skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What's new? Well, if we keep replacing low-skill jobs by high-skills ones, we may have a little problem: are humans going to keep up with the training? Is the workforce going to adapt fast enough?

When job replacement happens over several generations, it's a pretty easy problem to solve. When it gets faster, turns out some human abilities are not scaling very well.
> Everyone complains

Anecdotal evidence is worthless. Perhaps you could contribute something more substantive than this because it leads the conversation in an unproductive direction - "oh I live in the UK and everyone I speak to loves the NHS"
Why is the UI on these things so atrocious? It took him a number of key presses just to select from a list of 6 and many more to finalize the purchase. Why not have a bunch of large tactile buttons at the bottom of the screen like all normal vending machines do? I don't want to wait in line for 3 minutes while some technophobe tries to figure out how to nagivate a pressure touchscreen with 12 menus deep. It's not his fault, it's the fault of the UI designers who think all they have to work with is a bunch of pixels and X/Y coordinates of presses. There's more to UI than that.
While I know that there's not a lot of love out there for Microsoft OSes I'm pretty sad to be left to choose between the one true hardware/software combination from Apple or the wild west of the Android world.
Mayo Clinic
Looking around the Mill Computing, Inc website, this feels like an (accidental?) sweat equity scam. I realize that is a very loaded charge, but this is NOT how real companies are run: "In the beginning we were a sweat equity organization; no one received a salary; instead, contributors received units that converted to stock when we incorporated. At incorporation 45 people had worked on the Mill and became shareholders. After incorporation we are still a sweat equity organization; we now use a stock option system for sweat equity, and we still pay no salaries. Reward for work today is comparable to what it was before incorporation."

I was involved in something similar around 10 years ago where we were working on a revolutionary EDA suite for analog and mixed signal circuit design. The owner was quite technically competent but kept upping the ante and theatrics to the point that no customers or suitors took the company seriously, only the desperate employees. They never closed sales nor sold the IP.

I advise extreme caution in dealing with the business side of this.
An interesting article, but I think it misses the mark on two things.

Firstly, it minimizes the concerns people have over jobs being lost because AI isn't around the corner. While a valid point of view, even if many jobs will be lost only in 30-40 years and not in 10-20, isn't it something worth thinking about?

Secondly, in terms of the AI safety movement, I think he doesn't really address the core problems that people raise. From the article:

"[ai safety pundits] ignore the fact that if we are able to eventually build such smart devices, the world will have changed significantly by then. We will not suddenly be surprised by the existence of such super-intelligences. They will evolve technologically over time, and our world will come to be populated by many other intelligences, and we will have lots of experience already."

I think this ignores two arguments:

1. While his scenario is certainly plausible, the "AI takeoff" scenario, in which an AI becomes super-intelligent via recursive self improvement, is also at least a possibility. This means it's worth thinking about, because it negates the "safety" of other tech advances helping.

2. Either way, one big concern of the AI safety crowd is that we just don't know how much time it will take to "solve" AI safety. Given unlimited computing power now, we would have no way of making the AI have the same goals as us, because we have no idea how to program a safe AI. This is something that might take 10 more years of work in laying down mathematical foundations, or might take 100 years. Nobody knows! That's why it's important to get this right.

The argument from the article is "let's now worry, because tech will advance enough by the time we have intelligent AIs". Well, maybe, but how does that tech advance happen? By people being worried about this problem and working on it! It's not magic. You can't just assume that the problem will solve itself.
And you wouldn’t expect atom to use more memory than sublime, either.
I disagree and think the machine has less overhead. Yes there is a large cost upfront to develop and manufacture it. But once the machine has been designed and tested, it will never have to be designed again. Design is a one time cost.

Once manufacturing is underway, the process is typically made as efficient as possible and made to scale. The work that went into design and testing can now be scaled to thousands or millions of units which is a great return on investment. Each unit has a one time cost for materials used for parts, with some long term maintenence costs.

Operation requires only an electric energy draw. If that energy is from a clean source such as solar, this unit isn't having much of any further negative impact. Operation could last years or decades depending on design and whether or not the product is superceded, at which time its parts can be recycled. Even then, the time spent on design will be used to create the next version.

Supplying the machines with goods is already a task handled when goods are delivered to the location and stocked, so there isn't going to be much or any overhead added there. Plus, we can automate that too (self-driving vehicles for transportation, robots for the last leg of delivery and stocking).

Human workers do not scale in the same way that machines do, and aren't typically as efficient at this type of task.

Finding suitable human workers is difficult and can take considerable time and resources every time one is hired.

Human workers are expensive, and this is an ongoing neverending cost. This cost will not scale down as you hire more workers or work them for a longer time (unlike machines).

