skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I can't explain where the line is for the difference between saying that word at that time (although I suspect some lawyers might).

I can see there would be a big difference though in yelping a word in that situation and being directly responsible for the harm it caused (mischief maybe?) and expressing a person's ideas and beliefs.

The analogy you put doesn't work out, unfortunately, because ANY idea can result in human oppression and death. For example, the speech that civil rights leaders spoke and wrote that in a roundabout way caused injuries and deaths at protests motivated by them, the speech that fired up the American Revolution and other revolutions.
https://reagent-project.github.io/
To answer your last question: Because if we didn't, our competitors would put us out of business. Try running a competitive business on kindness and feelings and see how long you last.
A straightforward one, which I think has been well-accepted in Western legal thinking for centuries, is slander/libel. If I go around saying "Look, 'dfps is a Nazi," you can get the courts, and if necessary the government's monopoly on violence, to stop me.

Another one that's extremely common is use of a trademark. I do not have a free speech right to say "I provide Microsoft-certified computer repair services." We believe there's more harm to society from me going around causing people to believe that than from me being unable to say that.

Another one is unauthorized practice of law. I do not have a free speech right to say "I know how the GPL works and I can represent you in court." We believe it's more important to a free society that when someone says that, they're actually a trained and licensed lawyer who can competently represent you, and that the harm to you from me going in front of a judge and spouting nonsense on your behalf outweighs the harm from me being unable to speak freely about the GPL.

Do you think that these restrictions on free speech are more harmful than the cases they seek to prevent?
International Programmer Pay Comparison
bitcoin also has hardcoded checkpoints as well. so what's your point petertodd?

if you feel there is a security concern or attack, you should properly elaborate your concern

Peercoin has been running 5 years. What severe problems are you referring to?
Yes, Namecheap choosing not to collaborate in spreading this speech is absolutely covered under the “concept of the first amendment”.
Anarchists, socialists, and antifascists have been traditionally grouped under the umbrella of "the Left". It's odd seeing people try to push parts of the original Left out into the "Alt-Left", almost like gentrifying a political space.

(Antifascism itself dates back to early 20th century opposition action against fascist tides in Italy, Germany, and Spain; the comparison to the modern phenomenon of the Alt-Right feels historically inappropriate.)
Yeah, I thought the eclipse was happening over the continental US. What's up with Sri Lanka?
Does graphviz support interacting with the graphs?
>A society that obligates a private business to provide business to everyone, whether by cultural norm or by Congressional law, is not a free society.

You're probably the 5th person who has said this. Why do you think that's the only other option? Why give such an important issue so little consideration to alternatives?
Someone should stop the monopoly of google in computer science and AI. Otherwise its going to be dangerous.
Many things (like compilation) are not that special, but having it in a dynamic (-> at runtime changeable) language with a lot of flexibility is slightly different.
I don't think Iris is goto framework for go developers. I would like to see pure go based benchmark.
WATCH Live: Crotone – Milan
Applying it to video is one of the most obvious applications and it pretty much just slots in as a module, replacing huffman coding or arithmetic coding.
If you don't consider evidence you are aware of in an argument, it means you don't think that evidence is necessary to consider. He wants his argument to be considered rigorously in which case it is appropriate to make inferences about what he didn't consider as well as what he did.

It's a quiet truth that most disagreements between people have a crucial basis in the implicit nature of how we weigh and consider information.

A great deal of defense of Damore's arguments are to only consider what is explicitly said and not how it fits into the broader discussion, which is implicit by definition.

So Damore can claim he isn't saying that he thinks some female engineers currently at Google are there because the bar has been lowered (explicit) and this is accepted uncritically by some defenders, but it's not hard to draw the inference from his arguments and his policy suggestions that he thinks Google's current practices have a negative impact on the quality of engineers it recruits (implicit).

Likewise we are told to evaluate the information he gave (explicit) but not consider why he omitted discussing the mountains of evidence that suggest alternative positions and how his arguments should be evaluated in light of it (implicit).

My position is that there is the evidence of negative social feedback is significant enough that companies should experiment with changing their demographic compositions and empirically measuring performance.

