skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> There's no way that the people heads-down in their cell phones are going to do this less once they realize they don't really need to pay attention.

The counter-argument is that they do this without Autopilot anyway. Given that they're already not paying attention, adding in Autopilot seems like a net gain.
Facebook's suing of your company is different from Facebook's infringing of your patents or acquiring a company that is infringing your patents.

It isn't just React -- most of their repos contain the PATENTS file.
As far as we know, humans are better drivers than every other species in the universe.
By then you'll be dead if you actually needed those replacement parts.
> i wonder why everyone wanders into parenthood without any forethought

Because most people are accidents.
Just curious - have you driven one in situations that became emergencies in which autopilot disengaged? What was that experience like and how does it compare to emergencies you have experienced without autopilot available?
Only if you want to determine whether two integers are the same object and not just two objects that look similar. `is` is for identity, whereas `==` is for equivalence.

Idiomatically, you generally only see `is` used for comparison to `None`. Sometimes developers want to check identity, and you'd use `is` there too (but I don't have a handy example offhand).
I think people like the sound of the ideas he's espousing in "Simple made easy", but toward he has some pretty specific examples of complexity that are often ignored. Like, I've worked with people who would fervently recommend the talk, but still love for-loops.
Block quoting can screw up desktop rendering on HN if the quoted line is too long. Say you put a 1000 character line in a literal quote:

1.......1000

The whole page would render at the length of that line. So this text that I'm writing now, it'd normally wrap once or twice depending on your window's width. Instead, it'll only wrap after approximately 1000 characters. This is why when I block quote, I put in a line break every 60-70 characters (similar to what you did a few posts up).

I know this behavior happens with IE, I believe I've seen it in other desktop browsers but can't verify at the moment.
The thing is that technology can have an incredibly positive benefit on a kid's life if done right. People espousing schools banning screens and limited screen time strike me as people attached to the status quo. We need to adapt and learn how to raise children around technology.
Kids (0-8) do better when there are (predictable) boundaries. They feel more content and secure.

From 9 to 12, just have fun together.

From 13 to 25, just keep them alive.

YMMV
Valid points
Uber's First Pitch Deck from 2008
Sorry, I did not clarify, this has been my experience in bike shops in the US in the past few months (I had not previously looked at bicycles in some time).
>thin enough it won't help you slow down - much.

No. It's thin enough you can't land with parachutes alone. It's still enough that Mars Global Surveyor used it to make up a 1,250 m/s delta-v deficit.

Is landing on Mars more complex than a thick atmospheric landing on parachutes or an exoatmospheric landing on propulsion only? Yes. But the atmosphere still saves you a lot of delta-v.

[0] https://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mgs/sci/aerobrake/SFMech.html
> making the majority of travel safe in exchange for making edge cases more deadly to untrained drivers has a simple solution: a higher bar for licensing human drivers.

You are still misunderstanding the concern. The problem is not poorly trained drivers. The problem is that humans become less attentive after an extended period of problem-free automated operation.

I hear you trying to make a Trolley Problem argument, but that is not the issue here. L2 is dependent on humans serving as a reliable backup.
While I have absolutely no problem believing that a carefully, tuned special purpose system like Stan readily beats the equivalent julia libraries, I'd caution against making inferences about the speed of any code written in a particular language as a result. Once a certain level of performance is reached, for most applications, the primary performance factor is algorithmic (and I include things like memory layout/cache friendliness in these). As the simplest example, consider matrix multiply. The venerable triple-loop will perform about the same whether it is written in Julia, C, Assembly, Rust, Nim or Fortran (ignoring for the moment compilers with specific matmul pattern recognition). However, depending on your CPU, you're leaving anywhere between 10-100x performance on the table by not using BLAS. Now, BLAS happens to be written in assembly and Fortran, but that's not the point. If you used the same algorithms in Julia code, it would achieve the same performance.

As for the benchmarks you posted, the worst I see Julia performing in that list is on the JSON benchmark.
However, again, that's benchmarking a library. Doing high performance text parsing well is a non-trivial problem and JSON.jl isn't a super high performance library. The fact that nobody has sat down and written one yet is more of a reflection of the user community (since JSON is mostly associated with the web stack, JSON-parsing tends to be more incidental for julia users, than languages/libraries that are more focused in that area) than any performance limitation of the language - in fact I think I recently did see somebody working on a higher-performance version, but I don't have the link handy.

To summarize, it is true that some languages (or rather their implementations) are slow, causing an automatic slowdown to projects written therein, but that is generally not the case for julia (or C or Nim or Rust, etc). Once you get to that point, other things matter more, and it is important to distinguish that. In the case of Turing.jl, the linked wiki mentions that one of the primary factors impacting performance is their use of forward AD, when reverse AD would be algorithmically better. It seems understandable, that a newer project would be algorithmically less sophisticated than a more established one. However, that'll get fixed over time and the other benefits will become more and more prominent as a result.
They also tend to qualify it as "refinement" instead of "invention" because their definition of "innovation" can't include Apple for some dogmatic reason.
Just take any job that requires a significant highway commute, you'll see more than that.

