skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Sure. But people on the wrong side of the Google monoculture feel like they have to be closeted at work. They don't want to feel that way either

Everyone has to be closed at work; it's a part of being in a professional environment. For example, you can't go up to your co-worker and tell them you think they're a complete idiot even if you think so.

In social settings this is possible because relationships can just end, but that's not the case for a business where you are expected to interact with the same people often.
I'm curious as to what happens when there are two cars with active sensors at the same place - how much would they interfere with each other?
Musk said they'd demo L5 late this year, which is delusional.
I second the request. I spent several years as a K-5 teacher, I didn't perceive this dynamic at all. All US teachers are rightfully extremely wary of being alone with any child, and from what I've seen that is a concern for teachers of all genders.
If your problem justifies a Hadoop cluster, you probably have the team that can properly set it up.

Insecure by default is not a big issue if it has its own dedicated network with restricted access in or out.
Please keep ideological talking points off HN. If you have a substantive point to make, make it thoughtfully; otherwise please don't comment until you do.
A single load balance server is hard?

You don't have to host all your stuff on one server at all.
I've reiterated what the person said in the article. If your burden of proof is word semantics, then do I really need to elaborate to you more on the definitions of debate vs discussion?
> Essentially, the old version becomes a consumer of the new version

As a raw concept, I really like this idea. Let's say you're bumping from 2.5 to 2.6 and there's a breaking change in-between.

You replace the old api code with a new thin layer that consumes 2.6 and puts it in 2.5 format. This would be easy to write a series of tests for to make sure that 2.5 is still providing what it should, and it has the added benefit of giving your engineers the opportunity to consume the new api internally in a structured way, so that would be a good way to catch any bugs you might not otherwise find.

And of course, the 2.4 version already only consumes the 2.5 version, so it's turtles all the way down.

That's a great concept. You would have to still deprecate APIs or provide an incentive for users to update to the newest version, otherwise the oldest versions would create a long chain of requests that add unnecessary overhead. But otherwise I love it.
The article on QC I got the most out of: http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=208

Very visual example of how Shor's algorithm works to solve factoring. Nothing more than basic arithmetic required.

The big takeaway for me was, it's not just "try every combination at once" as per pop lit on the subject. QC doesn't really do that. To get QC to work any better that traditional for any task, you need to get lucky and stumble across an algorithm that QC can excel at for that task. Just from reading Scott Aaronson's article, it seems likely that most tasks simply don't have a QC optimization, so perhaps QC won't change much at all. (Well, except cryptography, which may change everything...)
Your odds of being the 0.00001% are very low, but someone has to be it. He's just saying recognize that. Recognize that all your hopes, dreams, fears, assumptions, etc. can literally be gone in an instant and live accordingly.

I know it sounds ridiculously cliched, and of course you never think it will happen to you, but let me assure you that life really can be taken from you at any time, so live it with that reality in mind.
Oh we know why! It's just not acceptable to talk about it:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3311490/

Asking people to take responsibility for this one simple thing is taboo.

(I have a Colonoscopy just last week as part of a routine exam at my age. The procedure really isn't that bad. A couple hours on the toilet during the prep, and that's about the worst of it).
Even better than WD40 (which sucks as everything equally) is a mix of ATF and Acetone for stuck bolts. From the store, pb blaster is the best. Wd40 stands for Water Displacer, it is not the formula our fathers knew. They would have used wax and a torch or wintergreen oil anyway.
> it is a telling opinion about how he thinks about the capabilities of women.

No, assuming that men and women who applied have the exact same distribution of 'good qualities', you have twice as many male applicants as female applicants, and you want to hire as many women as men, you have to lower the bar for women.
Communication can spread many things. If used to connect people and promote understanding, people can keep governments from war. If used to spread rumors and fear, people will push government towards war.
Yet, my ICE is cheaper to repair than an out of warrany tesla.
By perpetuating the stereotype that "women are less interested in engineering" and suggesting that your chances of getting a good female candidate are lower, Damore is introducing an unconscious bias against women. After all, "it's likely that she doesn't really like this", "she probably went into engineering because her parents pushed her", "maybe she's great now, but she'll lose interest once anxiety kicks in."

Next time your engineers are scheduled to interview someone and they see a female name on the resume, they'll form an opinion (even if slight, and even if overridable by interacting with the person) about who the candidate is. Depending on how tired/stressed/bored they are that day, that opinion will play a smaller or bigger role in what they write down in the candidate report.