Because software engineering requires a great diversity of skills, including people skills, empathy and whole-systems thinking, I think it's very plausible that making the gender balance less skewed will lead to more productive teams.
IMO you shouldn't really need to wake user mode that often. Just let user code buffer the output samples well ahead of the hardware needing them and have the kernel do the copies when needed.
Reminds me of Ali G's ice cream glove: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48TR0vUPQCs
> If your preferences lead to economic inequality

Except they can't, by definition (hence the word, "preference", as in prefer A to B). If you accept a less paid position A rather than better paid position B, because you prefer doing job A rather than job B, then it's a CHOICE. Why you should be forced to take position B for some higher societal goal of "equality"? That's completely insane, and I say that as a leftist who understands what is economic inequality (which is always, by definition, driven by either lack of choice or non-rational choices).
Along with the kiddie play-school design. Some creepy psych things going on there.
Is nodejs the VC funded package manager?
Vice... Read their description, they toss in "two police officers dead" as as if somehow that was related to the events.
I much preferred the second half of this to the first half.

However, both seemed to end up with the same fundamental flaw: he's either underestimating or understating how absurdly difficult most of what he's suggesting is. It's all well and good saying that we can have a standardized system for email, with everything being passed over messages, but what about everything else? It's extremely difficult to standardize an opinionated system that works for everything, which is exactly why so many operating system constructs are more general than specific. For this to all hang together you would have to standardize everything, which will undoubtedly turn into an insane bureaucratic mess. Not to mention that a lot of software makers actively fight against having their internal formats open.
Their valuation never made any sense. They can never justify it.

They can never win the self driving technology war. They were late to the party, they missed out on key patents. They chose a team that may have stolen technology from Waymo, exposing them to massive potential liability. Now they have to start over.

Automous car technology will be freely available to everyone when it's commercially viable. Uber can't transition to that model unless it becomes far more economically successful. No one is going to give them $50B more to build out autonomous car infrastructure (cars, service, storage, parking) world-wide when they are still hemorrhaging money in their first business model.

Uber doesn't need to invent squat. It has to maintain it's massive lead in drivers and installed apps. When it's customers want an autonomous car, they'll use the same app they always did.
I will happily give money to software I like. SimpleNote is currently a compromise which I'm not completely happy with so I don't feel the need to donate. If it answered all my needs, or at least didn't ignore it's users, I'd buy it.
I stand by their right to dismiss employees that make the company look bad. I also stand by their right to remove content that is might mislead people into doing something that would harm themselves (https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiratard/comments/5vwedb/google...).
I've been a C++ developer for a couple of decades. It's funny and nicer than a lot of things we say about the language ourselves. And waaaaay nicer than what the C guys say. :-)
You can use depends_on to wait for a resource in terraform. In the last year there has been at least one occasion in which a new AWS resource was supported in Terraform before it was supported in CloudFormation.
This seems incredibly unlikely.

I just had a paper accepted (yay!). Although we cited sixty-odd papers, I don't think our conclusions critically depends on any one of them.

A lot of the citations place the current work in context. If these papers turned out to be false, it might make the paper less "interesting"--the mechanism underlying a useless therapy is pretty boring, after all--but the factual content would be unchanged. Other citations compare our results with others' work. These discussions are silly if the other work turns out to be flawed, but again, the facts in our paper would not change.

We had a lot of techniques-related citations. Many of these, however, are mostly about giving credit or pointing to extra information: we used a behavioral paradigm adapted from this paper, evaluation was done using the criteria established by that paper, etc.

A few citations are used to "prove" something is (ir)relevant for the current experiments. An error in one of these papers could be damaging. However, we usually try to have multiple sources for these claims, so any one error would not be calamitous. People usually try to show that their own data matches the cited work, so we have several analyses like that.

Finally, it's worth noting that an individual paper (including mine) does not provide iron-clad or no evidence for something. Instead, it should nudge your beliefs slightly one way or another.
> You can do that more efficiently with any ML language.

So first you say Lisp is useless in compsci because of the existence of "rust, c and idris", and now its pointless to use it because of ML?

> Dude, that notation is not original to lisp...

Firstly: Have you actually looked at an MD file? [0] RTL is a Lisp dialect.

Secondly: The first paper on S-Expressions appeared in November, 1997. McCarthy's first paper on what would become Lisp in 1982. I'm aware of no language, and can find reference to no language, that used that notation before Lisp did, so yes it is original to Lisp.

[0] https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=blob_plain;f=gcc/config...
https://blog.namecheap.com/we-say-no-to-sopa/

"At Namecheap, we believe having a free and open Internet is the only option that will continue the legacy of innovation and openess that stands for everything we all value in our modern society." --Namecheap CEO Richard Kendall, 2011

I'm curious what changed.
What better slogan if they really planned on being evil.

It is not unlike the Cloudflare banning some crazy right wing website recently and publicly claiming it dangerous for a company to become the online arbiter for speech, while the CEO behind the scenes is sending memos how it was his decision and just something he wanted to do etc.

