They knew they were untouchable and they were right
Yes I know this - it doesn't stop some rich person breeding a faster race horse. In practice once you have the fastest horse you will be able to race it outside the thoroughbred system.

Actually even within the registered thoroughbred system it would be possible to use genomic data to improve speed. Due to inbreeding the average thoroughbred carries a large number of null mutatations in minor genes that degrades overall performance. Using genomic data it should be possible to identify which horse should be crossed to remove these mutations. Having said this, it will be a slow and expensive process.
I would hope not, at ~2:45 the presenter mentions working towards open formats, such as their orbx format which is open source.
> you're responding as though, at some mysterious date in the future, all people are getting fired and replaced with a robot

I have said no such thing. I am responding directly to your own statements. You said, in effect, that nobody's job is safe from automation. I just assumed you meant what you said.

> You're still hung up on this idea that productive things are all people can do.

All of the things in question are productive things, by the definition I thought we were using. A "productive" thing is a thing that improves people's lives. Are you saying that artistic creativity, service work, craftsmanship, etc. don't improve people's lives?

> There will always be something for us to do

That contradicts "no one's job is safe from automation", doesn't it?

> We already are seeing the beginnings of a population that can't really produce anything

Again, you're using a much too restrictive definition of "produce". But there's another point here as well.

The basic vision I see you describing is, nobody has to produce anything because all of the necessary production will be done by machines. But who owns the machines?

If the machines are owned by a few centralized entities, then we have the same problem of distribution that we had before--who gets the stuff the machines make? If you think there is any way of setting up a society that will guarantee that such a distribution is going to be fair to the people who don't own the machines, I have some beachfront property in Nebraska I'd like to sell you.

The obvious alternative is to make those machines cheap and small and plentiful enough that we can all have one. In other words, instead of universal basic income, we all are able to buy, at some reasonable price, machines that meet all of our basic needs. Then it will indeed be up to each individual person to decide what, if anything, they want to produce, because they will own all the resources necessary to meet their basic needs.

The difference between these two scenarios is that the first (yours) requires a fundamental change to human nature. I don't think that's going to happen. The second (mine) only requires a change in the kinds of technologies we try to build. That seems like a much better bet.

> this doomsday view also relies on the AI being entirely unaware of empathy, which as a core component of humanity, would likely make its way into the artificial minds humanity creates

This strikes me as overly optimistic handwaving. We have no idea how human brains implement empathy, and none of the artificial devices we have built so far have it. Yet somehow we're going to magically be able to build it into an AI?

> It's a base function of animal and human brains

Which evolved over hundreds of millions of years. I think you're vastly underestimating the amount of complexity that process created.
Trust: there's no “DNS level” which you can reason about reliably across the wide range of networks people use. Developers would still get bug reports because some ISP resolved localhost to the IP address of their search / ad page, or a dodgy home router returned its setup page, etc. Lest that seem contrived, there are major ISPs – national level in Europe – which ran transparent HTTP proxy-caches which stored pages for years beyond their expiration date. I have zero confidence that some ISP wouldn't through incompetence or marketing have localhost resolve to something you don't expect.

Building it into the network stack means that entire class of errors stops happening.
I remember looking at other time windows, anything 5 years or below wasn't great.
I definitely don't think terrorism is more justified if it saves your own peers' lives.

The narrative that it saved Japanese lives is based on wrong premises (they'd never surrender, etc.), but tries to build a persuasive argument that it was for their own good.

I can't understand why you think "the american military saved their own lives by killing foreign civlians" is at all a more persuasive justification.
> make the owners share significant portions of the costs of protecting them

Well, practically speaking, we do. In the form of taxes, which are redistributed according to need by FEMA and associated agencies. This is definitely one place I would not trust a for-profit insurance company given the typical cautions around fire insurance for a home - use it only as a last resort or find yourself unable to get coverage.
My attitude? What attitude is that?

A single non-replication does not. Consistent failure to replicate, after communicating with the original author, does.

See e.g.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/cover_story...

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v483/n7391/full/483531a...

Or just google "reproducibility crisis", the two most common subjects that come up are cancer research and psychology research.
I've gone between both - for a while. The G2 is more "scratchy" on paper - and I like that.
Yeah. The ancients speak of a time when address and search bars where separated.

I think it's a legend.
SEEKING WORK - Remote

My name is Emad and I'm a Front end web developer and designer with years of experience in the field. I've worked with businesses ranging from startups to hugely popular websites (Such as xda-developers and Harvard CNS).

