skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Thanks a lot for your thoughts!

You're right. I would recommend the same thing to others launching on PH from now on. I didn't have any system in place to engage with users after they try it out. My product was easy to get started with, but also easy to forget.

Glad my mistakes can be lessons for others ;-).

My short term goal for NameQL is to make a really great free offering: support more TLDs, smarter suggestions, and to check for related trademarks, etc. For profitability, I was hoping that affiliate links would be enough to generate a decent revenue. It doesn't seem to be very effective, though. I'm considering adding value-added features for a small price, but I haven't planned out what those will be.
Because otherwise people will just submit random picture for the lulz
I'm _assuming_ the only reason a human representative is doing this is so the system doesn't get abused. Like say I upload a photo claiming it is of myself but it's actually the advertisement a competitor of mine is using. If they didn't verify it was something that SHOULD be removed they'd automatically remove my competitor's posting of their advertisement every time they posted it.

Granted I really wish this was all done on the client so Facebook didn't gain access to the images themselves but I'm not sure of a good way around it to verify the image is something they should remove and not an abuse of the system.
"I cannot be bothered to look after my offspring therefore I will downvote whomever doubts that education-by-internet for two year olds is appropiate"
I got a couple friends to sign up with me and we are having a blast.
Presenting the pictures of a quantum computer with adbobe flash is an impressive combination of technologies. I hope they are use a different technology stack to develop the OS of that machine ;-)
> they may be able to get around this by the "data is integral to the function of the business" exemption

That's probably more of an "integral to fulfilling its contractual obligations to those the data is about". It's more complicated than that, but the point is that you cannot simply declare it the purpose of your business to collect personal information and thus be exempt from data protrection regulation.
1) ML is still going to be a tiny niche in numbers of all the software things that need to be done, it's just a comparably new and trendy niche, so it gets talked about.

2) In most ML projects, the majority of the necessary code written has nothing to do with ML, it's all the data transformation, transformation pipeline, service backend, data management tools, etc etc; so in a multi-person ML project usually most developers don't touch the ML part.
Oh, and we use the basic Ghost theme, Casper, with some design tweaks.
Why Analytics Are Your Safety Blanket
You need to define how to order things in other languages (though not in languages where you can automatically derive implementations like Haskell or languages with built-in polymorphic comparison like OCaml) but you don't need to define how to swap elements over and over.
> It's hard for "normal" people to imagine how sociopaths or those with destructive aims will behave when given flexible tools like this.

Given enough time, you just need one misanthropic individual.

Edit: and it doesn't just need to be CRISPR. It could be AI, fusion, you name it. The power of the individual to impose their will on larger and larger numbers of people and parts of the planet keeps increasing with technology.
I guess you consider me one of those offended, and let me assure you, I am not.

It is just weird if a technical presentation doesn't even mention the environment (lack of a better word) at all, but considers PowerPC multicore history for Mac relevant, which technically I consider not.

There are people out there, that don't consider technology or innovation to be Apple or other-vendor specific, heck, go ahead and stone me, I don't differentiate between Macs and PCs since Apple uses Intel CPUs.

Even further, I totally don't care who invented it.
> Maybe Nanni was also instructed to throw it at Ea-nasir's head

Well it does say that it is slightly damaged.
This made me weep a little bit. Such loneliness in this world!

I feel like this is what the logical endpoint of total capitalism would look like- things have been headed in this direction for a while with first the making of household items, and farming, then the preparation of food (restaurants) and the raising of children (schools) now performed by paid labor. I guess it could go even farther, one could imagine a future in which all relationships are mediated through money.. it's not a future I like.
Every programming language I've ever used has been open source. I have fixed small issues myself, and I know that I or someone else could fork them if the current maintainers quit.

Whether developers have the right to the source is debatable. But personally, I wouldn't stake the life of my projects on a language (or database) whose life depends on one entity and their business model. And it seems to me that others feel the same way, and that the trends are toward OSS - .NET went open source, Oracle is giving way to PostgreSQL, Azure now supports Linux, etc.
go would be seen as a project of insanity if not been made by google; and would most likely be in a field of dead language husks
I'm not disagreeing with you (I've previously criticized Go here) but I think it's helpful to think of Go as a more "modern" C. A lot of the warts you see here (Cludgey POSIX interfaces, no smart scheduling around channel error handling, bad reflection semantics, etc.) are the same as you'd find in C.
No, your career is not doomed.
Follow your insight.
Keep reinventing yourself, keep curious, keep learning be it in your career or AI/ML or anything.

Try to make friends, get involved in projects.