That bias, by the way, exists today. Trying to justify it on the base of biological differences does nothing to fix it.
Every day the "pro-diversity" (in the sense of preferentially hiring practices) don't abstain... they tell you a viewpoint and force you to adopt it even when you disagree. The fact people keep their mouth shuts shouldn't be a surprise. That doesn't make the pro crowd any less controversial. It's just they don't get fired for their controversial opinions.
True, but the most likely cause is hemorrhoids! Still, this should never, ever, be ignored.
I completely disagree. The majority of big players has poisoned the waterhole. They've made the web less usable because of how they've made things dynamic. I think going back to static would have some negative impact, but it would make things better for everyone overall.
What makes you think scientists aren't doing that type of research?
Not sure I follow why you think the firing had something to do with outreach? You mean they'll be losing out on candidates like Damore?
> If you require one group of people to score 90 on some test in order to be hired, and another group to score 80, then among successful applicants the second group will have lower average scores than the first.

That's not necessarily so; you could require mice to be heavier than 90 grams, and elephants to be heavier than 80 grams, and still have your elephants be heavier on average.

(I don't want to wade into the bigger argument, just pointing out that "that's simply how statistics work" only under certain conditions (which most likely apply here, but you wrote "there's no getting around that" when there is)).
Are Some Technologies Beyond Regulatory Regimes?
awww... little sick boy thinks he gets to be a preacher now, to warn us all about mortality.

you're all idiots.
My dad was diagnosed at 42 with a rare type of GIST(gastrointestinal stromal tumor) that at the time had 6 known cases in the entire country. Doctors literally gave him 3-6 months to live, maybe 12 with really intensive chemotherapy. Fortunately, he was offered to sign up for an experimental test of Glivec against GIST(Glivec was a known drug at a time, but for something completely unrelated) - with a caveat that he could end up in a control group and be given placebo. He didn't. Glivec was found to be extremely effective against that specific type of cancer and my father has lived another 8 years completely GIST-free(died at 50 due to another cancer that has developed independently of GIST and taken him within 6 months of diagnosis).

So yeah. I know this maybe isn't a super happy story, but not every super bad prediction ends up being true.
No, if their car is not running any lights under normal circumstances, but has ran it even once at a particular intersection, you bet I will send my engineers there with some cameras to tape the intersection so we can analyze it and see what is happening. If the intersection is poorly designed/timed, why would it be implausible to happen to catch human drivers make the same mistake?
Best SEO for Small Business – Do It Yourself
Frances: ...if I remain silent, that silence could be mistaken for agreement.
I should not be forced into that kind of debate at work.

And then

Frances: ...I’m also disappointed that the men I know,
including most of my male colleagues, remained silent
on the topic.

Frances: ...Many powerful men in Silicon Valley have
huge bases of social media followers. By remaining
silent on this topic or tweeting support for Damore,
they are sending a message that philosophical arguments
and principles take precedence over the lived
experiences of many smart, talented female engineers
and technical founders.

So, what? Is it just impossible to stay out of the issue if my silence is sending a message that philosophical principles and whatever matter more than women in technology? What if I just want to work my 9-5, treat all my coworkers well regardless of sex or gender, and let the PC warriors duke it out in the streets away from me? Can't even stay silent without sending a message.

While I agree with much of what is said in this piece, I find this pretty demonstrative of the "damned if i do, damned if I don't" situation I'm in as a male trying to survive in this PC crucifixion culture.
Eset Endpoint Security 6 Crack and License Key with Activator Full Free
I'm almost ashamed to ask but what's "explained rectal bleeding"? An unusually large/solid movement causing direct damage?
It is an attempt to get past the type of issues that Dan Luu wrote about almost three years ago[0], where he referred someone to Google as one of the most impressive engineers he ever met in any field and that person didn't get past the phone screening as "not technical enough".

[0] https://danluu.com/tech-discrimination/
> I thought this was going to be a bit more informative about _how_ engines work

Suck, squeeze, bang, blow

Four words, four cycles - covers the majority of engines out there (including jet engines). 2-cycle engines are slightly different, but not by much. Steam engine are fairly simple to understand. Sterling engines can be difficult for some to wrap their heads around. Then there are the really esoteric engines (and I am not talking about a Wankel, which is also a 4-cycle engine)...