Here is a list of my skills:

- HTML/CSS

- Bootstrap (if needed)

- WordPress

- JavaScript

- jQuery (if needed)

- React

- Redux

- ES6

- TypeScript

- Socketio

You can view my work here: http://www.sx-portfolio.com And contact me through my email: emads14@gmail.com

Thanks,
Emad
For those who would like to see the original, here's a dual language version: http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/Books/Euclid/Elements.pdf.

The text includes a lexicon which is surprisingly short.
Ask HN: Freelance app devs, how much are you averaging per year?
* How much are you averaging per year from client work?

* How big are your typical projects?

* How on earth do you get new clients?
I think overriding the signalling system should only be done in extreme circumstances.

If it becomes normal, it's too easy to make a mistake during the procedure, and cause an accident.
What does this link have to do with things?
The Reason Why Boxer's Wear Hoodies
You don't really understand how difficult recursion is until you've tried to teach a bunch of programming newcomers the concept. A few get it quickly, but for the rest all the "think of it like ..." suggestions don't really help. It's a concept that everyone seems to have to learn through practice (as the author implies). I fell into the trap that if I only explained it clearly enough I could make it easy for others. Everyone learns it their own way and you just have to give students enough opportunities to practice for them to get it. I don't disagree with Dijkstra that the concept shouldn't be difficult, but I do not believe there are any easy paths to the concept for most.

It's one of the most interesting learning processes in that once you get it, it feels almost as simple as a for loop or simple math. But until you get it it feels like the most opaque, impenetrable wall where 1+1 != 2.

Side note, recursion would be slightly easier if the concept of a base case were applied to all functions as preconditions. The idea of a base case really has more applicability than just in recursion, it's just that we don't call it a base case in other situations.

Recursion is also interesting to implement when doing TDD. It comes in a refactoring step, of course, but you don't have to think about the base case(s) because they've already been done. Again, not suggesting this is helpful to a newcomer struggling, but is just an interesting process.
Maybe where you live and who you hang with? Most my friends decided long ago not to have kids as did we. It's not a given anymore.
Diamond is used in some of the higher end thermal pastes and they do perform marginally better than alternatives, but the problem is that they tend to cause micro-abrasions caused by the high-speed vibrations ICs do. This isn't too big of a deal when you're mounting a cooling block to an IHS surface, but if you're doing direct-to-die cooling (which many hardcore enthusiasts do) it can spell disaster.
The 37% rule has been the most beneficial heuristic that I've applied to dating.

https://plus.maths.org/content/mathematical-dating
If I'm going to stay more than a week or two, or more than once or twice, I cut out AirBnB and contract/pay directly with the host.
I personally don't think the past 100 years are going to look anything like the next 100 as far as the stock market is concerned. But we will see.
The notion of running one giant model that has many sub-talents is epic. I can imagine that all the disparate models they run today could fuse into a giant network that melds predictions and guides computation as required by the task. That seems like a very Jeff Dean scale endeavor.
> Everyone selects someone who isn't perfect

My wife didn't. :-)
I know some superhosts who use airdna.co to find new properties to invest in and price listings. It's not free though.
IIRC, the instruction has a bit field to specify a register as a destination. If you specify a register that is hardwired to have the value zero, the instruction is, effectively, a NOP.
Marriage, monogamy, and (romantic) love are conservative notions that are close to being (or should be) marginalized in my opinion.

Romantic love, especially, is an extremely superficial and hollow idea exalted to high heavens by the group-think of the masses. I gave up religion, and over the years realized that love is the second, way more sneaky and no less damaging, delusion that humanity indulges in. It has to go the way of the religion.

I hope most of you would agree that at least 70%-90% of being in love has something to do with the appearance of your person-of-interest (most of it visual). No matter how you cut it, no matter how much of an intellectual you are and how much you prefer to connect deeply with a person, in the end, given two individuals, you fall in love with the one that is more visually attractive. What a coincidence!

And what is visual attraction? In other words why do we find some people more beautiful than others? Because we have a biologically ingrained form of discrimination based on looks. It's lookism plain and simple.

Note that I do not buy the silly notion that 'beauty is in the eye of the beholder' and that 'I don't find that person attractive but I'm sure someone else will'. This is somewhat backed by data (e.g., the OKCupid survey), but I have developed this belief on my own. Humans of all races have a built-in instinct to find some visuals more appealing and attractive than others. It is sad but true. To take it to an extreme, if we find some visuals disgusting (e.g., spilled guts, slimy things) we don't all of a sudden go "I'm disgusted by slimy spilled guts of animals, but that's just me, I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who have the exact opposite reaction, that they love to look at slimy spilled guts".