Whenever you get full speed traffic occasionally interrupted by traffic jams (from whatever cause, other accident, tolls, weather, low angle sunlight, construction, etc.), you'll get a higher incidence of rear-enders. Especially when the tail of the slow/stopped traffic is at a point just past a hill or curve.

I got rear-ended myself some years ago in just such a situation, clear sky & dry road. The traffic ahead had slowed dramatically driving into a section where the bright, low winter sun was in everyone's eyes, we couldn't see that before the gentle bend & rise in the road, I saw the slowing traffic & had to brake hard, the person behind me braked late and hit me even though I'd tried to stretch my braking as much as possible to give her more room. There was another similar accident minutes later just behind us.

This kind of rapid-slowing situation in tight-fast traffic will likely even get out of hand even for automated cars, unless there is car-to-car communication. This is because of the slight delay for each successive slowing car in the accordion-effect accumulates to the point where eventually the required reaction time decreases and required deceleration rate increases past the performance envelope. At that point, a crash is inevitable.

With car-to-car communication and automation, the last car in the pack can start braking almost simultaneously with the first one and avoid this.

So, no, it's not hyperbole, it's ordinary.
Do they not get car sick from reading books while driving? I remember as a kid on long car trips I would try and read but I'd always feel sick from it, however I was fine watching movies on a portable DVD player.
Am I the only one who thinks this is a cynical ploy to tap into the anxieties people have about not being successful?
50 in 50
I'm having trouble thinking of catastrophes that could take out both. Well, I can think of a few (bio-weapon, nearby supernova) but they would take out a Mars colony just as easily.
The problem that I haven't seen a good answer to, is what happens when (not if) the customer loses their 2nd factor device? If someone loses their phone, they can still keep their same number and receive an SMS verification on their new phone. With OATH/FIDO, that won't happen.
Pipe down, Skynet.
I sometimes use this linter: https://github.com/lukasmartinelli/hadolint
> You'd use an interface for polymorphism, much better.

Interface inheritance is simply the special case of inhering a purely abstract class. I've never seen a good argument why restricting abstract classes to purely abstract methods is worthwhile and several that speak against it [1, 2]. Languages that separate implementation and interface inheritance (such as Sather) have been tried, but never caught on, because it just leads to a lot of code duplication in order to write the interface twice. It can be useful to have inferred interfaces (as in Dart or OCaml), but there's nothing inherently better about using interfaces over more general abstract classes.

A common use case is to represent types of the form `T * A | T * B`, which (without implementation inheritance) just leads to code duplication for `T` or extra destructuring efforts (if you turn it into a representation of form `T * (A | B)`).

[1] Example 1: it gets in the way of doing Design by Contract as part of the interface of a class, even if you want interface-only inheritance.

[2] Example 2: Abstract classes with significant implementation parts show up all the time in design patterns. (Note that this is not about whether design patterns are good or bad, just that they reflect observed common practice).
So I guess you posted this from work then?
You're right. If you have other frequent means of socializing and dinner is just a time for food in mouths, then devices at the table aren't the end of the world.

But there is a reason many people like to use dinner as a mandatory point of family social contact: it keeps you on a daily schedule. You can multitask: listening to stories while you chew. And it provides some resilience to changes.

Like marriage, there is some value to committing to something like this "in sickness and in health". It's nice that you all want to play Catan now, but what happens when your teenager decides they don't like games anymore? Or what happens if your spouse isn't loving your approach to competition these days? Or if someone just doesn't feel like socializing? Everyone needs to eat, so in that way it's resilient to these shifting winds. If nothing else, you can sit and chew and listen to your family's voices.

So I'm not disagreeing with you: there are other ways to achieve the same ends that might be more efficient or more comfortable for your family. But there are also good reasons to sacrifice a little of that in order to fix a ritual that can pay off in unpredictable ways.
Okay, here's a better example. [0]

That's a linked svg, styled with CSS, though the CSS gets linked into the SVG header, rather than inherited from the page it is on.

<?xml-stylesheet href="sp-styles.css" type="text/css"?>

However, still possible to use CSS, rather than JS, without inlining.

[0] http://blogs.sitepointstatic.com/examples/tech/svg-basics/sv...
So, why wouldn't a parabolic mirror in orbit that bounces the light down to solar arrays on the moonbase work?
Meteor impacts and supervolcanoes seem to be the near-term worst case scenarios, neither which change the state of living on the moon. I don't know that the metaphor of them being under the same roof works.
What does any of this matter against National Security Letters? There's no place safe in the US.
- Quickest way to make more money is to reduce your expenses. See where you are wasting money and optimize for that. Work remotely for the same amount of compensation and move to a place that has very low cost of living/rent etc (even within US).

