skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
65,000 portraits of the artist: how Van Gogh's life became a fully painted film
> [Musk] also joked to employees they would be going through “production hell” to meet demand for the new car.

It sounds like taking sick days, vacation days, and going home at 5pm is exactly what Musk doesn't want from employees.

Germans are fortunate to have those benefits guaranteed by law (and culture).
There is actually a group of researchers tasked to measure the progress of "make China great again", they reported back in 2012 that the goal is 62% completed.

Chinese source from People's Daily -

http://politics.people.com.cn/n/2012/0805/c1001-18670287.htm...

Trump just copied the idea from Hu and Xi.
I suspect part of the cause is the prevalence of asperger-like personalities in the IT-field.

No emotionally mature adult would conduct an interview like that, unless forced to. It would be completely unacceptable in any other professional field.
It's nowhere near that clear cut.

http://www.radiohamburg.de/Nachrichten/Deutschland-und-die-W...

One of the "unwords" nominated for 2017 is "sozialtot". That's "socially dead" as a synonym for not having a Facebook account. As for Google, when everybody has their email at google I can craft my packets by hand, Google will still slurp them up. But oh, it's all optional, that goes without saying so it has to be said all the damn time.

> particularly when $bad_thing is to read opposition news.

You don't even know if "and their use is purely optional." refers to even one word more than the headline. If it does, you don't get to pick and chose that conveniently. The article also contains sentences such as

> All of them are making decisions about who gets a digital megaphone and who should be unplugged from the web.

Where does people doing something to themselves even figure into that? We're still at that part where someone blamed the victim and you're contorting to excuse that as something noble at heart, if lazy and inarticulate.
But you get what I mean, yeah? Like, nobody has any interest in "the merits of the acquisition". It's all feels-based. It's whether you like conglomeration or not. (Spoilers: I don't, don't, don't!) To that end, your original question would totally sprout up the discussion it did. It couldn't not.
Ignoring the topic of the linked article* I'd argue that there's examples of being too cautious as well. There's a lot of good that we could have done with GMO that is not being done because of very restrictive regulation. Ironically it means that GMO is mostly used for things that are not as obviously good because that's where there's enough profit to be made in the short term to make the research worth it.

I'm a bit afraid that this will happen with self driving cars and AI. That politicians will create draconian policies and laws to protect against the threat of AGI etc, without understanding or knowing what the real threats even are (just look att the trolley dilemma debate...). This could make it economically prohibitive to develop many technologies which has the potential to save many lives as well as improve life quality overall.

* It seems to be more about how rules and policies can be unfair and just to a small extent about how policies can be made opaque by being internal to some ML system.

There's a lot more money going into making plants resistant to pesticide than into making plants better adjusted for harsh conditions or more nutritious, things that could potentially have a huge effect for poor people.
Grohmann Engineering.

And yes, this has happened a few times now - American corp buys some German corp and replaces managers with American ones (or American-styled ones) and a few years later no one in the industry wants to work for them any more.
After periods off social and asocial life, I feel that there's a part of your mind that needs alter(s) (as opposed to ego/self), if that part is satisfied (baby, girlfriend) you won't need much socialization. If you don't have alter, the ego can be your main motivation. I've gone very long periods alone because I was happy doing something I enjoyed for me (music, cs, whatever). But, this may be detrimental at some point, I think whether we admit/want it or not, the alter/social part of our brains needs to be refilled. For instance, even though I was bored, anxious and somehow hated (as in sitting in a corner waiting for an hour at one point) attending some birthday a few years ago, the morning after I woke up a little happier; I don't think it's unrelated.
We currently have thousands, or even millions of intelligent entities (humans) which think pretty wild and dangerous things. We usually just tell them "shut up Bob and take your meds" and that's it. Sometimes we regrettably kill them.

Why would such AGI have the means of turning all of the planet into anything? I mean, sure, I also think the Terminator is a decent movie, but that doesn't make it a reasonable blueprint of the future.
I just thought these quotes were interestingly contemporary, and could complement the article.

The article builds a convincing point for itself (at the cost of a huge complexity), it contains no discernible contradictions to me. It is reasonable to prepare for the possibility of a future event (say, AGI, or Jesus returning to earth), by thinking about it now.

All interests and future predictions are different, but equally valid. To me, it feels like the Wright Brothers thinking about rotating safety valves in space, before they have even took off on their first flight, but that should not stop the author and supporters in any way: Science, futurism, and philosophy moves in small steps, and it may be a good time for some to start walking. Just make sure to properly define the end goal (AKA, the moment AI becomes AGI), or we may keep on truckin' forever, never closing the loop of our hostile AGI-created simulations creating a first friendly AGI.
A lot of them probably run an outdated Joomla.
> DAG

Feedback and memory are really important features of GI that you will not get out of a DAG ever. You need loops for that.
Thank you for the feedback, I have tweaked the wording accordingly (:
Which is exactly how we got here.

