skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is a good article. I wish I could force everyone who pontificates on schooling in Australia to read it.

We have an enormous private school system (part govt-funded, which is gross) that can get rid of students as they please. Then they go on to verbally dump shit on the public system, where they get to dump their problem students. Nice.

We also have a real fetish for selective schools, which are essentially selection bias driven to a huge extent. Any suggestion that this isn't a good idea is met by an chorus of "you must hate smart people".
Politics for you.

It's still a good idea.
That's weird
Has nothing to do with "revenge" or otherwise seeking to harm others. My point was about the harm we cause with phrases like "reverse sexism" that seek to provoke anger against the very people who have been harmed to a far greater extent.

In general, your arguments here are so facile as to make any attempt to respond equally as absurd. If you're genuinely interested in the topic, I'd suggest you research further vs launching into fallacious reductio ad absurdum-style arguments on comment threads.
It was a lot of scientific studies he cited (since contradicted by meta studies), nothing about Google's processes. Another commenter on this thread seems to suggest that almost all interviewers can get second shots, which (albeit anecdotally) makes his argument weaker (showing restraint here in not calling him an outright liar)

I know with my (again anecdotal) experience with large SV firms, if Google had these kinds of holes in their hiring process they would be standing alone in the valley. Also, "lowering the bar" is not consistent with their absolute global market dominance.

He also claims in the same interview that he had already done his fact and opinion finding, and incorporated feedback into the memo by the time he posted it[1], so I don't know how much of this was a "request for clarification". He even had action items.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4WoeOkj2Ng
Your understanding seems wrong:
https://www.eclipseglasses.com/pages/safety

If your understanding were correct, the difference between fake and real glasses wouldn't be minor ones such as round-ness of certain parts.
I'm hugely disappointed! And where's Hangouts Chat? I think Google tries to implement some sort of diversity in their product line as well!
I'm not prepared to fault him because I don't see how he could have been both professional and honest in discussing this issue. I think workplace norms need to evolve in one direction or another.
> But most tech employers already broach the subject in many ways. It's not right that employers get to have controversial opinions, including during work hours, but employees do not.

What controversial opinions are you talking about?
E.g. teachers in India are 80% men. Source?
My personal anecdote would be close to 50-50% with variance at higher college level and school level.
I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing. For one, the 80/20 rule applied back then just as it does today, so most of what's lost is crap to begin with. It's no different than in the real world: surely nobody's lamenting that you can't pick up a copy of Fordyce's Sermons anymore (and I presume that it'd be long forgotten if not for Austen). While some valuable resources were undoubtedly lost, most live on re-posted elsewhere, like memes, but in a "good" way.

Secondly, the book is more analogous to a map or dictionary, and it ought to be a descriptive source, not a prescriptive one. Some language purists may disagree, but I could care less :-). And similar to an old, outdated, map, you'd expect that the details may have changed, but the landmarks are most likely still accurate. NASA's still nasa.gov, MIT's still mit.edu -- well, IIRC www.mit.edu used to point to their library's portal, and web.mit.edu their main page; I see that's changed -- and CompuServ still...exists.
This was my first thought on the male childcare thing,too Could not make it past the first 30 minutes, felt so much empathy for Mads' situation and anger at the teacher/administrator for assuming guilt immediately. The fact that the director/writer gave us an omniscient view point with the sex acts happening in front of the child at home sort of forced one into Mads' corner right away.
You haven't been watching tv in the last 30 years if you don't think female reporters are told to dress sexy, with too much makeup an cleavage on display. Then you complain that society is being degraded by complaining about this - so you do see the sexy reporter stereotype?

Imagine if these standards were applied to men who are programmers. Instead we can dress however poorly we want, bad grooming is basically celebrated.
I'm still making up my mind on this one, but for the sake of argument, I'll disagree with you.

The workplace was the venue for this, because 'this' was evidence was that Google(his workplace)'s diversity initiatives and censorship were harming the company. He attempted to go through the proper channels (HR) as discussed in another part of the comment section for this very article.

Completely ignored by HR, and after some watercooler discussion in which he received confirmation that he was not the only one to have such thoughts, he decided to organize his thoughts into a memo, which from his perspective, introduced ideas that could explain the gender employment gap at Google and help make the company better by erasing the notion of being a 'diversity hire' among other things.

What it did not do was claim that his female coworkers were inferior. I feel the need to reiterate that because that seems to be the disinformation that many take home with them and use for their arguments against him. With it, they vilified and ousted him.