Good luck!
It should be obvious to folks on HN why a Github issue that may go completely unseen by a large swath of the go community, or +1's which can be gamed/trolled, should not be taken as a valid measure.

But it must be explained I guess.
Thank you for sharing. Here's the tl;dr:

47% of Android users sampled (51 out of 107) « said things like “iPhone users are a cult,” “I hate Apple,” “only stupid people use iPhones,” or “I hate the iPhone” when explaining to me why they chose an Android device. Seriously, people actually used the word hate »

5% of iPhone users sampled (6 out of 112) « said something negative about Android or about a specific Android phone manufacturer. Not a single person make a negative blanket statement about Android users in general. »
I've been a professional web developer for 8 years. I don't have a C.S. degree either, though I did go through calculus (not really relevant). Honestly, I think it's far more important to be a solid programmer than learning the hype of the month. That's not to say you shouldn't keep up with developments in technology though. I think it's just a fad that will fade out. Sure, it sounds like you can do some cool stuff such as image generation or natural language processing. However, I think those applications are not as numerous as the posts on HN would lead one to believe. Not everything needs some magical AI to synergize the widgets.
Recommend this use the more accurate article title, "Radioactive Cloud Over Europe Hints At Accident Farther East." The expert cited said this doesn't sound like a nuclear plant accident, but a nuclear reprocessing plant accident.
Are you suggesting that it would be better if an entity should "own" / be in control of all information about it? I'm not trying to straw-man your argument, but I can't find any other self-consistent scenario in which what you describe as morally repugnant, ridiculous and dehumanizing is "solved".

Assuming that is what you meant, consider: Equifax's CEO owns all information about Equifax, looks at all this negative press recently and decides it should be scrubbed from the Internet / all publications / etc. If you meant it only to apply to people, lets play the Godwin's Law card and suggest that Hitler (or his descendants) wishes to scrub all information about the holocaust, etc.

I think that scenario is far, far worse.
"...has to wait for everyone alive to die..."

Certainly not. It's all based on the purchase/exercise/offering date. Let's take it to the extreme: if homicide had been legal, and society decided we needed to outlaw it, it stands to reason that homicide committed before the law was enacted would not be prosecuted, but only those cases happening one or after that date.
This really isn't too difficult to do, but it is a time sink I'd rather not have to deal with. With Spring in particular there's a huge amount of complexity so it can take a bit of time to determine exactly what's going on. Whereas with something like Go, I generally have full control over my applications control flow and if I need to look at a libraries source it's typically very straightforward and to the point.
No you're fine. What you're seeing is the emergence of another subfield in computer science.

Your question isn't to dissimilar from: Is my career as a backend developer doomed if I don't become a JavaScript/React developer?
No.

1997: Is my career doomed if I don't become a web developer? No.

2007: Is my career doomed if I don't become a mobile developer? No.

2017: Is my career doomed if I don't become an AI/ML developer? No.

2027: Is my career doomed if I don't become a/an [...]? No.
> - No supervision tree. Erlang existed far before Go but they didn't learn from this key feature. But it would greatly enhance Go to have it

This is the one thing in your list that I don't recognise. What is a supervision tree? Can you (or another Erlang programmer) point to your favourite reference?
Are any languages currently closed source and still popular?
I would never work for a company that doesn't allow early exercise. Whether or not you plan to do it, you have to wonder about the attitude of those in charge if they don't allow early exercise.
The standard complaint about DS9 is its merely a ripoff of Babylon 5. I have not been able to stomach watching B5; if I ever have a couple hundred hours of spare time I'll attempt it, until then I'll have to trust other's opinion. Something not often mentioned is the sheer expense of these series; hundreds of hours of limited spare time have to be invested to experience it all. I watched all of DS9 when it was new and then decades later just a couple years ago; it was pleasant but compared to the alternatives I'm not sure it was a wise use of my time. I tried B5 but after a dozen or so hours invested I had barely scratched the surface yet was bored. These series are just painfully expensive. For a non-sci fi comparison try "The Sopranos" where if you're not addicted its very hard to get addicted and the time investment is insane like hundreds of hours required.

Garak is the most interesting character in all of Trek. The linked story was very human focused, but if you get past the species-ism then Garak is clearly the most interesting character in all of Trek. He certainly has the most unique and interesting lines of dialogue.

There are strange human sociology messages in DS9 that are kinda unrealistic. In DS9 land, individuals are extremely newness-seeking and would never interact with someone of their own kind if there's any possibility of interacting with a stranger, and the stranger the better; this political requirement has no relationship with reality of course, and as such the series suffers under a pallor of weirdness. Friendship and family and culture feel at best bolted on, or at worst are outright ridiculous.