Human reliability is hit and miss. Also, you cannot work them 24/7. There is lots of downtime and you would require at least 3 or 4 humans to replace 1 machine if the task requires 24/7 uptime.

The enegry that humans consume and their waste is typically not effecient. Three meals a day, often including animal products which are costly in terms of resources and environmental impact. Then there's waste treatment for them. And the energy costs to deliver the food from a farm to their location, and even farm growing and harvesting.

None of this is as effecient or "green" as a renewable energy draw such as solar, wind, or hydroelectric delivered over a power line.

On many levels, humans are a poor replacement for machines in predictable tasks such as making a coffee or a sandwich for a chain restaurant. Humans are good for social work, and making coffee is not social.

In terms of someone needing a job, even if that job is meaningless and unnecessary, basic income should be provided instead. But that's a whole other conversation and we aren't there yet.

Point is: Machines are efficient. Social impact is a different conversation.
I just noticed you slipped in steak https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/27/health/report-links-some-...

If you overeat of a Standard American Diet you increase the risk of heart disease and cancer.
Building your own blockchain using Haskell
I wouldn't expect it to be any better either. Which means this thing is missing the point of writing a new browser.
There are a big likelihood that they used german terms since it's a german bank. Sourcecode written in other languages are not funny to read.
Wrt smart peripherals, probably all it means is that you need an IOMMU if you don't want to have to trust your drivers.
Flashback! I worked for Commerzbank back in the day (which ended up absorbing Dresdner). Anyway, I had to work on plugging various CB systems into the Dresdner openadaptor. I met the guys behind it (they were on the floor below me) Really nice chaps. If memory serves they ended up leaving essentially due to the merger but they were really helpful in the time before they left.
Debian 9.2 released
Or test Servo... (Mozilla's new engine.)
The same NASA who subsidized private contractors, so they could reach this price with equipment, science and funds?
It would be interesting to know if any of the cancellations were from the same people shorting the stock.
This is different. Atom is a text editor implemented in a web browser engine. This is a web browser implemented in a web browser engine.
A really good example of this could be validation.

Almost every CRUD app builder includes the ability to validate fields and properties, and this would appear to be sufficient for nearly all scenarios except it is not.

I can not name a single CRUD app that I have built that didn't require multi-field validation... i.e. start date prior to end date, time must be completed if date is filled in, if this part of the form is filled in then that part must be blank.

Without this capability to really express the application business logic, the technical simplification fails short.
10 Layers of Linux Container Security
It's certainly evolving.

Alibaba (and as well as other large online companies) had a huge leap during recent the Mobile Age as mobile phones makes online services more accessible to the public.

And government also enforced (impliedly) mobile carriers (China Unicom, China Mobile and China Telecom) to fueling this trend.

All this makes companies like Alibaba become very rich.

Plus, Alibaba's sites like taobao.com needs to handle tremendous amount of traffic in an average day, and even heavier traffic during promotion events like Nov 11 (Double 11) Day (It's like Black Friday[0]).

They had motive and resource to improve their system, and they opened some of those improvements already on GitHub[1]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Friday_%28shopping%29
[1] https://github.com/alibaba
nostalgia (aol sounds) = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxVQ9rhjyTY
It's so funny you readily presume JavaScript as the ultimate web language. It is everything but. The only reason people still use it because the browser holds them hostage and then they readily march into the hell that is server side JavaScript. Once WebAssembly breaks that hold, we will look back to the era of JavaScript as a bad, bad dream.
SOAP is bleeding edge in banks. Many still pull and push files to/from (S)FTP
Bertrand Russell’s Ten Commandments of Critical Thinking and Democratic Decency
I don't think so. Even even if - then ineffective, as a link to their tool is covered behind pages of text.

> There is hardly any substantiation to support the assertions.

How about side-by-side TensorFlow and PyTorch comparison?

...though, for experiment tracking (and experiment running) I recommend https://neptune.ml/.
The most famous article on this topic is called "No Silver Bullet". It basically answers this question: split up the work you need to do into "essential complexity", which is specifying in minute detail exactly what you want your app to do, and "accidental complexity", which is all the programming work around that to get it done. The "essential complexity" is still most of the work.

Thought experiment: If I gave you a programming environment in which you just said, out loud, exactly what you wanted to have happen, and there was no programming, it just happened, how fast could you build a CRUD app? Significantly faster, true, but there'd still be tons you need to specify, just because you want something that does something specific.

If you want an example of something that that is fully automated, think of a Facebook page. You can build it in seconds, but you're sacrificing tons of customizability. In terms of our thought experiment, this is like saying "make my app exactly like that". It's very efficient, but lacks most customizability.
I very much doubt so. Most of the IB, even at Deutsche Bank, doesn't speak German. And from what I can tell it seems to be in English.
Because the US has not believed in anti-trust regulations in some time, especially for snakes who don't hesitate to pay (I don't remember if it was Last Week Tonight or Adam Ruins Everything which played clips of the Luxotica CEO, that bloke talks and behaves exactly as if he'd order a pallet of cement blocks and ask for a discount).
Yet you have no problem bringing that to everyone's attention.
Again, depends. It's a tradeoff. As much as you want reproducibility, you never really want to be wed to security bugs.

