skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Google - blocking Nazi sites today, blocking your political party of choice tomorrow.

This is why namecoin and .bit domains are so great, it's basically registering your domain on the blockchain so it can't be censored.
So the main problem seem to be that libaio on linux does not use the filesystem cache because it's forcing the use of O_Direct.
Any reason linux could not support AIO on regular file like FreeBSD ?
> If you buy a car, you're going to spend more than that for the next few years, but if it was a fairly inexpensive used car, you might pay ~$250/month for 3 years and come out ahead in 8-10 years.

Do those numbers include maintenance and insurance? IME just routine maintenance on an oldish (60-100k) Toyota runs into the hundreds of dollars. Insurance again something like ~$800-1000.

I got rid of my car after I did the math and realized I was spending $1500-2000 a year on just insurance and maintenance.
I have seen lots of roles from kink, on linkedin.
We've been running high-traffic production services for months, everything's been great. Leaner faster apps running on smaller, cheaper Linux VMs and containers. No problems encountered.

For running typical webapps and services, the existing .NET APIs were already good enough and now we have pretty much everything else available.
It would be wrong for Comcast to drop packets for specific websites, if Net Neutrality was still a thing. Google is a private company and can refuse to service customers.
I desire anyone the ability to say anything on the internet without being squelched. I don't see how that is the same. If private companies want play that game, it's time to take the internet out of their hands.

The solution to that problem is to have a federalized registrar that will allow anyone to register anything and is required to uphold free speech laws as they apply to the internet.
Also they were very hard to get if you weren't in the few places where they were sold.
Haha. I read utilities as "ultilities".
Turkey: Found 3,000-Year-Old Female Statue at Citadel Gate Complex
FWIW, I don't necessarily disagree with this and certainly think that it's a debate we should have.

OTOH, I think in the regime we do have, expecting Nazis to get a free pass for violating registration firms TOS is unreasonable, and granting such an exception, even silently by failure to enforce, would send a terrible message.
There are two, not exclusive ideas here. First, when you are reading comments, you need a tough skin. I agree. Second, when writing comments, you can try not to be needlessly antagonistic. I hope you can agree with that.
These are completely different concepts. Government != buisness. I can't choose to ignore the US government if I live here and don't like what they do. These people do not have to use Google if they do not agree with their decision.
Userland. Basically during upgrades we installed a shell script in /etc/init.d:

sleep 1200
if ping -c 5 central-services.anybots.com; then
rm <this file>
else
cd /home/dist && git checkout STABLE && make install
reboot
fi

(We used git to distribute binaries, so we could checkout and install a previous version easily).

This was a last ditch recovery. I could imagine lots of things that break, but which still allow ping. And installing a previous version over a newer version is flaky, because a newly created file won't be deleted.

An unbootable kernel is a whole different kettle of fish. I believe GRUB can be told to fallback to a safe mode.
What are your thoughts on a CA issuing a wildcard certificate for:

*.com.removed-limits.com

Blocking the string "paypal" would prevent issuance for phishing sites for maybe a day. After that, they'd have all migrated to "payypal" or "paypel", which would still be more than sufficient. And if that stops working too, well, good luck with wildcards!

Not to mention that in an HTTPS-only world, CAs would have full control over which domains are permitted on the web. Is introducing a semi-centralized content police really a good trade-off just to prevent phishing, or shouldn't we look into how we can prevent phishing using other means (U2F, webauthn) and focus on moving to negative-only security indicators (where HTTPS becomes the default, with no security indicator)?
Right, that's why all countries that do not have USA style free speech are dictatorships. Come on, that's not even trying. If anything the USA is more at risk of becoming a dictatorship than many other democracies.

You're not going to see any trouble anywhere - except on private property - for expressing ideas such as 'men and women differ biologically', note that no government you'd care to list here has ever suppressed speech like that.

But Nazism is on a different level, and if you're willing to go down that road protecting the free speech of Nazis you really have to be very optimistic about human nature. I keep hearing echoes of 'it can't happen here'. But I believe it can happen, and it probably can happen everywhere. The question is if we will let it and what it will take to stop it once the ball starts rolling.
Kind of inevitable. We're trying to model complex things in a way we can understand, and that necessarily involves simplifying it until it's... simple enough. Simple usually means coarse. If your model is coarse, does that make it invalid? No, but the coarser it is, the less accurate & predictive it is across all values of the inputs.
Amazon’s robots: job destroyers or dance partners?
Wow. Is there any precedent for this? Where the board is at war and the investors mail the employees? They must be utterly desperate for a fire sale IPO at this point. How is something like this not meant to spook other investors, employees and potential CEOs?

I do wonder if Travis is miffed at his ousting. Probably. But is he willing to burn the company to the ground in response? He must be a significant shareholder in Uber and obviously is still a board member.