There is some relationship between DS9 and Ian Banks Culture-verse, echos of one in the other. Both are kind of a window into a future that does not contain social media and the problems resulting from social media, which is kinda weird, like experiencing a science fiction novel from just before the broadcast era that naturally does not explore the numerous effects of broadcasting. Off the top of my head I can't think of any hard sci fi that is set substantially in the future yet contains aspects of social media from a decade ago, although someone here probably has some good suggestions.
Why? I mean, if anyone really wants to read the originals, they can learn cursive then. But why aren't transcripts enough for the average person?
Not necessarily. You could just take the standard deduction without regard to whether or not it was good for you to do so.

Many people are in the situation where they just know that there's no point in itemizing, and more will be in that boat when state/local income taxes are excluded and the standard deduction is raised.
Should Children Form Emotional Bonds with Robots?
I actually experienced the opposite. Interfaces in go work so well, partly because you can create an interface which automatically gets satisfied by existing structures. For example I often use a requestDoer interface which only has the http clients "Do" method.

I'm using Goland so I have jump to interface from any structure implementing it. So that's another one that gets solved by tooling.

The structurally typed interfaces are actually my favorite part about Go probably.
At my last job we did a comparison between Vue and React before rewriting a major frontend application.

We did a POC in both React/Vue and ended up using Vue mainly due to the following reasons:

Single File Components

Single file components (.vue files) is the best thing about Vue.
I understand this might be a personal preference, but we wanted to avoid CSS-IN-JS.
Our designer could churn out neat html/css, but was a beginner in Javascript.
With Vue's single file components, he could also hack parallely with us while iterating on html/css.

Standard / Official way of doing things

This again is a personal preference but Vuejs comes with a recommended way to do a majority of things.
Vuex(state management) and Vue-Router are provided/maintained by same Vue core team.

React at times can be overwhelming for beginnners, just because of the amount of choice available

Example:

Google Search for 'React CSS style' [https://www.google.co.in/search?q=react+css+style] points to a bunch of links all of which link to valid solutions, but I have to go through a few of them before I get what I am looking for.

Similar search for 'Vue CSS style' [https://www.google.co.in/search?q=vue+css+style] all top links lead to official documenation on vuejs.org.

Excellent documentation

Also, as a team we were primarily writing Angular 1 when we decided to choose a frontend framework for newer projects.
I feel this also made our transition to Vue easier vis a vis React
If you're worried about this, I would recommend learning about the "complements" to AI -- data preparation and distributed computing. Those both involve a lot of conventional software skills.

What you don't get from the flashy news articles is that a lot of ML work is programming and sys admin work: writing code to prepare the data, and a cycle of tweaking and re-running large jobs (including debugging them when they run out of resources, etc.).

You can also read papers like this which talk about the software engineering challenges of machine learning systems.

"Machine Learning: The High Interest Credit Card of Technical Debt"

https://research.google.com/pubs/pub43146.html

There's a big difference between "we got this thing to work once" (which is most of the new articles you read), and a system that does useful work over a long period of time. That latter is what you should know about as a software developer.
This is a bad HN comment, not because you don't have anything solid to contribute (I'm sure you do), but because by choosing an uncharitable reading of the OP just in order to smack it down, you make the discussion less specific and substantive.

That's why we have this guideline: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Honestly, no. Because the flip side of that stance is that all information that has anything to do with me belongs solely to me. That just seems...naive? Unrealistic? I certainly don't find it morally repugnant or dehumanizing that someone can take a picture of me and keep it. And that's probably the mildest counterexample...

IMO it's only a problem if I did not give away that information. Thing is, we give away a lot of data about ourselves.
> If you have itemized before and no material changes have occurred in your tax situation then you don’t have to itemize again.

Explain this a bit more? I mean, it's technically true for most taxpayers that they aren't forced to itemize, but I doubt that's what you meant.
Except, it's not a compelling replacement of C. The type system doesn't give me good assurances about program behavior at compile time. Go inserts itself as a heavy unwanted additional layer for cases where I want C. Especially considering that now my program will have GC pauses.
I doubt it. The problem is the pay in a small town doesn't make up for the lost opportunity due to networking and having a selection of varied employers and colleagues. Also, the pay would have to incorporate a risk premium in case you lose your job, as it is perceived that it will be harder to find a new one.
Personally happy to see that the new tax code appears to reduce the inequality between staff and executives, with regard to compensation and taxation. I'm a strong advocate for leveling the playing field for EVERYONE; because it eliminates (or reduces to the extent possible) the ability to negotiate these special options for "deferred" compensation.... for which the vast majority of us will never qualify.
You know, being able to make a microprocessor from scratch and being able to supply the right instructions to get what you want -- these are different domains. As long as you can understanding what Machine Learning is _doing_ I think getting practice with some libraries and watching a lecture or two will give you the ability to play with and train them.

