skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>Pretty much every bit of meat that I eat was harvested and processed by myself or my neighbor

You do understand that you are the very definition of an outlier, right?

So it would OK if the term only confused you, since you are supposed to be confused, given that you do these things differently than 99.99% of the population.

But I think the term is confusing in general, not just to people who "kill and clean their own meat".
It's the countries that they are big in that probably make them think this way.

For example, Viber is very popular in the Middle East, Russia, Africa, India, parts of Asia, Ukraine, Balkans, some of the 'Stans.
PCA is a statistical model -- the simplest factor model there is. It deals with variances and covariances in datasets. It returns a transformed dataset that's linearly related to the original one but has the first variable with the highest variance and so on.

SVD is a matrix decomposition. It generalizes the idea of representing a linear transformation (with same dimensions in domain and codomain) in the basis of its eigenvalues, which gives a diagonal matrix representation and a formula like A = V'DV.

SVD is like this, but for rectangular matrices. So you have two matrices to diagonalize: A = U'DV.

That SVD even performs PCA as noted in the algorithms is a theorem, albeit simple one usually given as an exercise. But hey, even OLS regression can be programmed with SVD if you want to.
Just say it's for Project Euler. That way they just accept that any optimizations you're asking for actually need to happen.
The demo could be bigger, shorter and show off the results longer. I actually dozed off watching it and missed the results.

Other than that, looks nice.

Consider some form of easy way to contribute by writing 'converters'.
It can be ironic, but it doesn't generally seem to be used in that way to me.
It is true that, for all the cool stuff Google does, it is still fundamentally an advertising company where the future in those revenue streams looks bleak.

That said, Microsoft didn't die off in the "post PC" era even after spectacular failures in things like trying to make inroads in mobile phones. So with Google yes there are dark clouds on the horizon, but they could pull off a change in revenue streams and still do quite well.

The clock is ticking though... they're spending tons on these other pet projects that have yet to pay off so the pressure is really on to prove that they can actually create a viable business with revenue outside advertising.
We have somewhat different expectations of Google than malware sites, because we expect it to act as a good net citizen, and a thoughtful custodian of its enormous power to shape the future of our culture.

The risk critics are concerned about here is a future where the internet no longer "belongs" to the people on it anymore, and despite the malicious nature of the abuses you named, they hardly represented that class of threat.
Right to privacy here mean, govt cannot force citizens to give up their biometric for simple things like creation of bank accounts.
Till now, PAN card was the only identification needed.
I still don't think facebook is safe long term. I've been on facebook off and on for 12 years, and honestly is was only really cool back in college. I suppose there is some value in the whole 'real identity' thing. But the problem I see with facebook is the whole 'friending' thing. Do you really want to have to maintain digital relationships with everyone you've ever known? A digital phone book would be so much nicer. Want to reach out to an old friend from college you haven't seen in years? Look them up in the digital phone book. Wouldn't that be nice? But with how facebook works now, you have to stay 'friends' with everyone you've ever known (because its awkward deleting and then re-friending people). But then you ended up with this news feed full of a bunch of crap from everyone you've ever known. It's just not good. People aren't going to want to keep using facebook for 20+ years. After 12 years I'm burned out as hell on facebook and only have like 7 friends. And I have a feeling, other people are going to get burned out at the 12 year mark as well.

Anyway... I think facebook is still the most vulnerable of all the big tech companies. And I think Mark Zuckerberg feels the same way deep down inside. Why else did he pay $1,000,000,000 for Instagram? And feels he has to copy SnapChat? Because he's scared his empire is going to be the next MySpace. And you know what, it probably will go the way of MySpace eventually.
I have 7 kids, my wife stays at home and homeschools them. We live frugally. Outside of enormous COL areas like San Fran, NYC, LA, etc. it can absolutely be done.

The first couple kids are the most expensive, by the way. And thrift stores are my best friends.
What Russians think is irrelevant - their country lies across both Europe and Asia, so if we want to get an overview of "European" workers, then yes, Russians do absolutely count.
AngularJS App Development Company, USA- Synsoft Global
I found Zeal to be of some use as you can download a ton of documentation for offline use.
Have you read the actual article that for Parkinson's Law?

In there you will find the oft-overlooked Law of Multiplication of Subordinates. The findings were based on the expansion of Admiralty in Great Britain after WWI.

TL;DR: administration kept expanding even though the number of ships was reduced to 1/3 the size.

This is much the same problem identified in the article, what you have said and what I have seen in corporate america as well. Too much administration, some of it required via legislation/regulatory matters.

http://www.economist.com/node/14116121
Malcolm Gladwell's podcast has excoriated these people quite strenuously, and in the process has explained very well how this comes about.

