skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Licenses like these are a logistical nightmare. If someone deploys software under that license, paying that person for the job is the smallest item on the bill: Now I have to connect my legal department with my techies and with the finance folks. Let's schedule meetings every 3 months to review for which software we have to pay now!

Just the logistical overhead alone justifies a fork for any of the targeted users^wcustomers.
I stopped using Ember because they broke my side project four times in as many months.

I don’t think you should hold that one up as a paragon.
It's also far more likely that those people do not pose a genuine malicious threat to your data and security
Fwiw I didn't find the NYT article had a lot more interesting stuff beyond the CBC article. It looks like it was written before they knew as much about the twins.
Yeah, it's horrific
When I see an app has over 100 million installs, half a million 5 star reviews, and a support email address ending in @amazon.com it seems pretty sure to be the real deal.
You're right, but both the MIT and the non-commercial portion of this new license explicitly grant the right to sublicense. It's not obvious to me that a free use case can't sublicense its use to a huge organization.
Sacramento has all of the disadvantages of living in California (high taxes, regulation, etc) but none of the advantages (great weather, scenery, awesome job market).

You mention the weather... Sacramento's is awful. The heat is unbearable.

You might as well just keep on 80 until you hit Reno.
I don’t know! It’s so weird!!
HAX!
I don't get what is new in the set of attributes that this article describes.

Monte Carlo was already used in 2005 in AIs playing on KGS. Gradient Descent is a basic algorithm is a basic algorithm that I saw in an AI class in ~2008 as well. I bet both are even a lot older and well known by all experts.

This is not what makes AlphaGo special or Zero successful. The curious thing about Zero is that usually with Gradient Descent you run a huge risk of running into a local maximum and then stop evolving because every evolution makes you not better than the current step.

So one question is actually how they used these same old algorithms so much more efficiently, and the second question is how did they overcame the local maximum problem. Additionally there may be other problems involved that experts know better than me.

But an explanation of basic algorthims can't be the answer.
The Cost Center Trap
The problem is you're implicitly saying that ANY discussion is a pointless waste. As there will always be people on one more sides who see any other views as illegitimate per se. And there will always be people on all sides using "clickbait"-style tactics to sway people who lack critical thinking skills.

I refuse to accept this premise. Even if some (or even most) discussion is disingenuous or low-quality, I refuse to believe that anything positive can come from declaring any discussion topic forbidden in the public square.
Because the CoG should be about 1/3 to 1/2 of a chord from the leading edge of the wing. This is a bit harder to eyeball with swept wings, but yes, it really looks like this thing is going to have some trouble rotating.

Is the builder doing something different that would change this? I don't know. The nose of the plane looks a little 'long' if he's using a piston engine as the article suggests, and I don't see any pitots sticking out. It looks like a plane, but there are some weird details that just don't make sense.

The proof in the plane is in the flying, and according to the article, this plane never flew. I'd really like to see a flight test before giving this guy credit for building a plane.
This already exists with Unity via Mapbox - https://www.mapbox.com/unity/
Do social media threaten democracy?
Could you please do this survey as part of my research project?
your mileage may vary. https://nicemangos.blogspot.com/2017/07/professor-jordan-pet...
These days I think that the creative element of programming is why software is eating the world at the pace it is. Undergrads can look at each other's code and say Wow! while one titration is fungible with every other.

Seeing past this level of understanding is an attrition gate in any subject. What I mean is, the students who got past freshman chemistry to become good chemists are the ones who saw the creative element in chemistry.

Those same students may have taken the programming course and seen different codes as fungible with one another. Or in math, proofs, or in English, essays. I know people who came away from the freshman programming course, with the conclusion that "it's all just memorization." Clearly it means they didn't get it, but it also means it's a widespread impression.

As for chemistry, for reasons we don't know, part of developing creativity as a chemist is to get what they call "hands," which means being able to take care of yourself in the lab without wreaking havoc on everything. You need to have a sense of what can and can't be done in a practical process, in order to see your way through a difficult project.
sublicense != relicense. You can't remove restrictions. All of the terms of the license would remain. That organization would still need to pay the fee.
Apache PDFBox 2.0.8 released
Netflix is my goto example of "do your core competency in-house, outsource the rest".

They do one thing themselves in their stack: their distribution network for content, and they do an incredible job of it. Every post I see about Netflix's CDN for video is insightful and a learning experience.

Then they throw a CRUD app in the cloud on top of it and call it a day. Okay, a little simplified -- there's still some neat tech in the DRM, in load-balancing the CDN, and in keeping all of their tech highly available. But conceivably, Netflix could retain much of their value by simply offering all the content to other websites that displayed it to customers -- the hard part of what they do is the CDN (and contracts with content owners), and opening their platform to other interfaces doesn't change that. (Heck, Netflix might be worth more if they opened their content to other interfaces, since they're not actually very good at the front end experience.)