I tend not to but generally consider myself on the fence about that one.
Apiary Documentation with RSpec API Doc Generator
That’s an oversimplification of his argument. I interpreted it as him saying that positing a future, superhuman, malevolent, intelligent agent, that we should tremble in fear of, provides no useful line of reasoning that we could pursue to take prudent action to mitigate potential problems.

His obvervation is that the future road to superhuman intelligence will be paved with events, not known to us now, that will provide us with experience to handle the emergence of the malevolent AI.m

This shows that the author is not suggesting that since we can’t foresee the future, we simply should hide our head in the sand, plug our ears, la la la.

On the contrary, he is implying that our normal human tactics of being concerned with the future are more robust than we might fear, and will continue to serve us into the unknown future.
Naw, the ideologues will go after the programmers first, as soon as they realize, much like in the movie 'transcendence'... [besides infrastructure etc]
Microsoft really fucked up by making a "Windows phone" instead of the "Xphone" - i.e. with DNA, product design, product management, branding and consumer love integrated with and part of the Xbox ecosystem.

Just saying "Windows phone" makes me feel staid and bored, whilst saying "Xphone" conjures feelings of excitement, entertainment and potential.

Actually I don't think its too late to do this, given that Xbox is still very much alive and kicking, and one of the few corners of Microsoft left where people really feel love for the company and brand.

What Microsoft never got its head around is that phones are entertainment devices, not little flat desktop computers.

If they were really clever then the Xphone would in fact be a touch controller surface for the Xbox, and maybe even be shipped with each Xbox.
Kinda reminds me of a line from Dogtooth:

"If you don't drink your orange juice while it's fresh, it's no use."
Share USB Devices Over Network with USB Network Gate
go back to your cave and write some assembly you elitist neanderthal
I had the same problem, suddenly I had 2 kids, one followed the other, the Internet use becomes better, I am consuming just the necessary which is filtered organically by the amount of free time available. I am the developer as well and the time pressure is making me pragmatic. Not sure if this is 100% related to your problem but there is a point: there is something between the stimulus and the response, you are free to do what you decide to do in between, apply your real-time filter and go on. no need to shut down the connectivity, proof yourself you can.
The point of the stock market is as a vehicle for people to make money.
Installing and Running Ubuntu 17.10 Desktop on the 12-inch MacBook
Simple technique for preventing bugs like this: don't copy-paste code. If you find yourself copy-pasting code think twice why you even have to do it (DRY principle) and be aware of the potential consequences. Even if some code has to be duplicate, I am forcing myself to just write it from scratch, exactly for this reason: do you really know that you have updated all your data? And yeah, unit tests would help in spotting this and other things. But aren't unit tests a duplication of your code, already?

UPDATE:

Maybe I should have stated my last question differently. I meant that in the context of checking that the data is correct, it would be the same as writing the duplicate code from scratch.
I think most of that has excited moral (I would call it political) panic at one point or another. But, there isn't anything special about these salad machines, I agree.

The underlying narrative is a fear of automating lots of other things. The new wave of automation is still uncertain, we don't know how to identify nevermind personify the symbols and culprits of it. Automated kitchen robots are a nice stand-in for automation generally. Like the robots in the jetsons.
This is great! How do you detect the fields? Are you using image processing?
you mean you're not watching the [actual] matrix all day already? [neo, is that really you?]
There's an extension: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/u2f-support-a...

Works perfectly for me.
I'd LOVE an automated kiosk (or even person) that let me specify some numeric encoding of my entire order.

I always order the same thing at In-n-Out, for example, and would love to say, "Give me a 557-343-901-043" -- or better yet, scan a QR code that had what I want to order. And they have just about the simplest menu ever! (one reason I love them) If I could do that at other fast food restaurants, or Starbucks, where you might want to order the same Very Specific thing, without having to go through the tedium of explaining it or entering it into a kiosk / web form every time, I bet it would be a huge thing.

I will be surprised if Starbucks doesn't let you do this already, or isn't working on it.
US military drone fleet infected by computer virus that 'keeps coming back'
Chrome `--app` mode does the same thing.
Australian police ran world biggest child porn site for a year in undercover op
The article is about the UK. Previous OFCOM rules told providers they must advertise only a speed that at least 10% of customers can reach. So yes, people got faster than the advertised speed, about 10% of people. It makes no difference to the whining unfortunately.