I think it a pretty common pattern for the perpetrators to claim officially to very much against the things they might be accused of. Some of that might even work at the unconscious level. And I think corporations also have a kind of unconscious mind (all the unwritten rules, culture and hidden incentives).
Do you mean immediate mode rendering by any chance? This is a bit different (but not that much) from what e.g. imgui does.
Yes but the plugin API is undocumented.
Why There Are No Nazi Statues in Germany
> ...there is only one way to write something

There are several such examples in functional programming languages. Consider the Haskell function `map`, that takes a function and a list, and applies the function to each element of the list:

map :: (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b]

Keep in mind that this function is pure, so you cannot get any values into the function from outside via side effects. So if you have a call like `map f []` (i.e. the list of input values of type `a` is empty), there are no values of type `a` anywhere that you can use, hence you cannot call the function `f`, and hence you cannot have any values of type `b` either. Therefore, literally the only possible result is

map f [] = []

By a similar argument, you can see that the alternative case for non-empty lists can only be

map f (x:xs) = (f x) : (map f xs)

Source: https://wiki.haskell.org/Typeclassopedia#Laws (contains a citation to the relevant paper by Philip Wadler)
The patent application clearly contains concepts from their discussion with Duda, which they didn't disclose while applying, but was pointed by ISA reviewer: https://register.epo.org/application?documentId=EZ46ZRSY2014...

ps. hot today reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/6uuqcd/google_...
Hey this is a cool vignette - thanks for sharing.
PayPal. It's global and optimized for marketplaces (eBay). Don't become the merchant of record, which creates liability. Let your buyer and seller transact with each other directly.
Wow. Just wow.

So basically, you are saying that you can judge him and what he writes not by what he writes, but whatever you want to arbitrarily insert into his writing.

Even the inquisition had higher standards than that.
True. Chat has been around for a decade or more. Intercom didnt innovate on that at all. they just made customer management and communication easier.
This does make me wonder if it makes it impossible for those companies to be considered "common carriers" or able to enjoy "safe harbor" laws. By acting to censor legal (however distasteful) content, they could be considered to be policing what their customers do (asserting a custodial role) or refusing based on moral grounds (c.f., Indianapolis "111 Cakery") and subject to a discrimination suit.
“alt-right” is a label created by people to refer to themselves, and distinguishes their group from the establishment right.

“alt-left” is a label created by defenders of the alt-right to refer generically to it's opponents. They aren't really parallel terms.
I've received this criticism of my approach before.

Note I'm talking about not just C code-gen, but human-readable C code-gen. If it's not human-readable, then I agree with you, we might as well generate machine code and become full-time scheme programmers.

But if it's human readable C, as if the code was created by a C programmer with clean coding practices, then it makes a big difference.

You might ask, "but why human readable?"

I think the answer is that as a result, you can work on that C project, try out ideas, pick the one that works best, then go back to scheme to see how you can generate what you just tried out. It's a long-winded way of doing things, but you're doing research, you're not simply taking a hand-written change-set in C and creating the simplest scheme code to generate it (e.g., dumping a sequence of string literals to stdout). You are exploring the higher abstractions of the scheme code, and finding out how the new code that generates new change-set fits in with the rest of the scheme code.

Take 'logging' for example. Logging is orthogonal to a functioning C code. A well written fully functioning 10k lines of C program could easily become 30k-50k lines simply by adding comprehensive logging and not adding a single other feature.

If scheme code-generator has a logging module, it would not generate logging code directly, but it would take the non-logging functionality of the program as input, analyze it, and output logging code as a result. Further more, you could disable logging code-gen, and generate the original 10k lines of code, and then study the C code, and it would help a lot with readability (you're not coming across 10 lines of logging code every 2 or 3 lines of actual code).

Similarly, debuggability. A scheme code could help insert debugging code at relevant points. Heck, we're using scheme as a tool, a machine to help our coding, why not use scheme as an automation agent, i.e., use it to iterate through a debugging process by giving some directions in the beginning and letting it triangulate the exact line in C code which, e.g., causes a segmentation fault.

C code is full of error checks. Every function call is followed by "if (error1) { do_this(); } else if (error2) { do_that(); }". Wish to read the code without error checks? Just re-generate the code with error-checking disabled! Done.

Even more, you use scheme to generate various kinds of data that can be used for analysis. E.g., you wish to visualize the call-graph of the C code? you could generate the graph data file then run it through graphviz. (I know gcc does that already but then what is gcc? an automation tool for your C program! All I'm saying is that all these things can be done in a much better way in scheme)

(again, think of Scheme as a tool and an automation agent, and C code being the actual program!).
To be fair, also here in Finland some people swear by the “Minnesota Model” (as it is called here) form of treatment – which I've come to understand is very similar to the AA program in the US – almost religiously so, or maybe indeed, so.