If perfect security implies less productivity, security conscious people abide by "good enough" to appeal to the masses.
I was sexually assaulted at Equinox and banned for reporting it
Indeed this is something that deserves a mention in the list. Have added it!
Great read, and I don’t mind at all that the last section was a pitch for donating to MIRI. I have been an AI practitioner since 1982 and have enjoyed almost constant exposure to people with more education and talent than myself so I feel like I have been on a 35 year continual learning process.

I think that deep learning is overhyped, even though using Keras and TensorFlow is how I spend much of time everyday at work. I have lived through a few AI winters, or down cycles, and while I don’t think that the market for deep learning systems will crash I think it will become a commodity technology.

I believe that AGI is coming, and I think it will use very different technology than what we have now. Our toolset will change dramatically before we can create AGI. I use GANs at work, and in spite of being difficult to train, the technology has that surprising and ‘magic’ feel to it, however, so do RNNs, and that technology is 30 years old.

I am going to show my age, but I still believe in symbolic AI. I am also fairly much convinced that AGI technology will be part symbolic AI, part deep learning, and part something that we have not yet invented.
It's important to understand the "efficiency" here, though. Companies that operate ethically and provide actual value to customers are not usually at the peak of efficiency. A farmer from your example might be only breaking even because he farms sustainably, making sure not to diminish the fertility of the soil. A more efficient buyer would instead extract all the value from the soil and then sell it off as construction ground.

Similarly, in the realm of Internet businesses, a business that employs massive tracking, shady advertisement and plethora of dishonest and anticonsumer practices will be more efficient at exploiting the market than the one which does not.

Which is to say, peak market efficiency is not always something good to have.
Another list of questions can be found in this Tech Interview Handbook:

https://github.com/yangshun/tech-interview-handbook/blob/mas...
Posts and interactions like likes or retweets via the api should be marked as automated, but identifying users as bots is problematic and not very useful as there are good bots and bad bots.

Many users use some automation and that’s a good thing, e.g. posting blog posts when published, bots to repost top #shithnsays for those who want to follow it, that amusing horse books bot etc.

More problematic than bots to me are the many many ways the twitter platform simply rewards the wrong thing, from verified nazis to crowds of trolls and spamming hashtags.
They'd been selling out a while, some would call it "growth", but what it was was distance from what made it great.
Considerations to Make Before You Hire Php Developer for Your Business
> estimator built out of a DAG of calculations

All loops can be modeled as a DAG and single attached piece of memory (of sufficient width) allowed to execute to a steady state; sorry if it wasn't clear that I was talking about things like NTMs too. (It's why I used 'tensor network' most places; also, in practice, we tend to let subgraphs reach a steady state independently where possible.)

Your comment is also an excellent example of a strawman: you picked out the word 'DAG' to raise a technical argument when the usage of DAG versus general tensor networks clearly wasn't the main point (as some NNs have feedback and the standard model is posed as differential equations).

It's more constructive to respond to the strongest point, not pick at technical details that can easily be rephrased.
I thought this was a standard. I have been seeing this in play since highschool guest speaker sessions
Talking about "goals" and "desires" can sometimes be a usefully simplified way to think about biology, but it's not really accurate. A bacterium doesn't "want" to reproduce anymore than a rock "wants" to roll downhill. Only quite complex animals can be truly said to have goals.
Right now we didn't replace it. We'll sent more metrics from the Rails app to Prometheus (included in GitLab) to compensate.
>The recent leap in machine learning has felt rather hyped to me. I don't think AGI is near.

I've always thought it's never too early to start allocating significant resources to AGI research and safety given the potential impact. That said, I've up until very recently agreed with your take on the situation.

What changed my mind was an article detailing the latest advances in silver nanowire mesh networks.[0]

I knew neural computing was a thing, but not that we already had a computing substrate capable of self-organizing its own neural architecture based entirely on external input, with power requirements analogous to the human brain. No firmware or software required.

One could say that human physiology remains far more complex just on the substrate front alone, what with the brain being an incredibly complex, delicate balance of chemicals and heterogeneous cells. However, this particular artificial substrate is already succeeding in basic learning tasks, despite the fact it's far simpler.

I steongly suspect we've figured out at least one artificial computing substrate not only capable of, but perhaps well-suited towards producing AGI, and that it's just a matter of scaling it.