What I'm trying to say is that standards of visual attraction, while not physically objective, are largely biology objective, and yet, it's a bad thing, because it's a symptom of biological imperfection. It's a genetic defect in our biology and 99.99% of humans are afflicted by it.

I personally think social individualism is a concept that needs to gain traction in modern society. It is the 'atheism of love'.
> Kind of like if gmail started blocking emails sent to a gmail account if it disagrees with its content.

I'm pretty sure that gmail's superior spam filter was one of its big initial selling points?
Is the Nginx client using the happy eyeballs algorithm?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Eyeballs

Can be a source of race conditions.
People keep claiming this, but I know not one single sexist developer who can't find a job. Not even the ones who actually, literally committed sexual assault: they are all still employed.

It is only possible to justify identifying with this asshoel by completely ignoring the harm his "speech" does to his company's culture while vastly over-inflating the consequences he is likely to face. If he had said, "programmers should sit down, shut up, stop whining and write what they are told" no one here would have a lick of sympathy for him getting canned.
What I always tell people who are dating, and only half joking, is you need to find someone you can be bored with.

When you're young and just done with education, starting work, things are changing quickly. You're getting a lot of new experiences and meeting new people. It can be very exciting.

Unfortunately, it's unlikely to continue like that. You can't always be travelling, changing jobs, or even go out on the town. This is primarily if you're going to have kids. They need a routine, which means you need a routine.

So the challenge is to do the exciting dating thing while looking for someone who will be happy with something much more monotonous. I met at least a couple of women who seemed likeable but just didn't act like they were going to be happy on the long straight.
Escape from QuickBooks (with data in hand)
Alphabet expands in Africa
The only place I think that really applies is if you're in a small town. If you can't get past the first few dates after trying with 10-20 candidates in a big city (requiring 100-200 solicitations), you're probably facing one of a few very solvable problems, off the top of my head:

- fails at basic hygiene (solved by showers, haircuts, clothes, cleaning your room, home improvement projects, eating vegetables, etc)

- fails at basic rapport (solved by practicing with non-romantic partners)

- underlying mental health issues (solved by your therapist/psychiatrist)

- fails at having an appealing life to join (solved by identifying personal goals and practicing working towards them)

There are exceptions, of people who are extremely physically unattractive, or who have truly insoluble mental health issues. But it's a really tiny percentage of people. I'm talking you literally make babies cry with your appearance, or you have a history of torturing animals, or something like that.

Most people have just a couple of actual dealbreaking items on their filter, so out of 20 candidates there should be one or two whose filters are on things you accidentally do right.

And I'm not saying those four things I listed above are quick to solve. They take time. It might take 2 years of daily effort. I'm just saying they're easy to solve: there's no trick. Anyone who can bake a cake can do the steps necessary to solve them.
Using Background Workers to Handle Workload
My personal recommendation for a book on geometric algebra is the one by Hestenes, New Foundations for Classical Mechanics (https://www.amazon.com/dp/0792355148/). I was disappointed by Geometric Algebra for Computer Science and I recently got rid of my copy when I moved to a new apartment, but I have a mathematics background and tend to prefer denser books.

I would say that "alternative" is a viable word here. Yes, you'll need a foundation in linear algebra to understand geometric algebra, but our classes and books on linear algebra go beyond what is necessary for understanding geometric algebra and introduce concepts (like the cross product) which have more natural equivalents in geometric algebra. I'm not even convinced that it's necessary to have a good understanding of matrixes in order to work with geometric algebra.
Wikimedia Objective Revision Evaluation Service
Likewise, are they different enough to justify the massive disparity in nursing?

As of 2011, 90% of nurses in the US were women[0]. That's even more skewed than tech. Moreover, the average income of a nurse in Silicon Valley is $100k. To my knowledge, there is no outcry or movement to bring more men into the nursing profession.

[0] https://www.census.gov/people/io/files/Men_in_Nursing_Occupa...
No amount of knolling will help me with my usual problem taking apart complicated machinery:

https://xkcd.com/1780/

(That's titled Appliance Repair)
As has been the case for a number of years now perf/$ the best choice is Noctua NT-H1. While there are better TIM on the market, they tend to be more exotic which requires special care during application or have specific lifecycles where they must be re-applied. Alternatives which perform better are also more expensive.