One way or the other, perhaps the saddest form is the most used – a very short clinic stay coupled with benzodiazepines to help safely stop a prolonged bender. Nothing wrong with that per se, but it's not really enough... but it's a free world.
interesting post; so how did you end up dealing with your issues post AA?
I sort of had the same problem happen to me: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/19596
I think it was back in the 80's when I was in a networking standards group (was it ANSI?? It's been a long time) and we were trying to define programming layers on top of sockets for UNIX. The effort completely failed - but the write-up about what we were trying to accomplish seemed to live on - getting revised and revised until it became the OSI model - with all its layers that we sort-of tried to implement. Of course, the new drivers and software layers didn't actually work, and the performance was abysmal, so the effort was abandoned. But the press and everyone else really liked the understandable text write-up about networking, which almost nobody understood at the time, so the write-up seemed to get a life of its own.

Since then I've been scorned at job interviews and among peers for not having the model memorized, or not being able to explain the meaning of various layers. Just another example of our crazy methods of screening job candidates. Answering stupid questions from stupid people means more than actual experience.
Sounds like he should be using iOS honestly.
It does look nice, but Apple world only... I'm currently with mac and iPhone, but as a principle I insist that my note taking app will be as cross platform as possible. This is not for practical reason, but for trust reasons. I don't think that every app should be completely cross platform, but notes, at least for me, are essential for the long time, and I don't know on which ecosystem I'll be a few years from now. So picking a platform that at least tries to be cross platform today is the best thing I can do to ensure it'll work for the long run.
The big difference is intent. Nazis / hate-speech intends to harm people. They are advocating for such harm.

Engineering and communism typically don't, though where they do it should be shut down.
The [Aurelia](https://aurelia.io) framework is also aligned with Web Components and other web standards.

Aurelia extends beyond Web Components, and comes with a lot of features built-in, such as routing, validation, and internationalization. This saves time from having to assemble/build your own framework.
It also trades strong global deadlines of the "your project must be done by X" type for weak local deadlines of the "this feature should be done by X" type. That is custom-made for projects that face scope creep.

But, yes, it's impossible for developers to create an overall plan, or for the developers to decide to pay back technical debit. But can still be done by the client, but those normally don't.
I stumbled upon this edit war concerning Huffman Coding article on Wikipedia [1], where the ANS algorithm author (Jarek Duda) justifies his edits back in 2007 as a way to "shorten the delay for its [ANS] current wide use in modern compressors, leading to unimaginable world-wide energy and time savings thanks to up to 30x speedup."

Sounds dramatic, but today it seems like he had a point. The other guy (guarding Wikipedia against self promotion) has a point too, though.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AHuffman_coding
Yes where were they? :-) I honestly can't remember much computer marketing at all - any computer I could get a hold of was exciting. The Apple II in our class was mostly ignored except for about 2-3 boys, and even by the girls who were better students than the other kids.
Yeah, that's always tricky, but you are still missing the point. It's not using it for video they have to prove is non obvious but how they are using it for video. Given the elite mathematical skills you'll need to understand all of this I suspect they'll be able to protect it.

Good reference on this patent:

https://encode.ru/threads/2648-Published-rANS-patent-by-Stor...
Because the viewpoint I'm replying to seems to be the sort of First Amendment absolutism that worries that anyone being in any way inconvenienced from speaking in the time, place, forum, and manner of their choice is an immediate threat to a free society. If we're going to be absolutist about the First Amendment like that, it's illogical to be absolutist about free speech and not free assembly or association.

I am personally, as you might guess, not a First Amendment absolutist, and I don't actually think that reasonable inconveniences on free speech cause us to lose the ideal of free speech, nor that reasonable inconveniences on free assembly cause us to lose the ideal of free assembly. I agree that there's room between the two extremes for free assembly - but I believe that because I also believe there's room between the two extremes for free speech.
> Is Antifa mainstream Left then?

It substantially overlaps with the mainstream of the left; note that in the US, the dominant (though decreasingly so) faction of the Democratic Party is center-right, not left at all.
Nelson Mandela spent 27 years in jail before becoming president and father of a nation.

While "only" 4 years, Muhammad Ali sacrificed what would have been the prime of his boxing career as a conscientious objector. He was famous as a great athlete before, but transcended it after.

Alexander Calder was an engineer for about ten years before becoming one of the great artists of the 20th century.

Many other examples.
I am mystified probably coming from South Asia, what makes Thailand so attractive? when you can do similar cost arbitrage with many places in Carib and Latin America, while being in the same time zones and probably better way to get in touch with US based clients.