Of course, once you scale the technology sufficiently, the question then becomes how to architect and train it into an AGI. You say as much above, but I suspect the architecture need not be human to be a threat, or to otherwise become extremely powerful.

[0] https://www.quantamagazine.org/a-brain-built-from-atomic-swi...
That's why I largely moved to board games. They are by definition optimized for multiplayer and finished in one seating. Dedicated servers by default. "Spawn" system like in StarCraft 1 by default (one person owns the game, everyone plays). Board games practically don't get outdated. Good ones are still widely played decades later. There's high innovation in game mechanics. Many of them aren't even turn-based. There are dexterity games and real-time games. There are games with simultaneous turns, where you only wait for the slowest player. And you get to make friends.
Is it a dog or a wolf? Can the two species interbreed?
Also look into meditation. Not to the degree that it causes anxiety, but just as something to play around with.

Despite recent posts to the contrary, there's decent evidence that it works, and the (real) risks of it causing further problems seem to only be an issue when you get serious about the whole thing (retreats, 1h+ sessions).

But even just the basic stuff like taking a walk for 30 mins and practicing the quieting of your mind, or even just five minutes of doing so, might help immensely and AFAIK carries no risks.

I can highly recommend the Headspace app, but really I'd say at least at first it's pretty simple: just go for a walk, or sit somewhere, and look around. Watch the clouds or any life around you. Or something like that. When your mind goes places far away from your direct environment, acknowledge that, acknowledge where it went and, if you want, mark it as something to think, analyze, and/or obsess over at a later time (why did I go there? does it matter? am I just being anxious? I should be less anxious. what can I do to be less anxious, etc.)

It's not solved my problems, in part because it's damn hard to even just do this. But it's achievable, and whenever I do I wonder why I didn't start earlier. Because even that tiny bit of time where I manage to 'just be', it's a reminder of how nice the company of my own mind can be, that it doesn't have to be a constant struggle, and that there's good stuff worth struggling for.
The burden of proof is on the one making the claim
The ability to compute intelligence given infinite time and compute power isn't proof that NNs are a useful approach.

For that, a technique must be able to compute human intelligence at a useful speed on a constructable system.
History of Ball Bearings [pdf]
...and unplanned pregnancies are more common than people think.
So clearly the random garble in smspriv6fynj23u6.onion isn't recognizable enough for a user to spot a bogus one. And so as long as an adversary is willing to spend the same amount of money mining their bogus key as you are in generating the original, you're never going to win.

My suggestion would be to, during the mining process, search the "random" portion of the domain for "recognizable strings" (probably just any dictionary words) and keep mining until a domain is found with a suitable level of "recognizability". This way you get the extra "strength" of having mined for a significantly longer string at only a fraction of the cost whilst an adversary would have to search for a much more specific string to mimic you convincingly.

This is somewhat similar to facebook having "corewwwi" following their domain - not words they were specifically looking for I'm sure, but notable and so would be necessary to bruteforce.

Consider it to be a bit like having "correcthorsebatterystaple" on the end of your domain (yeah I know it's too long).
That depends whether the other occupants knew about the safety features and record of elevators. If they did, then they were making a sound judgement. If they didn't, then they were being completely reckless.
The gym I used to go to had an incident with someone being killed by the lift falling: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1278427/Health-club-...

Admittedly it’s rare, and personally I wouldn’t be worried about it as a liklihood.
> Does it mean only masternodes can use the privacy focused feature?

No, it means the masternodes provide privacy by mixing your coins. This has privacy implications.

> An additional note, can someone please explain me what is so novel about the governance policy other than instead of asking votes from the entire network (ie bitcoin), the votes are focused only in hands of people with enough coin?

That's the novelty. No it's not particularly useful.
build 1M bot and host them on aws. now, you have 1M bot friends. simple.
few questions if I may:
- were you taking them alone?
- weren't you scared of having a bad trip?
- how long did the feeling last?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction
Didn't the same argument apply in general to why NNs weren't particularly useful for anything ~30 years ago?

Using a network of tensors to compute intelligence is incredibly old (I believe, dating back about 80 years), but has only recently become tractable to do for any complex tasks.

However, in the past ~30 years, we've gone from "intractable for moderate problems" to "world champion at go", "able to detect cancer in images as well as experts", etc. My contention is that in another ~30 years, we'll see a step sufficient for "can do average at most intellectual activities", even if that's just having the storage to keep 10,000 task specific NNs (of AlphaGo sophistication) on hand to interpolate all actions as mixes of specialist tasks. Do you really not think there's a strong heuristic case for that? (I would contend that you should be able to point to a specific task you don't think it will be able to do on that timeline -- do you know of such a task?)