Basically, you have a training set of data that has "this is the data in" and "these are the outputs I expect." so if you are training something to learn the different animals of the animal kingdom, your data set might be portraits of giraffes and gorillas, and your outputs might be simple labels like "gorilla, snake, giraffe, tucan" etc. The neural net part of it is like the parameters you can hone. You can hone how many layers deep it is (try a layer for each dimension, like if you are tracking 5 facial features, you can try a network of roughly 5 layers). You have an "activation function" [usually sigmoid] because the _neurons_ sum their inputs and only fire on activation threshold (like your brain neurons).

Anyway, don't let the maths hold you back. When you can find a Python library on neural networks and play with it well enough to get results, you have pretty much figured out the puzzle. Not many people have deep intuition on how it works exactly, because the parameters (the "brain" of "neurons") is really an abstract mathematical object that is adjusted regressively over the course of learning [the training data].

Don't be discouraged, there is plenty of growth in software, and unless you are trying to help make a breakthrough in ML or "artifical intelligence" which, in my opinion, is something we have not even come close to touching, you don't really need to know the nitty gritty. The promising modern day results in ML came about because someone wanted to model a brain with a computer and ended up learning how to pattern match.

(Results match Data? Accept : Adjust)
One cure for this is to have someone who cares solely about simplicity, as an ideal above all else, in charge of technical decisions.

When you're hyper-vigilant about simplicity, you end up creating the simplest design that meets the goals. It takes a little extra time, but it's so worth it.
So if programmers are wizards, who is our Voldemort that wants us to rule the world? ;)
Huh. That are exactly the reasons I would give if I had to explain that hobby to somebody. ;-)

Feels kind of good to know that I am not the only one doing this.

When it goes really well, programming is akin to what I think meditation must be like. But explaining that to people who have never programmed themselves is hard.
At least at my employer, the deferred compensation plan is only offered to high-level management employees ("Director" and above). So this doesn't seem to be a great loss for the average engineer.

If other people who are individual contributors, or even low level managers, have access to an employer deferred compensation plan (different from my experience), I would love to hear about it.

(As a highly paid engineer, I would totally make use of this deferred compensation scheme to lower my tax burden by smoothing out my income, if I could. But I've never been able to.)
I'm not sure what you mean? Netflix got sued for not following the ADA over that exact issue, and it looks like they came into compliance years ago after settling and landing on a captioning framework with the National Association for the Deaf.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/11/tech/web/netflix-subtitles-set...
>the world around us seems to be falling apart because of political schemes. I simply do not care.

Then maybe go to a forum for people who don't care whether or not the world is falling apart. The rest of us, well, we live in the world, so we kinda care.
Are you asking me to Google That For You?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=american+children+cursive
That's a clever way to solve the issue. I think most Go codebases could benefit from such explicit checks where the language does not provide an unambiguous solution.

The interface issue has been on my mind for quite sometime. I had thought maybe declaring all interfaces in seperate files might help with the structure (like having the definitions in a header file in C), but the Go standard library does not use this approach. Interfaces and implementations are scattered across files and modules. Maybe I'm being too clever and we all know that Rob Pike always says that programmers should not be too clever. Maybe I should loosen up a bit, and treat Golang more like a pragmatic language. They did the best they could and produced a wonderful language. Any additional feature such as generics and explicit implements statements would have made the language much more complex.
Here's the research team's talk from last year's 33C3 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JCUrG7ERIE
My favorite passage:

The idea is to create “a deeper and deeper emotional connection,” Sofman said. “And if you neglect [the toy robot], you feel the pain of that.”

When he told me this, I felt a flash of not-quite-anger. It seemed almost cruel to design a robot that could play on a young kid’s emotions. And I had never considered that, in the coming human–robot conflagration, robots might take over simply by expertly manipulating us into letting them win.
Youtube is built entirely on their content, but they have to censor themselves because otherwise youtube might screw them.
Yeah I'm curious how their hashing mechanism works. Like, is it a straight up sha hash of the image or something a little more sophisticated that wouldn't be fooled by minor edits? Though in the latter case can that even technically be considered hashing? I guess it all depends on how they're doing it which brings us back to my first question...
Would you please stop posting unsubstantive and/or inflammatory comments to HN? You've done this quite a lot, and we eventually ban such accounts.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html