Going back and reading it now, it's hard to believe such a seemingly harmless claim (women aren't as well represented in tech because they're not as interested in it) has created such outrage. I blame this mainly on Gizmodo, and those who piggybacked their original article (that blatantly lied about what he wrote and presented his memo which they had quietly edited). Some credit also needs to go to whoever leaked the memo, which Damore probably did not mean to leave the relatively small group of people he originally introduced it to, at least at that point in time.

Really, what he presented and how he presented it were not very controversial. It easily could have been addressed internally by HR, or discussed within the company by its employees without the dishonesty and witch hunting. My point is, what he presented should have been acceptable in the way he did it especially given Google's claims of free speech and the historical precedent of memos like these, but dishonesty and close-mindedness distorted it until it looked like he was calling for repealing women's suffrage.
Are you serious?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_optimization

Just using gradient based descent can not achieve much with non-convex functions.
You are entirely mistaken, unless all you care about are the basic built in dict/list and some of the other built in data structures AND each thread only stores OR reads data (i.e. never reads and then stores it again), from a SINGLE container (you never care about consistent state between two different objects).

In my experience this is almost never the case. Moreover, this type of synchronization is trivial to accomplish with relatively little performance sacrifice.

What is much more complicated is getting more complex logic work correctly and performantly when you are interacting with multiple different data structures from something more than a saturated loop.
Then Google's calculus is simply different to yours. For what its worth, I don't think Google's response to this is going to have a significant impact on Google's ability to hire talented people, or that white, heterosexual, cisgendered people are going to feel that their opportunities at Google are likely to be curtailed. Females, I would say, or any other minority within Google, are even less likely to.

Amazon attracts talented staff despite a widespread perception that it's a hellhole to work at (https://www.theverge.com/2015/8/15/9159309/you-probably-dont...). Google, to most people, will continue to represent a dream job.
Not sure what got you downvoted. There's even a South Park episode about it where Kyle has a surgery to become a black basketball player, which kind of goes in the same direction.
“Gender-Differentiated Parenting Revisited: Meta-Analysis Reveals Very Few Differences in Parental Control of Boys and Girls”

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal....
> I think many people were just so unprepared to hear any argument from an opposing viewpoint that they read into it what they wanted to.

You hit the nail on the head, and it isn't limited to this memo. We have a serious intolerance problem in this country that goes far beyond Nazis and racists. Over the last 25 years our culture has warped to the point where opposing viewpoints are considered by many to be offensive. Kids have been raised in an environment where they are told that they (and their opinions) are always worthy of respect (no matter how uninformed or ignorant those opinions might be). Those who show insufficient respect (in the eyes of the person being "disrespected") are seen as hateful aggressors who must be attacked or silenced. In today's society, many people (especially young people) don't want vigorous debate between those of opposing views. They don't want to live in a marketplace of ideas where logic, morality, and the ability and willingness to articulate and defend your beliefs in a public forum are valued. These younger people have been conditioned to appeal to authority when they are offended or their beliefs are challenged, rather than answer the bell and debate the merit (or lack of merit) in an idea or statement.

Unfortunately this withering of public discourse is a bellwether for authoritarianism. You need look no farther than the recent outcry against the ACLU for their defense of free speech. There are very dark days ahead.
My uncle was diagnosed with cancer last july and died 3 months later. Left behind a wife and two kids. The holidays was rather depressing last year.

He was an athlete who ran in marathons. Never smoked or drank. But cancer still took him. Such a terrible disease.
I ordered a dozen eclipse glasses which are clearly fake or defective as I can see my kitchen light with them. Amazon did NOT send me a recall email. People are going to get injured. I hope Amazon gets sued for major punitive damages. They've had this problem for many years, have absolutely no quality control, and most of their products are fake or garbage. In response to returns of this garbage, they proceed to ban buyer accounts. Why does it have to take people going blind before Amazon changes its ways? What a shitty fucking company. Fuck them. I hope the people who suffer get awarded billions in damages but they won't. They'll be lucky to be able to afford their medical bills. And this despite the fact that Amazon knowingly failed to notify some users like myself. Fuck Amazon.
Actors who appeared in movies even after their death Photo
Two-to-the-forty-seven nanoseconds is a little over thirty-nine hours.

(Let's see HN mangle that!)
As someone with a very debate-loving personality, I disagree. Saying how I'm wrong is the best way to start discussion.