IC engines are - at a very basic level - very simple in operation. Where the complexity comes in from the theory is doing that cycle efficiently and quickly; the more efficient the engine needs to be, or the faster it needs to turn, the more complex things get (much of the complexity there is in fuel/air ratio delivery, exhaust handling, and oil distribution to bearings and such).

If you really want to know how a 4-cycle engine works, look into going to a "local" (if you have one nearby) antique engines show, and look around for these:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hit-and-miss_engine

They can be made to run slow enough that you can see all of their operations fairly clearly, plus they aren't all that complex (you could probably build one from hardware parts and a bit of welding). They are, however, extremely inefficient (and very messy - they sling oil/grease everywhere).

Ultimately, though - engines are simple. If your car ain't going, it's because one of a basic set of elements isn't being done - fuel, air, or spark. Now - what is causing one or more of those to be missing, that's where the "fun" is in auto mechanics...
That's standard issue advice. "No company ever failed because of a security breach."
As I read this article, it didn't suggest that selective schools are bad or improper, but that they may greatly mislead us about causality or what particular institutions and methods are or aren't accomplishing.
I blame postmodernism. Really. Postmodernism says that all discourse is about power, not truth. People are starting to act consistently with what they've been taught.
Why would women need to "defend themselves"? He wasn't attacking them. The entire point of it was, that for whatever reason, women are statistically less likely to be interested in computer science. He never said anything about their ability.
> That this article hasn't been flagged and remains on the front page is because of it's provenance

I'm not sure what you mean by provenance but people should know that HN moderators haven't touched this article (other than to turn off the flamewar detector, because the thread, against all odds, is not a flamewar). We're surprised that it made it to #1 and delighted that the discussion has mostly remained respectful, at least compared to the tire fires of the last couple weeks. IMO this has a lot to do with the care that Cadran and the other authors put into crafting the post.
> Physical is different than mental: yes

If you say that there is no relation between our biological features (like genes or hormones) and our mental capabilities, I have to disagree completely. And I want someone to support that affirmation with facts and research studies. As far as I know there are a lot of mental illness treated with chemicals and hormones and a lot of studies that link malformations in genes with mental capabilities. There are also philosophical studies that link the mind to the body and that claim that there cannot be intelligence without embodiment. So all this things and other papers lead me to think that biological traits are linked to mental skills.
Congrats on the launch! I think I saw you talk recently in NZ, sounds like you have an exciting path forward
Lie, cheat, and steal if you have to. I'd bribe medical staff just to get the best experimental treatments if you can't get there via legal means.
I've yet to see a meta study which contradicts those studies. Would be interested to see one. I've seen studies that say in X% of studies about differences between men and women the differences found are negligible. That's not a contradiction though, and it's not really meaningful at all. The % of studies which find negligible differences can be arbitrarily inflated because it's simple to find as many axis along which there are no gender differences as you want. It doesn't matter how many you find, even if it's .000001% of studies that find a difference if those differences happen to be particularly important that still means there's a meaningful difference. Scott Alexander has a more in depth explanation of this here: http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-exagger...

If all interviewees have the same access to second interviews then I agree that it does nothing to lower the bar. In general if a policy doesn't concern itself with the identity of the candidate I don't see a way that it could be lowering the bar. However, my understanding, based on previous comments, is that diversity interviewees get a second chance immediately while the others must wait 12 months before they get a second chance. If that's the case then Damore's argument (and mine) stand.

I don't think Google's market dominance can be used as evidence of good hiring practices since I believe in the early days they didn't have such practices and wound up with a very undiverse company. This didn't seem to stop them achieving market dominance, draw from this what you will about how much they need diversity to succeed.

I'm having a bit of trouble understanding how you simultaneously believe that he "had already done his fact and opinion finding, and incorporated feedback into the memo by the time he posted it" and "The article shouldn't have been written without clarification on these points and conclusive evidence." It seems to me that not only did Damore make an honest effort to seek out clarification but that you're well aware of this fact.
> Amazon attracts talented staff

Yet you don't know if they would have even more talented staff being more decent. They're by definition stuck with what they can get.
Except it isn't so much the tax haven in Europe as it is profit stuck in china (their second largest market). Same is true for Microsoft.
It's very difficult to convince people who aren't interested in being convinced. There are too many people out there with a different, maybe wrong, opinion.

Why waste your time with those who don't seem genuinely interested in opposing evidence?