But when I was doing consulting (about cloud stuff), that was my advice: do the core of your business yourself (eg, CDN) then offload as much of the rest as you can.
Securing North Korean nuclear sites would require a ground invasion – Pentagon
One might find familiarity with Hume useful here.
People leave nonsense comments like this just to spread FUD are so irritating. I upgraded 1–>2 a while back and it took a few changes based on informative error messages. People like this made me dread the upgrade thinking it would be complicated. It was basically painless. I’m on version 3–something now and have encountered no other breaking changes. It’s a great tool.

I guess people who leave comments like this have literally 0 threshold for any kind of error message and just want all the interfaces they ever use to be static and permanent. I’m not a webpack fanboy. I don’t like JavaScript. But I don’t go around posting nonsense FUD about “relentless changes” that don’t exist. Sorry buddy, you’re full of it.
Visited Ljubljana for New Years' a few years ago and loved it. Yet another reason to visit again!
If it helps you, I’ve felt similarly bitten by the Podcasts UI changes and have found solace in Overcast as a great replacement; free with a paid option.
The "dead horse" argument is disingenuous, as discussing this subject has been verboten here since it first came out.

Besides, come on. Half of this website is dead horses ("Rust vs. Go"... "JavaScript framework X vs. Y"... "Haskell and/or Lisp is awesome"... etc).
Are you the owner of learn-anything? I like how the pathways are mapped out like a tree. It’s great for guidance, but isn't taking the time to figure out your own learning pathway also beneficial? Because you have your own needs and way of learning after all
I wouldn't say he was harsh. I would just say he is mischaracterizing them and creating a split that doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
> He has spent about $800,000 of his own, and his family's money, and has sold properties and pawned family jewellery to fund his dream.

> "In India, innovation by commoners like me is not taken seriously. [...]"
How do the "honest DIAN officers" that you talk about report their exhorted income?
Elderly doctor: I lost my license because I don’t know how to use a computer
Turgid prose
I think you just low key blew my mind.
Being a relatively kinky person myself I’d still. consider shoving quite a sizable Li-Ion battery into my body a way bigger potential problem than some foreign person activating my buttplug.

But yes, the question is interesting.

I can imagine situations where unknown people taking control is part of the play.
While rust is the safer, and more featureful language, I think Go is quite possibly the better pick for large corporations just due to it's simplicity. Rust to me is the more interesting language, but it definitely offers more power and more choice -- they probably did the right thing by going for Go IMO.

Also really cool to see all the tooling they've built up -- all of the things mentioned seem really cool, "who's gonna clean up all the stale branches" is definitely a question that gets asked (and answered) at more companies that it probably should.
For US Generation Student Debt, there's a significant long-term cost to that decision. If you don't have to double the years it takes you to pay back your debt to do so, maybe moving abroad is more of an option.
"Direct" eye contact with a mirror is good enough.
Maybe you are confusing looking at someone's face and eyes with a posture that faces the other person: it is normally an important element of body language, but if it's impossible it ceases to be meaningful.
No, HTTP2 doesn't just replace bundling, and definitely not what Webpack does.

Based on what I've read, sending a few bundled chunks instead of many individual module files will still generally have less overhead. In addition, Webpack's ability to load and transform other file formats like images and styles is something that simply requesting ES modules over HTTP2 can't deal with. Webpack's ability to code-split an application is also important.

Tobias Koppers, the main Webpack developer, wrote an article last year on how Webpack and HTTP2 relate: https://medium.com/webpack/webpack-http-2-7083ec3f3ce6 .

It's also worth noting that Tobias had only been able to work on Webpack intermittently for the last couple years, until this recent funding allowed him to work on it full-time. Tobias has been writing reports on what he's been doing [0]. Also, grants and full-time development is enabling the team to work on projects like integrating WebAssembly support directly into Webpack [1].

[0] https://medium.com/webpack/the-chunk-graph-algorithm-week-26...

[1] https://medium.com/webpack/webpack-freelancing-log-book-week...
Of course people can license their stuff in whatever weird way they want and I don't have to like it.

But I don't like it when people lie to me. The title is "Trying a new open source model" - the content is "Trying not to be open source any more". If you don't want to do open source then you can of course do that. But if you don't want to do open source any more and still say you're doing open source then you're lying.

(And before anyone answers: No, there's no "other open source" or "a different kind of open source". Open Source is a clearly defined term and such restricted licenses aren't.)
Please read a comment before you respond. The whole comment only exists to say that it seems like the author of ungit is not making a living on his own work alone, but also on the work of all the OTHER contributors, who contributed assuming this would be a free and open community project.
> You start in a PhD program (so that you have support and do not pile up debt), and you leave with a Masters as quickly as you can.