Now of course, not everyone will be the same. But for those that like to debate and have discussions, then just tell me why you think I'm wrong and we can go from there. I don't need you to coddle me.
Please, quote feminist propaganda with the same level of invective that has been circulated at Google and maybe we have something to talk about. Otherwise, you are just trying to justify the author of a memo that was released at a work place by suggesting there's literature released elsewhere that is as inflammatory.
This breaks the HN guideline that says "Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15021781 and marked it off-topic.

Edit: since this account has been using HN just for ideological flamewar (and personal attacks), we've banned it. Doing this will eventually get your main account banned as well, so please don't do it.
Well, I agree with the spirit of your argument. However:

> So if I say "the average women is shorter than the average man", am I now liable for being fired for creating a hostile environment for my female coworkers?

You wouldn't just be saying that. You'd be saying, "we know about implicit/explicit biases, but maybe short people are less interested in tech and that helps to explain the hiring gap." That and a series of studies about how short people, on average, have biological qualities that differentiate them from taller people, which you use to bolster your supposition. In effect, you'd be saying that, on average, short people are possibly just less interested in technology because they like other things, respond differently to stress and don't have the drive for status that tall people do.

So, while you wouldn't necessarily be _wrong_ for supposing that and people would be wrong to impute any further meaning than is represented (such as, short people aren't fit for tech, short people are not as good as tall people, etc.), you might be at least partially wrong for not being as clear as possible in your phrasing ... but not much else. Mainly, because his intention isn't to say women aren't fit for tech, but to point out why they might, on average, be less interested in tech, which would help to explain the gap in STEM interest.
Damore self-identifies as autistic [1]. Are you seriously suggesting that the proper course of action is that a mentally ill individual should receive training on how to speak and think from his corporation? What has the world come to where this is sanity.

Liberals today: "Embrace diversity of thought, color, and sexual genitalia! Wait I don't like that thing he said, fire him. Wait, he's mentally ill and thus persecuted, he needs to be protected. Wait, autism isn't a metal illness, he's fine just the way he is. Wait, he's a white male, he's not fine just the way he is, he's evil. Wait, he's self-identifying as autistic, he's not really autistic, a doctor has to diagnose him. Wait, no, that's different than self-identifying your gender, that's totally fine."

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/JamesDamore/comments/6thcy3/im_jame...
130K lost in phishing attack on Bittrex user
You seem to have modified the memo slightly to enforce your point.

>While Google hasn’t harbored the violent leftist protests that we’re seeing at universities

He's saying the leftist protests at Berkeley were violent. Which... is simply a factual statement.
Had forgotten about two experiences I had in roughly three months ago.

Stiffer feces lead to "tight squeeze" and then bleeding to the point of dripping in the toilet. True red blood. This happened twice within a week, feeling around in shower discovered pain on surface of recturm. I was eating terribly at the time.

It went away and I went on with life. Reading this today is a billboard reminder to get colonoscopy and clear myself ASAP.
So, you are in favor of outreach programs where you get to talk to more people?
This actually makes porting easier, not harder, in most cases, since code semantics remain the same.

What makes porting complicated in general is dealing with pointers and handles. These are 32-bit or 64-bit, depending on the architecture. Unfortunately, it was pretty common for old code to assume that they're always 32-bit, and e.g. shove them into ints (WinAPI itself was guilty of this on many occasions).

Technically, such a thing was never portable - not even with longs - until C99 brought us intptr_t, there was no guarantee that any integral type was large enough to hold a pointer. But in practice, it worked, so people did it.
Are ten-page screeds on any subject welcome and most companies? Google was this guy's only job after academia. I value his opinions on Google and corporate life in the same way that I value the opinions of unmarried people or people without kids on those respective subjects. I wince a smile and nod and think, "check back with me in ten years when you've been around the block a few times". This is not a person to take seriously. He does not even know what he doesn't know
PSA for anyone reading this: Colorectal cancer for younger people seems to be on the rise. They don't seem to know why.

My father had colon cancer and was not expected to survive it. I think he was 69 when he was finally diagnosed. He had put off seeing a doctor because he thought it was "just old age" and it was quite advanced by the time he was diagnosed. He did survive it and died, iirc, just short of his 89th or 90th birthday.

A lot of my relatives have had cancer, some of them more than once. Few of them have died from it. So, I tend to be biased in assuming that it can be conquered, even when the doctors say the odds are long against.

I know I have seen quotes on HN about how the odds are long against startups and other things, but how you can work to overcome those odds. I think it is a bit like that.

Good luck in your journey. Best wishes on your outcome.
Everything I actually read about the memo (and I didn't read it besides some points) is:
- Some Points are valid
- Some Points are discussable (that's why this post was created, wasn't it?)

but nearly none addresses them as totally invalid.
I mean even in this post of ycombinator the person in question couldn't straight said "No! This is wrong" and back it up with data.