The lawsuit by Benchmark alleging fraud was one level of desperation. I mean Becnhmark gave Travis the power to fill those board seats and now they have buyer's remorse? You get no sympathy from me.

This does raise obvious questions about what the lawsuit will reveal.
Keep that in mind as Nazis put a boot in your face
>Not sure what this letter is supposed to accomplish. [...] , and employees who were behind Travis will continue to support him,

Based on Travis' continued day-to-day meddling in Uber, it looks like he still has quite a bit of "soft power" within the company even though he's no longer an employee.

This isn't like the situation where Steve Jobs sold all his Apple stock and cut the ties after John Sculley and the Apple board fired him.

I'm guessing his soft power exists because you have a large faction of employees with stock options. For whatever reasons rational/irrational, they think the best way for the stock value to increase is with Travis instead of Benchmark's candidates. Maybe Benchmark thinks their letter can change some opinions on Travis or capture the undecideds.

(Yes, Steve Jobs coming back to Apple helped, but Jack Dorsey coming back to Twitter didn't. Therefore, don't get tunnel vision about Travis being the ultimate savior ... seems to be Benchmark's underlying message.)

Yes, Benchmark also has stock equity in Uber so the VC's protection of their capital should be perfectly aligned with the employees' desire for their stock to go up in value. The problem is that the employees have been "in the trenches" with Travis whose value to the business was demonstrated concretely whereas Benchmark is just an "investor" whose value to Uber is abstract.
That's baloney. Try to run a website by an IP and see how far you get.
From the article:

> "The moves, which include easing a cap on how many stations a broadcaster can own, have opened up lucrative opportunities for Mr. Smith, among them a $3.9 billion bid to buy Tribune Media, another large owner of stations."

> "Associates say both men believe that local television stations, which fall under the commission’s rules because they broadcast over federally owned airwaves, are at a disadvantage when competing against cable companies and online streaming services like Comcast and Netflix."

> "Loosened regulatory requirements, Sinclair executives said, will help even the playing field and benefit millions of Americans who rely on broadcast stations for news and entertainment by allowing the companies to invest in new equipment and technology."

I don't watch (local) TV, but the Jon Oliver piece [1] on Sinclair was eye-opening. I understand how larger companies can invest in new technology. However, cable and broadcasting companies have historically not done this [2] because they are near monopolies (or duopolies). These deregulations make things less competitive, not more. I don't understand how conservative voters who support these moves and the magic of the free market at the same time do not see this.

There's no leveling the playing field here, unless it's in the sense of bulldozing all the players out to make room for a few giants who are cooperating on some occasions to avoid competing.

> “I’ve been listening carefully to what you have to say,” Mr. Pai told broadcast executives in late 2012. “Unfortunately, it seems there’s a widespread perception that today’s F.C.C. is largely indifferent to the fate of your business.”

Why should the FCC care about business fates beyond their mission of providing fair service to consumers?

1 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvtNyOzGogc

2 - http://newnetworks.com/ShortSCANDALSummary.htm
Even though I strongly disagree with the content, I think it's an awful precedent.

Perhaps they should complain to ICANN (although I think the intellectual level there may be too low for a meaningful complaint) ?
Is it really that hard for people to understand that the first amendment only applies to the federal government?

Not to mention that the Internet is a global network with 200+ speech laws.
Lucky for us morals do not equal laws.
every private party is generally free to choose what speech it will relay

This is generally true, but not always; in particular, companies with monopolistic power forfeit some of their autonomy. I'm sure that wouldn't apply in this case, but it might kick in if Google banned this website from its search results, for example.
Of course Google has that right. I question whether it will have the intended effect, though. Pretty sure isolating extremists tends to cause further extremism.
If we are framing this as a free speech issue: Isn't spam email free speech?

How dare any network provider tell me I can't send 500 billion emails about my Viagra supplements? That is violating my freedom of speech!

The US government has actually passed laws making spam email legal (CAN-SPAM, under certain conditions), and still most every reputable network provider will not let you send it on their networks, even if it is legal.

I'm not suggesting the particular issue in the OP is the same as spam, but clearly there are some boundaries of free speech on networks that everybody seems to agree are good.
Jython uses the JNI and IronPython does it through C++/CLI, neither of them support the CPython extension interface, meaning the C modules aren't compatible. Because of this, Jython and IronPython inherit the interface properties of their respective VMs and they can remain thread safe without the GIL.
> Domain registrars have no business doing this.

Why do you think that Google doesn't have the right (business) to do this? They are not the sole registrar. Is there some contract with ICAAN which specifies this as a duty owed?

> Originally, they just registered domains for ICANN. Now they act like they own them and just rent them out.