The proof was merely that we're not barking up a theoretically dead tree -- we have to rely on heuristics for if it will eventually converge to tractable.
The 'exact' concept is wrong. Any picture depends on lighting, camera used, filters, lens, etc.

I don't mind colorized photos. Yet for some of them that were made thinking in a b/w result (For example, the 'With The Beatles' album cover) colorizing means the lost of those stylistic choices.
That's reasonable. I think I misunderstood because it was on the front page - I assumed it was showing a neat new thing rather than someone exploring a something new to them. My bad. It's a shame I can't delete my original comment.
Not asking these questions is giving a free pass.

I am in favor of asking 'Are questions asked in the interview a true reflection of what I would be doing if I was hired.' If the answer is no, then you have more questions that revolve around 'how they evaluate best-fit'.

The tech interview process is broken and change requires challenging and questioning the status quo.
I didn't read GP's comment as tearing down. Also, I learned something new - didn't realize HB went through YC, or that it even was VC-funded.

> I don't get why HN, of all the places in the world, would seek to tear down software companies, literally started on HN, which produce a service that people love and which achieve a successful outcome for all concerned.

Well, the company got bought by a third party with dubious reputation, which will most likely lead to "service that people love" deteriorating and possibly getting cancelled. This is not a good news for people who were fans of the service. It definitely doesn't look like a success for all concerned.

Basically, HB is seen by many (myself included) as a great service to have, not as a great trick for some people to get rich.
Dogs and wolves are fully interfertile. Their suites of behaviours and adaptations are very different but they can be and often are considered one species.
How do you fight the “idea worthiness” paralysis?
Don't worry about it. If you're not already, keep fit and healthy as much as you can. Not to get rich or attract women etc, but for yourself.

For your career, the end goal might seem far away, but each step forward is progress.
I continuously struggle with debugging aspx with embedded JavaScript. Breakpoints can't be set on any line and I still haven't figured out the logic why and when stepping through the highlighted line is never the one that is actually running. Even after expanding the code with the { } button. It's just simple JS so no code maps should be needed.
One thing I would like to figure out is how often I can ask for help. Any ideas how to phrase that ?

I worked in a small company where I was the only programmer and had to figure everything on my own, plus search engines, IRC, StackOverFlow. Then an interviewer at Intel was mildly unsatisfied that I didn't ask about a test question that wasn't entirely clear. Also, one company where I worked very briefly considered question asked a sign of weakness.
I think they've done rather well for themselves, given their success. They still support charities in a major way, and haven't given into DLCs the way Steam has. Overall, GOG > Humble Bundle > Steam if I must have a game not on GOG, so in that sense, glorified Steam sale, yes.

After the original bundle, I've gotten a few in the last year: Intergalactic, Freedom, Star Wars, and Civilization. All have been great values, if you know what you want. Even if you don't, you're giving to charity and you can gift the games to someone.
The primary task of a developer in a modern "agile" team is to take a small bite-sized piece of functionality and alter or add code to implement it.

A very large number of job candidates aren't very good at this. So something like it needs to be tested for.

Personally, I love code. For me, an exercise like this is like whittling or molding clay, tactile and creative. I wouldn't want to work for a company that isn't interested in my craftsmanship, independent of everything else at higher levels of abstraction or closer to the business. Why? Because it will hire other people who don't care, and the code will be ugly, and it will be an eternal uphill battle to stay sane.
I'm not arguing that NNs aren't capable of AGI, merely that the ability to compute the standard model leaves the far more difficult question of whether the problem is tractable, as you said.

The standard model could be computed directly without NNs, which I think we agree wouldn't be a useful way to approach AGI.
Exactly. True education is something you do to give people humongous ROI on their time, not something you do for your own ROI.
How did you choose one week, rather than a day, or forever? Why were "people" foolish to stay in the elevator and keep using it that day, while you were not foolish because you waited a week?
Sabae: Premium Eyeglass Frames from Japan
Completely agree with this and related posts.

I think curation is massively underrated - importantly, curation allows a filter on quality. Lots of popular music is popular for reasons other than its quality, and Spotify is unable to detect that. Critics can.
Call for help: fund GIMP development and Libre animation
Astronomers find potential solution into how planets form
Humans evolved from immaterial matter to conscious carriers of information.

The real question isn't whether AGI is possible but whether humans are the fittest carrier of information for our DNA and that seems to be technology in some shape or form helped by things like deep learning.

My bet is always on evolution. And now that technology can learn it's IMO only a matter of time before we will experience another Cambrian explosion if we aren't already.