Those aren't telephone sanitizers. Their job is to keep thinking up spectacular things to propose, the better to lure insanely wealthy people into investing in Stanford. Stanford's run (or was) by a guy who as a matter of principle cannot think of ANY reason why any endowment or gift should ever go to any other school or thing that isn't Stanford, no matter how much money Stanford has or how little money anyone else has. He's committed to the proposition that the world's advanced through the consolidation of infinite resources (for Stanford).

As such, 'Office of Development' is a big deal for them, as is Land, Buildings and Real Estate: it's pretty much all about maximizing resources in order to be awarded more gifts to turn into more resources forever. They could not have ANY students or faculty and still function just as they are, if the hyper-wealthy people awarding them money were convinced their mission would be better without students. They could not have ANY students or faculty and still go on for years or decades just on the wealth they've currently got.

This university isn't 'broke'. They're part of the reason everybody else is broke. The idea is that they should have it all, ???, profit!

I'm not sure what metric 'profit' is expressed in. If it's 'money', this is working for Stanford.
> John McCarthy admitted this much when he conceded that most Americans are TV watchers anyway and won't need a home information terminal to do research, and Neil Postman wrote about the negative effects of television in his 1984 book, "Amusing Ourselves to Death".

Zooming out just a little, Guy Debord's "Society Of The Spectacle" talks about this same stuff on a higher level.
"Drone mesh network" is discussed in another thread today.

Btw does anyone know if Amazon sells customer data for advertising? (Besides their own purposes)
Comparison of Dyson V8 Absolute vs. V8 Animal
My feeling is that the thing that would really rock Google to its core would be a major scandal about ad spend.

Like one where they were unambiguously exposed - say - channelling all the good leads to people at the start of campaigns and then once the spend was established starting to feed them the shit leads, until they convinced them to spend more money. In short like a Casino that would let people win to give them a taste and then reef them.

But of course that's purely speculative and probably that type of thing couldn't be unambiguously proved even if it were true - which it isn't.
It not being an ideal free market doesn't change the fact that it's a market and it has market-ish dynamics.
This is not entirely true for proprietary software :)
There are many languages in India, not just Hindi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_India
Also companies like Ocado, which is exclusively online, and started operationally in 2002 I believe.
This is cool, thanks.
Why do you say this? Can you give an example of someone who has converted their salary to USD?

At the end I plan to polish the results and publish them
Sounds familiar. I went to a highly ranked private college where tuition went from 35k in 2007, to about 50k only 4 years later, and now it's around 60k I believe. The professors were mostly excellent and well known in their fields, but at the same time many departments were understaffed while the university spent 42 million dollars on an "Institute for Global Citizenship" that ended up being mostly unused, though it is pretty:

https://img.apmcdn.org/c1675e4ec7a7aec84a32edbfe93999b018c70...
Two of the largest customers of adwords are Expedia and Priceline. Why?

Because almost every travel customer starts by typing their destination into google, and whoever has the top ad gets the booking.

It's a fierce bidding war on keywords, and the only winner is Google.

This article grossly understates the number of companies and industries that begrudgingly play this game to acquire expensive traffic with hopes that it converts to cheap organic repeat traffic in the future.

Google is doing fine.
Of course they did a big part of the work, and for that they got the compensation they negotiated, be it salary, equity or other benefits. At any point, they could have said "Hey, I don't like that this single person disproportionally benefits from the work we all do", and leave the company to do something else. (This is generally a hard statement to make, but I think for a company where such a big part of the employees are software engineers, I think it is reasonable to assume that they have a few options to shape their live into a direction they want.)

Apparently, in the end, Roy decided to act against his publicized beliefs, which just serves as a reminder, that words don't mean s#!t when it comes to business.
Added! Specified in the question to insert in € or otherwise specify.
I think this is an issue of context.

"Clean" food means something very different than "clean" energy.

If I'm looking for clean food, my standards are very different than someone looking for clean energy. I know folks who wouldn't think lab grown meat was very clean simply because it was created in a lab.

All that to say: you're not wrong, but clean means something very different to the food-conscious person shopping at their local co-op.
> Then I guess "everyone else" should find a way to make a usable mobile content website without AMP, because apparently that's a nearly unsolvable problem.

It's a hard problem.

Having everyone use Google as a proxy and content server, trusting them to deliver ads and so on, is one way to improve quality of service, but it's a way that's hostile to publishers and infringes on the privacy of users, so the industry absolutely hungry for a solution here.

A major issue is that Google acts as a gatekeeper for competing products, so we're unlikely to see any effect unless high profile publishers take a stand, or we individuals lobby our government to intercede.

> It's hard to be anti-AMP when the user experience is that much better with AMP.

I know. Ben Franklin warned us in a way about convenience, so his words seem quite appropriate here; I value my quality of life and my privacy, and I see it as such a slippery slope, so I don't implement AMP on my properties.