This is exactly backwards. Google is refusing to act like they own them. They're refusing to have anything to do with them.
They just tell your roomba to rob you.
Don't you get bored doing the same thing for more than a decade?
Your clarification makes sense - a PhD advisor with a bit of NSF or other grant money would likely only fund a grad student to work on a problem that has a reasonable likelihood of generating some concrete, positive, and publishable results. This typically means an incremental result on a problem of interest to the research community.

That having been said, an accepted proof that P != NP would result in a Turing award and an additional $1M for solving one of the seven Millenium Prizes. This has been an open problem for decades, and it is a problem of enormous importance and visibility.
Silencing opinions is great as long as its opinions I disagree with.
You completely missed the point that the person above you was making
>Is it really that hard for people to understand that the first amendment only applies to the federal government?

That's the standard fallback of authoritarians. The law says the government can't ban speech, but the spirit of free speech, particularly on something like the internet, should be protected.
When advertising companies start paying large sums of money to product companies, you know that there is something wrong with the economy...

Money should flow from product companies to advertising companies; there is something sinister about money moving in the opposite direction.
That's the entire question we're addressing in these threads. It is weird that women excel in:

* the rest of STEM,

* the law,

* medicine,

* pretty much all the rest of the professions (accounting, actuary, &c)

... despite the fact that many of those fields are, both intellectually and from the amount of work product expected, more challenging than computer science.

Add to that the fact that most software jobs are far more work/life flexible than other professions (roll in late, work from home, wear whatever, weekly+ deliverable cadence, &c).

It is difficult to come up with an explanation for the 82/18 split in this industry that doesn't primarily include an implied preference on behalf of industry incumbents to avoid working with women.
I don't understand your position. This very article is evidence that his market analysis does not need to improve.
This is true if you are in a tenure track job, and denied tenure.

That's not true for postdocs, in general. If the sponsor pulled funding from the project that funded my postdoc, it would be challenging to keep him.
The author's other publications:

http://theory.cs.uni-bonn.de/blum/PubBlum.var
Worked at one found through craigslist. I left after the first year because somehow they were making $5k a day yet always having money problems. It got so bad they didn't pay the power bill. That and finding used needles in the bathroom were the final straw. At one of the office parties they had a communal pile of ketamine on the table. Just a really toxic environment. The CEO would regularly come in and let us know we were doing great because he lounges in his pool all day and does nothing so "keep up the great work". People would write in all the time saying we ruined their lives and what's it going to take for us to remove the videos (we could not be bribed) I didn't really advance my career at all.
Top+10+Must+See+Survival+Movies
He is still on Swift core team so why you think is he is not interested in Compilers/PL? A person of his/her caliber should be able to work on multiple things with very high level of performance.
Apples... oranges.
Domain registrars are not obliged to give service to anybody. If you register a domain you are given the use of a nice-and-easy-to-remember alias for your IP address. Whether or not the registrar will want to do business with you is their problem, that's a transaction between consenting parties, not an obligation on the part of the supplier. Whether ICANN accepts a registration or not is another matter, and so far ICANN has not been involved here.

So stormfront is free to shop around until someone wants their business or they can use their IP address, assuming they'll find at least one party willing to host them.
Am I misunderstanding something, or does Entity Framework Core, even at version 2.0, not support translating LINQ code into GROUP BY in the generated SQL? That seems so unbelievable that I figure I have to be wrong here.
What evidence do you have for this?

What I have read is that the "hiring a lab manager" experiments actually only found an effect for candidates that were (a) mediocre and (b) identically qualified. For exceptional candidates, they did not find bias. If there was a clearly better candidate they did not find bias.

Furthermore, the most commonly cited study on this was hiring for a position in a Psychology department. A discipline that is majority female. Other studies have shown that grading tends to be biased towards the gender that is less well represented in a particular field.

And of course there's the Ceci-Williams study that showed a 2:1 advantage for women in STEM tenure track hiring.
Im curious how many episodes the series is going to have
There's a part of it here: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/13/technology/do...
So to start with, don't conflate sex with gender.

Next, I'll make it really easy for you: women are women, and you can just count them as one group. That doesn't mean we should erase away the specific challenges and bigotry trans women face, but we also shouldn't be forcing them into a separate "quadrant" of women.
that might be true for kotlin, but probably not for Clojure, Scala, Groovy and JRuby
Freedom of Speech != freedom of speech.
They're really quite large, compared to most watches.
Gah, i totally missed that they were getting LFP and multi-unit only. I (foolishly) assumed they could get putative single unit, too, but I guess that's yet to come.
Interesting definitions. Theirs excludes you as an OSX developer, and yours excludes them as OSX developers. How about: Your requirements weren't those of "any OS X and iOS developer", unless you apply a "no true Scotsman" argument. Similarly, a nicer CLI environment is only applicable to some styles of dev on OSX.
Another very important thing is some form of free hosting.

I used to have my own prosody server a long long time ago. Eventually, I got fed up, since very few people used XMPP. I just got rid of it and barely noticed any difference.

