skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
How to win friends and influence people - Dale Carnegie

This book starts off as a business book but it is the single most useful book I have ever read. For some people they will find that it's second nature, for those of us on the less socially aware side of the spectrum it's like an instruction manual for communicating effectively without coming off as a creep.
This article is typical of many that claim proven limits on the feasibility (or, in this case, the capabilities) of generalized artificial intelligence, in that it structures the argument in a way designed to avoid discussion of the issue.

It starts by claiming that there is no such thing as general intelligence. What specialized intelligence, then, is human intelligence? It's specialized for "being human". The author is apparently unaware that this tautological response eliminates the distinction between general and specialized intelligence, as one could just as validly (or vacuously) say that a superhuman intelligence is specialized in being what it is and doing what it does. The author has invalidated the hook on which he had hung his argument.

A lot of column-inches are expended on repeatedly restating that animal intelligences have co-evolved with their sensorimotor systems, which is a contingent fact of history, not a fundamental necessity for intelligence (as far as we know; but then the whole article is predicated on the feasibility of AI.) He raises the 'brain in a vat' trope, but no-one is suggesting that AIs must be disconnected from the external world. Furthermore, this line of argument ignores the fact that many of the greatest achievements of human intelligence have come from contemplating abstract ideas.

When the author writes "most of our intelligence is not in our brain, it is externalized as our civilization", he is confusing the achievements of intelligent agents for intelligence itself. When he writes that "an individual brain cannot implement recursive intelligence augmentation" he is confusing a limit on human capabilities for a fundamental limit on intelligence itself...

I am far from convinced that the singularity must follow from achieving human-level artificial intelligence, as we don't know how to get to the starting line, let alone know how the problem of bootstrapping intelligence scales, but the arguments presented here do nothing to persuade me that it is impossible.
QoS can't be implemented without payments to authenticate intent, but the argument would hold more water if the fees are merely transfer payments between users and Comcast gets $0 out of it, or ... Comcast has competitors.

Neither is true, so QoS basically should not be implemented and it's Comcast's own fault for being a rent-seeking monopoly.
Swift on the Server: State of the Union (video with transcript)
Bitcoin is Tcp/ip happening all over again but even a solid technology can experience economic bubbles, I think if bitcoin succeeds it will cannibalize part of the gold market and will go to the moon , but I can see a correction in the near term because its going up to fast and too soon. Sorry for my english ESL here peace
> I believe that owning something like a share in America would align all of us in making the country as successful as possible—the better the country does, the better everyone does—and give more people a fair shot at achieving the life they want. And we all work together to create the system that generates so much prosperity.

And here I thought I was getting a slice of the GDP when I get a paycheck every 2 weeks.
If you care about net neutrality you vote for politicians who want to legislate NN into law, and seeing the voting calls on NN (past and present) it's become a partisan issue.

Your best odds is to never vote for a GOPer if you care about NN. This can easily be reversed next election/presidential cycle.
you're clearly not trying hard enough.
Whole I agree with the underlying idea, the national level seems a bit arbitrary. Why not global gdp, distributed globally, to really help engage the most disenfranchised people? Why not at a state or city level, so you feel like you can have a real impact?
Matt Levine has been musing on some issues adjacent to this one over the last year, e.g.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-08-24/are-index...
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-10-26/maybe-ind...

The basic observation being that if we can get the benefits of capitalism when most equity is owned by a passive investment fund like an index tracker, then what's the problem with the state owning all the equity in that tracker, and redistributing the proceeds to the population?

Note that there are a few significant questions left unanswered in there, but the fundamental question of "if index trackers work why wouldn't communism" is quite provocative.
More importantly, it happened in a country which forced people off their land at gunpoint, into urban poverty, where they provided a huge supply of cheap, fungible, and utterly disposable factory labor.

But that would run counter to the neo-liberal narrative... After all, the rule of law serves to protect investments, not the peasant forced off his land.

Where was the rule of law to protect said peasants? Perhaps the rule of law isn't actually necessary for industrialization - as long as capital is protected, everything is all well and good. Unless you're a peasant.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclosure_Acts
Yes, I'm saying that they could have just served 500s to clients (even ones with regular log files), which would have backed off and retried later. Essentially what the "chillout" method does too, but it doesn't sound like the author had considered it.
There's always room for Props 2.0!

(I don't think this is that bad of an idea. Is there a lot of packaging and marketing on top? Sure, but the fundamental idea is fine.)
Similar to the sibling comment, I would also appreciate explanation.