- Decide how much more you want to make? Is it purely a greed or do you really need that much money. You alway have to pay some cost to increase your income beyond certain point, it could be your time, safety, health. Calculate those factors in. Earning $50k more then if you end up spending that much on health would not be a good idea.
> Most of that design work you did to make you site "different" or "beautiful" just made your site less intuitive for a user.
I see it in the pretty pictures when I zoom in. I'm not sure what the colors mean. It's a dashed blue line.
Openstreetmap seems to not be able to find ANYTHING when I search -- not address, not business name. Hell, if I type "google" it comes up with something in Germany. I guess I just don't know how to use openstreetmap.
> Most drivers are lazy, distracted, and apt to do something stupid in an emergency.

Er, citation needed. I think the vast majority of drivers are good drivers — otherwise, vehicular transport would be a disaster.
Here's a great playlist featuring Richard Hamming with a CS focus on a similar topic: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2FF649D0C4407B30
It's definitely an affluent US city thing. When I was in Spain for three weeks this summer zero of the locals had their phones out in a restaurant.
Why do you assume that people are wasting their time when they’re on their phones?
For the first paragraph, I don't understand the logic behind your comparison between a train failure mode and a car failure mode. However your assumption on braking capability is wrong and it is a crucial point.

It does not matter how well your car can brake. Can your autonomous driving system guarantee it will always brake as hard and as fast as required when you will need it? Can you guarantee that the system will not have a bug the day it needs to brake?

Trains brake very well. There are even rubber wheel metros that brake so well we have to limit them in order not to sent everyone flying in the wagons :).

But in the safety calculations, standards like IEEE 1474 assumes degraded braking capability, and also considers that the preceding train is at stop. In other words, to be declared safe for mass usage, you can't assume average case. You must assume adverse case. You will not have a driver to notice that the car brakes poorly or to be confident enough to drive very close to the preceding car.

For the second paragraph, again, this is certainly true for driving assistance, but will most likely not be enough for driverless, as it was / is not enough for trains. Of course you may disagree.

EDIT: this is a good reference: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/safe-braking-model-explained-...
With a good CMake configuration and Ninja and ccache, a minute or two max.

Your CMake makes incremental builds safe, and the ccache saves you when switching between branches.
I understand what you're saying and agree for the most part. I guess the big question here is whether or not parents can or should teach their children self-control. As a parent, should I just give my child access to everything and hope for the best? Or should I restrict access and hope they don't become bitter hermits? :)
Adults are forced to be much more pragmatic and less volatile. Plus, most of us suffer from time scarcity. There's a specific pivot point in life wherein you shift from primarily a learner to primarily a producer and I think the shift in how we approach knowledge and our own interests is the unfortunate baggage of that transition.
> Yes, Julia is really fast with some things, but for other things it's much slower

No sane person would deny this :) Regarding those benchmarks, however, I would note that:

a) They are two major Julia versions old, many of the benchmarks Julia appears in are string-centric, and since then Julia's string handling has been improved.

b) Glancing through I see a few pretty basic ways in which the Julia code could be sped up without doing anything convoluted
>Requiring the driver to be awake and alert while not requiring them to actually do anything for long stretches of time is a recipe for disaster.

i heard that this is why autobahns are made with unnecessary curves/turns.
Until the government begins a mass extermination program for haters, I can't help but feel this is a hyperbolic argument. Not granting permits to march is totally incomparable with genocide.
Why are you saying that the universe might not exist if it were not for humans. I have a few questions for you.

1. What if humans become extinct in a few hundred years? Should the universe then not exist anymore and make more lifeforms?

2. What if there are billions of other "intelligent" species in the universe? Why should the universe care about one specific species that is actually not that great, and very destructive.

3. What if this universe is just an experiment, a petridish and we are just one out of billions of parameters.

4. What if our kind of intelligence is really not that impressive, what if intelligence of dark matter entities, which we don't
know about anything is much more powerful, what if even that is not that impressive?

Again, the universe doesn't care. It is not a person, it doesn't have a plan, it is neutral, unless we met our "gods" one day. Humans are just a blip among much larger things that are happening in the universe.
Good News for Young Strivers: Networking Is Overrated
Could you explain to me how it's worse than if React were released without the patents grant like most OSS is?