"Student freeloads with this weird trick. Grad schools hate him!"
I’m fascinated by the idea that they can apparently communicate using their connection- maybe that’s the mechanism by which they can share limited visual information. I want to know more about their shared inner dialogue.
I think it's just the fact that translations of classic Greek literature are largely the domain of the highest echelons of academia, which is still mostly men, and more so the higher up you go. (For example, the article mentions that common advice is to wait for tenure before attempting to publish classical translations.)
Exoframe: one-command deployments using Docker
Dodge, duck, dip, dive and dodge!
It didn't just unlock based on a similar face. It unlocked for someone who had a similar face and knew the correct PIN. FaceID learns about changes in your looks based partially on those criteria. If the other person knows your PIN, you've already loss.
Might be a bit offtopic, but you can easily output audio and video at once and then mux them later on:

./yourprogram -a >(ffmpeg -f rawaudio ..other audio opts.. -i - ..encoding options.. audio.m4a) -v >(ffmpeg -f rawvideo ..video opts.. -i - ..encoding options.. video.m4v)
ffmpeg -i audio.m4a -i video.m4v -c:a copy -c:v copy out.mp4

The >() syntax is a bash extension, supported also by zsh, and replaces the argument with a file path to a pipe that's connected to the process within the ()'s stdin. Similarly you can use <() to replace the arg with a pipe connected to the process's stdout. One thing I use it for sometimes is to compare directory contents:

vimdiff <(ls -1 dir1 | cut -d/ -f2-)<(ls -1 dir2 | cut -d/ -f2-)

There are better tools for this specific task, but for a quick and dirty compare on a machine where you only have vim and bash, it's hard to beat.
Hmmm... Im not sure I should respond given your straw man response, but just so others can keep the record straight...

1. PISA is a widely administered test for 15 year olds.

2. TIMSS is a widely administered test for 4th and 8th graders (Advanced TIMMS does "last year of secondary").

3. We are talking about university -- specifically elite universities.

4. I am extremely familiar with education in East Asia (most familiar with Japan), and their teaching of the fundamentals of math in junior high school and high school are in fact excellent. Sadly, this does not translate well into creative thinking. The best math people in Japan are largely limited to a small number of schools (3 or 4 elite ones and maybe a handful of others that have some players).

5. While you are correct that the average quality of education in the US is lower than other places (there are lots of US-specific reasons for this), the education at US elite universities and the US high schools that feed into elite universities is quite a bit higher than the US average. It's tough to find hard statistics on this because it would reveal a class bias in the US (gasp, there is one!), but spending some time in these classrooms and talking to and working with the students from these schools is fairly convincing anecdata.

I'm not sure what you have against US schools and/or US elite universities, but I encourage you to open your mind -- there is a reason why we have a lot of world-class top-rated (by any measure other than cost) universities here.
The "You can't say it is open-source" bullshit is just the first in a long line of idiots lining up to comment on it.

Just because OSI don't have a USPTO registered trademark on "open source" doesn't mean that the OSD isn't the de-facto definition of what "open source" means. One may (may) legally be able to call their project with a crappy homegrown license "open source" but they shouldn't do so.

It isn't always just about what's legal, it's about what's right, and about community consensus. And the truth is, Ungit is not open source after this change.
In case you don't scroll all the way down, there's a list of articles and video's titled "Use cases" at the bottom of the page which appear to cover (at least) how some of this data has been used.
Documentation PRs are a great way to get started, as is answering people's questions in repo issues and on Stack Overflow.

(Plug: both the React and Redux repos have a bunch of open issues tagged "documentation" that are waiting for someone to volunteer to work on them.)
That explains what he might have meant when he was talking about the "hidden curriculum" in comp. sci. Nowadays, the complaint more often heard is that the curricula have become too applications-focused, with the kids having huge gap in their understanding of theory.
no bugs in production. NO BUGS IN PRODUCTION.
View a discussion as solving a math problem. No, that's not entirely accurate but I do think the parallels are solid. Would you prefer threaded or chronologically linear? Why? The answer is almost unarguably the chronologically linear. Flat chronological systems don't really make it difficult for people to engage. People certainly can and do quote one another. And I think they also tend to progress the discussion much more rapidly than threaded systems for at least a couple of big reasons:

Threaded systems result in people repeating themselves constantly. For instance this topic currently has 16 top level threads and a total of 86 comments. However, I'd estimate 80% of the comments are saying the exact same thing in a variety of different ways:

- 'Trump won because media manipulation.'

- 'Hillary more actively manipulated the media and did not win, therefore the above is false.'