My organic Google traffic has admittedly suffered since the AMP logo program started, but focusing on making my sponsored search buy stickier has proven a lot more valuable to me fiscally, while allowing me to preserve my morality.
Most of the time the only common language between all the judges of the Indian supreme court is English. Writing the opinion in any other language would mean it reaches even fewer people than English would (except may be Hindi, but I don't know how many of the judges are fluent in Hindi to write opinions in that language).
How about this: https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2017#salary ?
Guys your comments & discussions will not change court decisions. So accept it.
> This article grossly understates the number of companies and industries that begrudgingly play this game to acquire expensive traffic with hopes that it converts to cheap organic repeat traffic in the future.

Exactly right. Seen it over and over again.
There's nothing wrong with OSM but you can't pretend it is on the same level as Google Maps. Where is streetview? Business opening times? Reviews? Phone numbers? Directions? Turn-by-turn navigation? Live traffic? Historical traffic?

Google Maps now has a live busynessometer for some businesses. And 3D models of entire cities, even non-London ones.

As a traditional paper map OSM is fine, but Google Maps is now far more than that.
Ex-Google Engineer Hires Lawyer Shortlisted as Trump Nominee
Sorry! you are right, fixed it now. BTW, not american :D, italian.
This assumes there is any benefit at all to them 'saving' in a situation where they're drowned in money specifically because they already have all the money and seek more from people who assume money is best spent by giving it to entities who already have the most money.

Sort of 'progress through increasing the highest possible score'. In this light, spending excessively on administrators and absurd things is a form of virtue signalling meant to elicit further gifts through demonstrating they are already wealthy beyond all imagining.

That's not a joke: that's actually how it works, and there are many parallels, for instance in the stock market.
Absolutely -- some dairy producing states like Wisconsin have forced makers of soy and almond milk to stop calling them "milk" so I'm almost positive that meat producing states would do the same.
special nature of regular rights

They aren't special, though. The distinction between "positive" and "negative" rights completely melts away when you ask yourself who has substantive access and who merely has formal access to their rights.

For example, free speech. You can't exercise your right to free speech when you're dead. Everybody may have formal access (access on paper) to free speech but some people have far greater substantive access due to their socioeconomic status. A poor person will suppress their right to free speech in exchange for a job so they can buy food. Their employer, on the other hand, can say whatever they want without the risk of being fired. Same formal access, different substantive access.

This exercise works for any right. Perhaps the most obvious one is the right to a fair trial. It would be laughable if it weren't so horrific. Every day, countless people have their lives ruined by the criminal "justice" system because they cannot afford the best lawyer. Wealthy people simply do not have this problem. A person with a lot of wealth has far greater substantive access to a fair trial than the average person.
Just seemed ironic in context. HN doesn't, for example.
As I've explained elsewhere, that "irreversible read-only mode" is well documented and completely avoidable, and even if you do trigger it a one-line kernel patch will bypass the overzealous safety check and allow you to complete the recovery process. If you're actually using something in production, you should probably RTFM so you can avoid shooting yourself in the foot.
Funny you would say that, I am in West Africa right now.

I have explored 15 countries in about as many months, never seen a single Child soldier.

Please, please don't just parrot things out when you clearly don't know what you are talking about.
Nope, Denmark
"the value is subjective"

that's what my issue with stock investment is. They aren't financial tools, in the way I'd like to think of a financial tool like a loan or interest-bearing account.

They're gambling on what other people en masse will value a stock - some of whom are also trying to predict my actions.

If I predict price goes down, I should short.
If I predict prices goes up, I should buy.

Even the parent comment to my question says "you get money in case of a merger or acquisition" which to me is a bigger analogue of the Bigger Fool theory.

I only make money if another company buys the company I have stock in which they would buy only if they expect to make money. In their case, possibly whoever buys the company can take dividends (as the new CEO) but it still looks like a bizarre thing to do (buy stock).
Chris Urmson's SXSW video: https://youtu.be/Uj-rK8V-rik
I think “tech” is short for “information technology”, a term introduced almost six decades ago: https://hbr.org/1958/11/management-in-the-1980s
Added Serbia, Norway and Switzerland.
The zinger with the "post PC era" bullshit was that it was a ridiculous marketing/buzz campaign that attempted to completely eschew the reality that most people need something more than a compact touch screen device to effectively complete their work. You cannot genuinely ask an electrical engineer, Excel jockey, photographer, or any other professional or power user to use something other than a laptop or desktop to make their living.

I think you can can see the difference between Microsoft's model (which never did go out of style and won't any time soon) and Google's model (which was doomed from the start).
Ask HN: How do you broach your disability when talking to employers?
If you can only work remote or need considerable accommodations, when do you tell them? Many suggest hiding until you have an offer if you can, but I could see that backfiring quickly.
> if only they'd have bolted in some support for "non-weird-looking classic OOP" like in "wanna type `window.