I've been building extreme-performance enthusiast systems for more than 20 years which has included using about every sort of exotic TIM you can imagine, including all the various types of liquid metals. Noctua NT-H1 is my continued go-to and the numerous benchmarks of TIMs continues to provide strong evidence that for the money you can't beat it.
Bio is more like humanities, it seems, than CS. I've seen Primary Advisers sabotage students in defenses before, it's not fun, and it's not uncommon (~15% of them, maybe). Don't ask me why, but it happens. I even saw a PI sue a student for 'work not completed' after he graduated and the PI signed the forms. The student just went back to China and nothing came of it, but for a few months there it was pretty hairy trying to educate the student in US laws and calm him down.
I think you are suffering from the same delusion that many have regarding this so-called bar. At the level of recruiting done by the big-five you end up with a pool of candidates who all make it over "the bar." You only need a couple, so now you get to decide on additional criteria like how well they seem to work in teams, how well they can communicate with their peers, how easily they can adapt to new situations and shifting goals...all things that have very little to do with the pure technical criteria that you initially filter for, but which seem to end up contributing more to any particular candidate's impact on the org than simple coding abilities.

tl;dr they don't need to lower the bar to diversify the company.
CouchDB 2.1 is out
If Tensorflow becomes the default library for Deep learning, is this a good thing or bad thing? Does it help in that all researchers can focus on what's important (the data and results) or does it hurt in that Google now controls an important paradigm for the next generation of computing?
In the UK, an estimated 42% of marriages end in divorce, as of 2015. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsde...
The hell are you talking about
Neither YC (you probably meant HN) nor SV are toxic.
Ok so you literally think that it's better to have 500k Americans killed than 250k Japanese, when the Japanese attacked us. And you consider defending yourself terrori sm???

How are the Japanese civilians any more innocent than the Americans? Can you answer this?? No you can't. You are just confused and have no comprehension of how evil Pearl Harbor and the Japanese rulers were. You have obviously never heard of the Bataan death march.

I literally think you are a horrible human being. You would rather sacrifice more of your own countrymen to save the wives and children of the attakcers. You are a straight up evil human being. There are no other words to describe it.

Thank you for proving to me beyond a doubt that liberals hate this country and would gladly see it burn.
Really? I thought that was a wishy-washy statement.

As you crank up the tightness of "exact", you'll always get more and more disagreement.

Is there any large science-based policy decision where there is 100% agreement among scientists, or where there hasn't been considerable disagreement between some of them?
Removing that ugly :focus ring (and keeping it too)
"everyone else" ... I don't know man, I haven't been ranting about this on twitter, and I find the author's document to be completely unreasonable, and many of the arguments against it to be entirely reasonable.

Maybe this just says more about our individual social groups ... or one of us is wrong about how prevalent one viewpoint is vs the other. Could be me :)
Anybody know websites to discuss ideas and tech about forest fire fighting ? (be it thermodynamics, organization, monitoring, chemistry etc)
Buzzfeed has a lot of good journalism, apparently. I never go to their site and seek it out, but when it's linked it's very good like this piece.

It shouldn't be so surprising; if CNN and NYT can fill their sites with clickbait, why can't Buzzfeed step in to fill the gap of investigative journalism? Hell, I trust Buzzfeed more than the other two; at least with Buzzfeed you can tell right away whether you're reading clickbait or real journalism.
>the union of two minorities is a minority, and the intersection of two majorities is a majority

Is that a typo? Shouldn't it be the other way around?
so who's going to write the Python wrapper to this?
Why to Run? [Programmer thoughts]
I very much enjoyed Part 2 of this article. It puts forward a much more complete framework for success than part one, which mostly just talks about the flaws in many standard approaches.

The notion that you are going to find the perfect person for the rest of your life at any given moment in time is ridiculous - you are going to change, they are going to change, your relationship is going to change both of you. The sense of friendship, being at home with one another, and the mindset that a marriage takes work have all been instrumental in my own marriage so far.

My wife and I met in our early 20s. The things we wanted out of life - both individually and as a couple - have changed significantly over the past decade. It is likely that if either of us had known where we would end up we might not have chosen our past selves to be together with our future selves. However, we've been a part of every individual and collective change and have worked to build a strong relationship through the changes. There is something amazing about walking through adulthood together and staying committed through all of the ups and downs.
Nah, the heart chooses OpenBSD, but you stick with FreeBSD out of convenience.

The real tragedy is NetBSD being forever alone.