The 'personalization' of threaded systems leaves most participants oblivious to most of everything else that's being said -- even when said at roughly the same time. So instead of the direction moving forward it takes a sort of logarithmic divide with numerous divides repeating other divides. This is a very common theme in every topic.

Another major issue here is that as time elapses the number of people seeing any given comment rapidly approaches 0. Chronologically ordered systems enable lengthier discussion. Threaded systems all but ensure any discussion is dead after < 24 hours and often much sooner. So you have a sort of double whammy of not only a divide of progression, but less time spent 'progressing' as well.

And lastly, I think chronological systems also deter pointless nitpicks. For instance I really want to get snarky about thinking Reddit's voting system has solved anything, but what's the point? The only reason I'd discuss this is because of this personalization, but it's unlikely to end with either of us feeling any more well informed and it certainly has extremely little to do with the topic at hand.
A visual and intuitive understanding of deep learning [video]
Cost of living is really high everywhere comparably with the the salaries. I can't even imagine place where it make sense to live keeping in mind one day you want to settle and buy property, raise kids and so on.
And when the police sieze your phone and use your face to unlock it before you can disable it?

If you think that members of law enforcement aren't going to use "rubber hose decryption" if they really want access to your phone, you trust them a lot more than I do.
The prices of new electric standing desks were so appalling to me that I held off on it for a couple of years.

I’m 6’3” so I pretty much have to buy the higher end models, as they’re typically the only ones that go up high enough.

Finally I struck gold with a CraigsList ad from a local office furniture resale company. It never even occurred to check them. I found a much bigger desk than I had been looking for with only a few scratches on it for less than 1/3 the retail price.

I absolutely love it, I use it every day. I’ve got two large monitors on arm mounts and all kinds of things. It’s very stable, quiet, and smooth. It probably goes up and down 10 times a day without issue.

The moral of the story is you can find these things dirt cheap if you look. After having one for over a year, I think I’d be willing to pay full retail if I couldn’t find one though.
Looks like a lot of this data comes from free sources. It's not clear from their site what the licensing is though.
> The curious thing about Zero is that usually with Gradient Descent you run a huge risk of running into a local maximum and then stop evolving because every evolution makes you not better than the current step.

No. The curious thing is that you can train a godawful huge NN with 40 layers via pure self-play with no checkpoints or baselines or pretraining or library of hard problems or any kind of stabilization mechanism, and it won't diverge but will learn incredibly rapidly and well and stably. As Silver says in the AmA, all their attempts at pure self-play ran into the usual divergence problems where the training explodes and engages in catastrophic forgetting, which is what the RL folklore predicts will happen if you try to do that. Local maximums are not the problem - the problem is the self-play can't even find a local maximum much less maintain it or improve it.

> So one question is actually how they used these same old algorithms so much more efficiently, and the second question is how did they overcame the local maximum problem.

Er, this is exactly what OP is all about: the Monte Carlo tree search supervision. That's how they used them.
Getting work visas for yourself and your significant other
and moving your entire life across an ocean can hardly be called "simple".
It's tedious if you wanna validate a complex structure. Most of these libraries are meant to validate stuff that is user input. Imagine I load a complex input from a configuration file into a nested dict and checking it, that'd be really tedious to do manually. A couple checks here or there are ok, but they get confusing and difficult to maintain very quickly. Stuff like optional values, enumerated values etc are also not much fun.

Also error messages for the user. I've mostly used Voluptuous, but it provides much easier to understand error messages.
This is the dilemma that I have, I have a burning desire to do everything. Actually I had eight (eight!) projects, and naturally found it overwhelming. Finally got the list down to (about) three, but it’s still mentally-taxing to switch between them and keep track of progress. Despite all that, I love learning them... this up-and-down feeling is really tiresome
You're confusing open source software with free software.

I'm on your side in principle but the distinction is important in this case.
Please could recommend one (Wi-Fi) rig machine ?
The 'good' chemists I know eventually wound up at places like Coca-Cola making sugar water after a post-doc or teaching titration...after a post doc.
I just learned about faircode[0] and I've got to say, I like the idea. I like that right on the frontpage, it shows that I have the choice to keep using the current license, and have it work like a Patreon, or use their own Faircode License (which seems what this story is about). It makes them look honest.

I like that they are honest about the cost of using the faircode service, right on the frontpage (5% on top of a 2.9% + 30c transaction fee).

I like that they thought about having tools integrated in the ecosystem to allow businesses to easily now what license the deps they're using are on, and how to easily pay for them.

I haven't looked too deep into it, but if it could handle a dual license model as well, then it'd be beyond awesome. I don't want to force companies (even >$1M companies) to pay if they contribute back any improvements they make.

[0]: https://faircode.io/