Ah, so you want an inferior way of doing OOP? Because the reason Julia is the way it is, it is because it supports OOP based on multiple dispatch (and over more than one object per method). I think this is a major quantum leap over the OOP you are requesting.

Sincerely, if that's what you want, there is always Java to make you happy.
Well, English is the inherited language for the majority of Indians. If we were to speak/read/write in vernacular, then we will need the article many languages (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_with_official_status...). And the language I speak at home is not in that list too.
Clinkle: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanmac/2016/01/22/clinkle-up-i...
But the epistomology of a word does not determine its meaning. Otherwise the art versus craft debate would be difficult to apply with its original meanings.
A merger or acquisition would only happen if the buyer expected to make money from the transaction. This looks like an Even Bigger Fool Theory. It is a little different because the CEO could take dividends whereas I, as a stockowner, cannot.

Potentially, a company's performance being good would motivate someone else to buy the company. But what I'm getting out of this is that you don't buy (dividendless) stocks because a company's doing well but ONLY if A) you think they will be sold or Bigger Fool Theory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_fool_theory
Clever article, blending history and future conjecture. Sure, Google has potential long term problems with its ad revenue stream but the have sufficient cash reserves to succeed in different lines of business. And they probably will. I use fastmail and mostly duck duck go, so in a sense Google doesn't make money from me in the traditional advertising sense, but I like GCP, pay for YouTube red and music, and buy movies and tv shows on Play TV.
Creating a Ride-Booking App with React Native and Pusher
Android 8.0 Oreo: ecco tutte le novità
Why would that happen? $CORP isn't obligated to do so.
A guide to Minimalist Web Design
As a publisher who has some properties with ads and some properties without, I get the stickiness complaints. I don't implement AMP simply because it's time spent that offers me nothing -- my sticky and converting traffic doesn't come from organic google search anyway.

> There are downsides, and I do wish the alternative was simply

A simple alternative would be public content caches; a meta tag that says "prefetch me" is a way for the publisher to tell sites it's okay to prefetch it and store the content in the content caches. I think trusting a google-run content-cache with no cookies would be easy for browser manufacturers to implement. It also wouldn't affect the user interface adversely.

A separate, unrelated program could be used for the "fast" logo that would require all/most content on public caches and pageload fired in under 0.5sec (or some other metric).
I wouldn't be where I am today, living the dream life on a sunny island, if I didn't have a stroke at 33 at lost my dad at 36. Lucky me!

That's exactly the same bias as in this article. "Luck" is only a post-hoc interpretation of stochastic events. Explaining these events by "luck" is like explaining them by "good angels" or "aliens influence": pointless.

That not science, and making any conclusion based on this "research" is a bad idea.

Are you really surprised if people tend to downplay luck, angels or aliens?

Luck is like religions, trying to find meaning in something supernatural...
Sorry but I'm not seeing what I'm missing.
Using movies as basis for decision is even worse.
Wasn't agriculture the first technology?
Brazil opens vast Amazon reserve to mining
The interweb works better when you use things like <P> not <IMG>
I suppose you don't use Chrome, or Android either, nor the iphone search button ? Because that would make it a seriously small minority.
Why streaming data is the future of big data and apache kafka is leading
Yeah, but you are on HN. A very poor representative sample.
I think in reality that doesn't work either. When they want to promote you they can gloss over certain criteria.

When they don't to give you pay rise, they can point to oddly specific criteria
The article indicated otherwise:

'At the same time, Disney might not even include all of its own content in the service. Iger said of Marvel and Star Wars, “We’ve also thought about including Marvel and Star Wars as part of the Disney-branded service, but there where we want to be mindful of the Star Wars fan and the Marvel fan and to what extent those fans are either overlapped with Disney fans or they’re completely basically separate or incremental to Disney fans.”'

If the only way I could stream new Marvel movies would be to go to Disney directly, I might pay per movie, or if it were cheap enough, I'd pay $7 for a single month of service to get that new movie or watch the original Tron re-engineered to look incredible in 8K one day when I'm 80 years old and have an old 8K monitor. But, I feel safe in my decision not to pay for a streaming service of only Disney content; I'm not a Zac Efron fan, though I did think Radio Rebel was Debbie Ryan's best movie.
AMP supports dozens of ad networks, including AdSense. It gives no particular benefit to Google's ads, and it doesn't require any ads.
We can do it != we have it.
You're right. It is partly greater computing resources, partly recent algorithmic advances, and partly the availability of large amounts of data which the more complex networks require.
I edited, any other suggestion?

I will publish polished results when will end data gathering
You are on HN. You are not a basic consumer. Selective bias at his best.
Thank you so much for this! Often when I'm online, it's only to access documentation. This might be the way out...

I wonder if someone has written a readthedocs importer for it.