If I had some place where I could register my own user@domain that matches my own email, I'd use it for sure. But shelling out 5-10 USD a month for that isn't worth while, not for me, nor any other early adopter (especially when almost any other IM service is "free").
Best brandings ever – did you know?
Fixed Point Division
Are there other examples of this happening, or is it just an isolated thing with Google?
I lost access to a TrueCrypt volume from years ago, and using AWS GPU spot instances, I was brute forcing ~1000000 permutations every 40 seconds last night for $7/hr. The hardware is incredibly accessible.
You and I understand this. Most paypal users do not. That's why they keep getting phished even when their browser says they are on a "Secure" site.

Maybe it would help to have something between the green "Secure" and the red "Danger! Stop!", e.g. an amber "warning" symbol implying that "You're connected to the site your browser is showing, but be sure it's the site you think it is." Sadly in reality I don't think that would go very far to solving the problem.
> and if you can't convince a domain registrar to give you a domain

This is the problem. If nobody wants to host my speech, fine: I can set up a server in my own bedroom if need be. But if nobody accepts my domain, it's not quite so easy to set up my own registrar.

Private companies arbitrarily censoring domain names is a can of worms that shouldn't be opened. Registration must be held up to a higher standard, like an utility.
Users are flagging it heavily, as they have been flagging most opinion pieces that have appeared during this tidal wave.

People who feel strongly one way or the other typically want to see the articles they agree with stay on the front page and the ones they disagree with get flagged. But from a systemic point of view, it isn't in HN's interest to have the front page dominated by repetitive arguments (and certainly not repetitive flamewars) about the same thing. That's not what the site is for and not why the majority of HN users come here.
On your second point, a construction which transforms NP-complete problems into P problems in polynomial time necessarily implies P = NP, by construction. If the algorithm isn't correct, then it's a heuristic, not an algorithm, and we have piles of heuristics for working with NP-complete problems already.
Perhaps a little unrelated, I used the rpyc package to get Jython and CPython working together. In the end I was able to use Java libraries from CPython pretty much seamlessly.
The Website is only doing this for publicity. They knew Google would ban them immediately and they can use that as a cry of oppression to their members and aspiring members and young people who buy into this and are looking for a cause to identify with. And after all this a lot more people know about them than before. Streisand effect in action.
As a machine learning researcher I have to say that you should join us too! AI is the future!

PL is an area with big challenges, but AI has even bigger challenges and the impact in the society is bigger, much bigger, too. I would change the question and ask why anyone shouldn't be interested in AI?
Freedom of Speech is about freedom from tyranny of the state.
> Considering that IP addresses you get from most service providers are dynamic you need a lookup system for others to be able to access your speech.

Not on the hosting side.

> Many utilities are also private companies and they they are required to provide service anyway.

Yes, but they're not. DNS is a nice-to-have, not a must. Hosting is a must, if you want to make a case then you are going to have an uphill battle where a hosting provider would have to supply and and all paying customers.
From what I've heard from friends working in those 3 companies, Tesla is more like Apple, with Google being clearly different from both.
I did. It was cheaper to own a car (but not by much).

My specifics: I live in Cupertino and work at home. I have a wife and kids. About four times a month we have a situation where we need two cars, because one of us has to be somewhere other than where they kids need to be.

Unfortunately, most of the time that's San Francisco, which is about $80 round trip with Uber/Lyft. I could sometimes use public transit, but usually the times don't work out and it takes a really long time, and I'd still need a ride to and from the train on both ends.

I have a five year old car so the payments and maintenance still come out to a little be less than Uber/Lyft, and since I've already got another car, the cost of insurance doesn't add much.

It's pretty close in cost, and the convince pushes it over the breakeven point.
When I go to google.com with a browser other than Chrome, I see a pop-up "Switch to Chrome, a smarter browser. Google recommends using Chrome. Try it? [Yes]" Each company leverages what they have to try to push you further into their ecosystem (or as Bruce Schneier would say, further indentured to that feudal lord).
The parent is likely talking about the "Land" typo.
I believe it refers to Europe. It's cheaper if you live outside.
I don't think you're doing a meritocracy if you use 'culture fit'. I think it's at best a cop-out.

I do share concerns with you about the ideas you are disadvocating. Such as that a person's productivity not a neat weighted sum. Such as that we could systematically find all the numbers that need to be summed. Plus concerns I'm not sure if you're getting at, such as the idea that sort of results from pushing a meritocratic view, which is that a person's value in the world is their value to some small collection of enterprises, their one job or their two jobs.

If you are paying people for their work and also providing some encouraging words, what do you then use to determine the pay packet or the words to say?
Is the rate shown when placing an order guaranteed or an estimate?
Sounds specifically like a problem of terrorists organizations and their marketing departments.