I just don't get the whole gender/race discussions, but if such a memo can exists and things like gender diversity programs do exists, than something is probably really really wrong.

But with one thing I disagree with her, firing him was not the right thing to do, at least not directly. I mean wouldn't it be better to just discuss this, probably in the open, with him, the company and even more and make a great discussion panel?
I mean with just firing him, they actually just ignored all points, even valid ones.
As someone without a formal education working with peers that have PhDs, there are lots of things one has to overcome in terms of perception in a given role. The majority of my coworkers for the past several years have not been white; however, most have been men (about 1:6 to 1:4 or so)
Very informative and thank you for commenting your experience.

Can you say which classes you took and/or your favorites or the ones you thought you got the most out of? Any you wish you had taken instead or the classes you did not enjoy or get much out of?

I've only heard of this program, but have not researched any details.
Think of it more like whacking an unneutered dog on the snout with a newspaper. Beside, I took his language just fine without envisioning the Stasi watching your every move.
> Affirmative action causes everyone, including the person, to question whether they got there on merit or based on filling some quota.

Affirmative Action does not require
having quotas (and, in fact, they are in mlst contexts explicitly illegal, even in venues required to have Affirmative Action policies). So, insofar as it “causes” the that result, it is largely by interaction with false information deliberately spread by its opponents.
No excess baggage: the startup helping travellers store luggage anywhere
"beware the college dropout" oh bother
There's a difference between the two words, "reason" and "justification". I think you're confusing the two; if someone talks about X as a reason for Y, you think they're using X as a justification for Y.

It's complicated by the fact that sexist & racist people will try and use reasons as justifications, that they will use their misunderstanding of statistics to short-circuit decision-making in a faulty and biased way.

But we shouldn't outlaw talking about reasons all the same. The reason we shouldn't outlaw talking about reasons, in spite of the risk of odious people using them as justifications, is that you would otherwise proceed unscientifically. Reasons relate to theories about the world, and if you discard reasons, your theory about the world is wrong.
Is there some positive net benefit of Google releasing the details of the person they fired for leaking the internal information? Companies rarely mention details about firing employees for misconduct.
Are ten-page screeds on any subject welcome at most companies?

Probably not. I blogged just today about my opinion that if this 10 page screed had been about how Google was doing the office furniture all wrong, he likely still would have ended up fired, sooner or later, for being an egomaniac who cannot play nice with his corporate overlords, basically.
>> In English the only correct plural of dwarf is dwarfs

etymonline points out that the form with a better-in-some-sense claim to be "correct" is dwarrows, not "dwarfs". But that term was uncommon enough that it completely died out. ( http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=dwarf )

As I mentioned sidethread, "dwarves" is a natural extension of what happens with other common English words ending in f, making it difficult to argue that it is somehow incorrect.
I, and I suppose a lot of people, give between 3-5 seconds to tell me what it does. If I am not able to find a reference to anything within this time - I will close the tab.
I have scrolled whole website looking for one headline or enlarged text with one sentence explanation of what this is.

Once I failed I turned in to HN comments.

UX on this website is awful, but it has a possibility to be an amazing one. Just a few small changes and people will link to this page as an example of UI. But for now is pretty bad.
this is textbook tone policing. it's an essay, not a spoken dialogue. you could say this about, say, a published study about climate change projections.
Except that people are just discussing ideas in a rational way, at least aspirationally. There aren't any physical sticks.

This is complex because people desire for fairness and respect in incompatible ways. If we analogize away one of those problems, of course the right decision seems obvious.

EDIT: I think the incompatibility is a result of some rules and norms that need changing. I don't think the conflict is a law of nature.
Curious why you didn't choose OCaml or Haskell
I'm taking ML in the fall and I've already taken ML4T and RL. So the order I went in was ML4T -> RL -> ML. My understanding is that's roughly in order of increasing difficulty (although I do suspect RL has gotten a little harder over the last year).

Both ML4T and ML have some RL component. So there's overlap. If you're new to python, then I'd definitely recommend ML4T first because it spends a bunch of time on Pandas/Numpy. ML4T is also easier to get into than ML if it's your first semester.

Take a look at the course review site also. It's really helpful in estimating difficulty:

https://omscentral.com/reviews
It's extremely charitable to assume that he is naive enough to not understand the implications of his associations with those alt-right sites. If he had been on techcrunch or some other media platform it would be one thing but he immediately started showing up on those websites with interviews.