It seems like you'd have no patents grant then anyway and you'd already in the position you're in now if you sue Facebook for patent infringement (and are using React).
SkipFlag: A knowledge base that builds itself
There was a lot of internal pushing for publication, apparently. But Apple decided they don't want individual engineers to get credits for ML work that whole teams are working on, so they came up with their ML blog to post papers without individual credit. At least, that's how it was explained by some of the ML researchers to this year's summer intern class.
I think you may be misunderstanding the nature of the grievances, here. I wasn't there, but having dug around a little bit, I don't believe that the people lodging the complaints are sitting around looking for Code of Conduct violations of which they can accuse people.

It is one thing to have technical disagreements when working with a team of other humans. These debates can reveal some very strong opinions, but if the discussion stays about the tech, it generally isn't a problem for the team to move on, and certainly would not violate any Code of Conduct that I've ever read.

It is an entirely different situation when several people seem to have been made to feel uncomfortable, excluded, marginalized, belittled, mocked, or shamed. Yes, some people have very thin skins and are easily offended, but is it likely that 4 people in this group were over-reacting, and that ultimately drove them to the point of resignation? Or is it more likely that there was a pattern of behavior from @rvagg that violated (or perhaps just consistently pushed the boundaries of) the agreed-upon norms of the group, as laid out in the Code of Conduct?

I think his openly dismissive attitude about the Code of Conduct probably stemmed from him being unwilling or unable to follow it, and regularly being at odds with the rules. If it didn't bother him, why would he question it? More importantly, if the group doesn't want to honor the Code of Conduct they've established, why didn't they just change it to allow @rvagg to operate without feeling like he was at odds with the rules?
You can read some more discussion on it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14804018.

One of the ideas is that most ML researchers want to publish their work and Apple wasn't allowing it. Allowing ML researchers working at Apple to publish in this journal was they only way they were get more ML researchers to work for them.
What are you providing consulting for?
I'd argue the opposite. ES6 is s pretty decent language, but setting up the tooling is a PITA.
See meaning drive past, not "observe the collision."
Non-paywalled version:

https://twitter.com/newsycombinator/status/90078007990679142...
"I don't want to live on this planet anymore."
pretty much how I felt growing up there
good find! here's a summary:

it looks like they searched the standard library for negative integer literals and that's how they settled on -5 for the low end.

the high end came after introducing the `bytes` object. it went up to 256 instead of just 255 for size/len checks.
JFC. I don't get why otherwise rational people become so stupidly aggressive when faced with analogies.
There are at least two companies that will guarantee (guarantee, mind you) a slot on the NYT list in exchange for a fee.
Amazon to Cut Prices at Whole Foods
When I was a teenager living with my parents we used to have a 'devices free' dinner where we'd sit in silence and realize that an awkward teenager had little in common to talk about with his out-of-touch parents. This was the time where conversation was forced and often led to arguments. Though this says more about my upbringing than the use of technology.

I think my point is that people see people looking at their phone while in restaurants or people sitting silently and assuming that this void means that the social aspect of the human race is doomed for destruction. You can't force conversation and I've found with friends and even family now that the phone has replaced forced discussions with something else. And you don't always need to fill silence with conversation and nonsense.

Similarly I would say there's nothing wrong with lessening the use of technology your kids use, but at the same time you can't just outright cut them and yourself out from it. Instead you should adapt; give your kids positive uses of the TV or their phone. If you try to force devices-free meals your kid may think that bringing up issues of cyberbullying, facebook etc might not be appropriate.
Hence my comment that maybe accident rates improve anyway. Although it's hard to predict the delta between distracted driving/no automation and oblivious driving/imperfect automation. It's at least plausible that you have fewer but worse accidents when someone's watching a YouTube video and the car suddenly panics.
I'm not familiar with this example. Could you elaborate on the Atari thing, please?
Thank you, that cleared up my misunderstanding.
Someone could easily turn around and say a car is $1000 a month for a "convenience". shrug
Even worse: I've been on several mountain roads with stretches of one-way traffic, where either an officer has to signal a switch in lane direction every few minutes (which might not be clear otherwise, especially around a bend), or cars have to occasionally reverse to let opposing traffic through. Don't think I'll ever be letting an AI do that!
Also curious as I'm a consultant, are you a private consultant? Do you go through a third-party to book? Are you a FTE at a consultant company?

I'm not happy currently with the amount of travel required nor the archaic mindset of some of the managers/planners.
Ask HN: Spike in App Store Downloads from China?
I have two unrelated iOS apps under different vendor IDs and both have seen a surge in downloads from China over the past week. In-app analytics suggest that most or all of these downloads never even open the app.

In Apple's dev forums, it appears that other devs are experiencing a similar spike right now.

Anyone have a clue what might be going on?
yeah, same. felt the entire course could've been compressed to a 12-point medium article.
What about tossing in tests every twenty minutes or so where you are required to "drive" for one minute (but the car remains in charge) and your driving is scored vs the A.I.? Maybe if you fail badly enough, you're scored drunk and have to pull over.