I didn't find his tone aggressive but he didn't at all seem interested in having a discussion. If I remember correctly he didn't rebuke any opposing points, let alone present them, which makes me think he didn't bother looking for them.

It's like hey I have this point I want you to listen to but I'm not even going to make an attempt to look up answers and instead force you to listen to me before I listen to you. It's like trying to answer someone's question without even understanding what they're asking, which I am sad to say I have seen far too often at Google.
If your workplace is sexistly discriminating against men and firing employees that disagree, then yes it is the venue for it.
In a sense?! Sexual power can be used to bring someone to their knees; to control, to humiliate; I think you do women a disservice if you diminish this fact, and what's more - and in the spirit of bombast - you are arguing against one of the timeless truths of human existence, and a theme that pervades human culture since time immemorial.
Colonoscopy was a pretty fast and painless experience for me. The prep drink I had to take the day before was the worst part.

Being worried is definitely not a reason to put it off!
In this case, living for "expected value" only makes sense if you live enough times to exploit the central limit theorem. If you review actuarial tables, you can see that at 35 (and male) you have 0.93% chance of not living to see your 40s. That is small... but it isn't vanishingly small. (source: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html)
You seem to be mistaken about what's been happening. Moderators haven't been flagging those articles; users have. That's what '[flagged]' means.

The different outcome in this case is because of community response. There are still a lot of flags, but there are many more upvotes. That, plus the discussion quality (i.e. not a trainwreck) surprised us quite a bit. I emailed Cadran this morning that she should probably expect the post to get flagged the same way as others (by users) and that we wouldn't be able to intervene if that happened. Instead, it went straight to #1. That's fine by me because the discussion has remained relatively civil and substantive.

For completeness I should mention that we did do one intervention: we turned off a software penalty called the 'flamewar detector' that kicks in on discussions that get a great many comments. But that's routine: we always turn off that penalty when the discussion isn't actually a flamewar, and this one qualifies. Other than that, moderators haven't touched the post at all, so yeah I think it's fair to say no exceptions.
Right; the problem being with a rate that low is that there really isn't much to do about it, unless you pretend its much more likely than it actually is. Living accordingly, given all other potential for error in your life that actually is likely to occur, is really to change nothing at all.
Your criticism is that he shouldn't have released a poorly-written memo to an enormous company. I would agree, however, I don't think that's what happened. I thought he brought it up in the internal Google Skeptics group, and then it got leaked and went viral. I doubt he wanted such an enormous audience for this draft, but I'm open to hearing statements to the contrary.
Read the Asian Saga by James Clavell to get inspired...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Asian_Saga
Every thread about the Google Memo in the past weeks got flagged (?) promptly out of the homepage but this one stays at the top with just 400 points. I wonder what's the difference.

1695 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14952787

754 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15009759

590 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14968626

448 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14959601

And many more.

Then people wonder how Trump got elected.
A community-backed distro, surely? There's also Arch, and others.
problem is lots of people think they have a problem that justifies a Hadoop cluster, but they don't really need it; the whole "you don't have big data thing".
It happened that I read about mpweiher's comments and I found out a linked medium article by [Ex-googler & entrepreneur Vidya Narayanan](https://medium.com/the-mission/im-an-ex-google-woman-tech-le...).

I agree on your point that the discrimination begins very early on.

The aforementioned article, although, bolsters the point that females may aspire to adopt different career options. Therefore, the organizations can't be held responsible for creating the gap/divide. And I seem to agree with Damores's memo because he mentions solutions to the problem of gender-ratio-gap by suggesting programs to attract women to tech.

In conclusion, complaining about the gender ratio alone won't fetch us equality but collectively attacking the root of the problem may.
> Don't assume you have a lifetime to pursue your dreams.

But will this change our perception of people in their 20s-30s that do pursue their dreams and are behind in their careers and finances?

At what point is a quarter/mid-life crisis not just an acceptable adult YOLO?

The author has some initial regrets on building up their savings and network, and I wonder if additional perspectives will be made by me posting this
This is exactly it. Women in spaces (virtual, in-person, in their workplaces) are being forced into this conversation to defend ourselves, because this "bomb" was dropped/leaked, outside of all relevant context, and now hype and focusing illusions have made it our job to make evolutionary psych-based arguments against it. I don't know what Damore's intent was, but the effect was to put people who disagreed with him, and especially women who disagreed with him, at an immediate disadvantage, rather than to reach out to them for the sake of a conversation.