The effect is, for say 40MBps VDSL (the service most UK households with "broadband" use, almost always ultimately delivered through a copper telephone cable from BT's Openreach last mile subsidiary) all the ISPs will advertise that as "up to 38Mbps" because at least 10% of their customers can get 38Mbps out of that link. Nobody gets 50Mbps, the link layer is throttled because they're on a 40Mbps product, but plenty of people absolutely will get 40Mbps even though the advert said "up to 38Mbps".

That includes my very tech-savvy ISP which is obliged to say "up to 38Mbps" in big print everywhere even though it explains that you're buying the 40Mbps VDSL service and talks about deep network internals, and even though its customers usually know exactly what speed they'll get (I get 40Mbps) because they're technical people and know how to measure.

Now, suppose you're one of the people getting 30Mbps from the 40Mbps VDSL product. Should you upgrade? There's an "up to 76Mbps" product advertised by your supplier, surely that would be faster? No. All the "up to 76Mbps" product does is change the throttle to 80Mbps, and you aren't impacted by the throttle so the product will simply cost more and achieve nothing.

Now, in fact under those rules an ISP had an incentive NOT to sell you the expensive product, because if they give you the 80Mbps product then you hurt their "up to 76Mbps" averages and make it harder to sell the product.

The result of _that_ change to the market was ISPs would have a headline product advertised heavily e.g. "Guaranteed at least 60Mbps for £24.99 per month" and then if they couldn't meet the guarantee for a particular customer they wouldn't magically fix things to go faster, they would simply say "Ah, you don't qualify for that offer, you can have a refund and the service stops, or pay £9.99 per month for our other product "Guaranteed 10Mbps" which we're meeting.

The ideology behind all this stuff is that our old friend the "invisible hand" will fix it. But er, no. There is actually only one last mile technology involved (for people in most cities there is a competitor, Cable TV cables, but that's a whole separate ball of wax) and it's VDSL offered at speeds set by the wholesaler. It will perform exactly the same whether you buy your "service" from an ISP with a call centre staff in India that uses a purple logo and has a chimp mascot, or you buy "service" from two blokes named James who work out of a rented office in Liverpool, because the "ISP" part is trivial and largely irrelevant except for branding, and the last mile part is a natural monopoly provided always by the exact same engineers, same copper cables, same everything.
with autonomous drones and AI warfare, say goodbye to the birdies. chomp
Scary to think that the reveal of all passwords on MacOS shoulders on one person's accidental copy + paste of one line.
>> about 100 times simpler than React

This statement is inaccurate and since its not explained, meaningless.
Google Fiber Scales Back TV Service to Focus Solely on High-Speed Internet
Getting the vast majority of your food from a single starchy source is also not great for dental (or general) health, even without the sand chewing part.
Each protection entry is has a lower and upper bound. The entry can cover something as small as a single byte, or as big as the whole address space or anything inbetween.

It is just a normal bounds compare to see if each entry covers the access, and the PLB has as long as the top-level cache access takes to do the checks.

So the PLB misses far far less often than a conventional TLB.
Right, the NSA has a bunch of anti-Tor tools that usually are called QUANTUM-whatever. However, correlation of people across different networks is something that XKEYSCORE does. There's also the writing deanonymisation tools that you mention (but there's Anonymouth[1] which could help).

My original point was that OPSEC is hard if you're trying to be a topic expert in a short period of time. You don't need NSA tools to attack someone in that situation.

[1]: https://github.com/psal/anonymouth
and NOBODY watches porn anymore...
.. but they also complain about it. Expressing affection by bickering is very British.
It's not just about what protocol you use, physical factors also come into play. If you're in an apartment, how noisy are your neighbors? If you're in a villa, how far away are you, and how many walls are there in between?

Yes, Wi-Fi can have pretty decent bandwidth in the optimal case, but there are far too many uncontrollable variables for it to be possible to guarantee anything with it. It also makes perfect sense to want to exclude it as a variable before making a more thorough investigation.

If you bought a computer without Ethernet then that's on you, not your ISP. Fashion is not an excuse.
Fully agree with you. If you use Ruby on Rails (but any modern full-stack framework would do the trick), building a CRUD is indeed 90% automated already.

All you have to do, and that's where the value lies, is putting the bricks together and building the other custom 10%.

Modern full-stack web framework have pushed productivty to an unprecedented level.
This does create the illusion of just in time salads, but how is it different from prepackaged salads? I assume such a machine in large sits in every salad factory.
if ((err = SSLHashSHA1.update(&hashCtx, &signedParams)) != 0)
goto fail;
goto fail; /* MISTAKE! THIS LINE SHOULD NOT BE HERE */
if ((err = SSLHashSHA1.final(&hashCtx, &hashOut)) != 0)
goto fail;

History repeats itself in ever stranger ways. While the effects are different, the original mistake can be quite similar.