Also, (for others who also missed it) I didn't understand the terms source and sink. this is what google gave me: "Sinking and Sourcing are terms used to define the control of direct current flow in a load. A sinking digital I/O (input/output) provides a grounded connection to the load, whereas a sourcing digital I/O provides a voltage source to the load."
Well the answer is that I underperform what could have been optimal. That means I sold most of my bitcoins between $200 and $1000 USD. Sure it hurts, but I still have some.

I got out of the stock market in 2006 because I thought it was overpriced too. I'm the type of person that looks at fundamentals / physics and I get in and out early. Bitcoin might be going to $50k a coin, but I bought at $3 USD and I still have a small amount. I still think the governments are going to ban it, but having a bit of exposure is averaging the risk.
Copywrite – An online dashboard for copywriters
That's true, but it is something that is potentially within your control as well.
Dancing instances
Will Bitcoin break $10,000 this week?
They used to have comments enabled on most stories. I remember, from the time they were covering Snowden, all their stories seemed to have comments enabled.

I believe they largely shut down comments for a couple of reasons:

- Like a lot of newspapers, they feel very strongly that they have to moderate comments very aggressively. They didn't use automated systems to do that, because often the comments they wanted to delete were highly scored, so they ended up paying an army of moderators. That's not affordable for an organisation that loses tens of millions of pounds a year.

- As their columnists got crazier the comments got more vitriolic. It became commonplace for me to read a loopy story and go down to the comments to find people pointing out factual errors by the writers, or flaming them for their extreme opinions. I think the staff got tired of commenters trying to bring them back down to earth.

Nowadays they only rarely seem to enable comments. Presumably to keep mod costs down.
It seems like the idea of a universal basic income would achieve much of the same long term goals, while not getting things tied up in the complications of treating the US like a business.

The problem that's trying to be solved by this is legitimate, but I don't see much value here beyond it sounding a bit clever. There are ideas out there already that aren't making headway for the same reasons this idea wouldn't.
Tumblr CEO David Karp is stepping down from the company
“Otherwise, we'll keep hating each other.”
I do agree with you (we should be tackling problems that have plagued humanity since we've been a species). I think it's just incredibly tough to find motivation when the cards are already stacked against your from the start. Largely thankless work even when you are successful. Why fight to get healthcare accessible to all when you could make the world "more open and connected" instead (and become a billionaire in the process)?
Progressively adopting your favourite framework
I owned a PowerMac G5, and still contend its introductory video is a thing of beauty: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSxXgtlX8ho

However, I remember mine being ridiculously loud. Ive promised me that more fans would mean less noise due to the "thermal zones" described in the above video, but, at least to my knowledge, that didn't pan out. It also had a habit of just blasting the fans in the middle of the night like an airplane if I remember correctly.
So and that source is as easy to read and step through as minified JS (didn't know something like that exists)?

And does the one who deployed the code has to use the non-lossy text format or can you simply convert any WASM binary to something human readable (with browser dev-tools)?
>> t one point, this came up a lot when eBooks were getting big--though, in that case, the publishers ended up being able to hold the line fairly effectively.

I still get miffed when the e-book costs more than the paper copy. It's not like I expect them to be free, but when I'm buying the same product without the physical distribution, I would expect it to be <= the paper price.
Feel free to explain how Something like $0.1 trillion out of several hundred trillion dollars. is not a comparison of Bill Gate's wealth to total GDP over the period he captured it.

I mean, I didn't painstakingly lay out my meaning, but there you go.
It does not even have to be that difficult these days.

Create VPN, spin up network namespace, move tunnel interface to network namespace, start resolver in that namespace, start VPN'ed applications in that namespace. if-up scripts for OpenVPN can do this for you[0].

As long as you operate the tunnel interface and the genuine network interface side by side some applications may simply decide to ignore default routes and explicitly bind to specific network interface. There are valid reasons to do so. For proper isolation you need to hide all the non-VPN interfaces.

[0] https://www.synkretie.net/writings/easy%20namespaced%20openv...
Hubris can be a powerful motive force. You get as big as the area you service, you think "I could do more than this", you get bigger, you service a larger area, you think "hey, is this enough..?" - and before you know it, the Manchester Guardian is a worldwide media company.
There is a "High Assurance Platform" configuration included that apparently the NSA uses to disable ME post-boot for their own hardware trustworthiness, so at least 1 body is asking for this.
If those new taxes primarily target the rich and large corporations it would be, since a disproportionate amount of money they earn is not being spent.
>are currently aimed towards the professional Media and Entertainment sector,

That's possible. Based on previous AWS services "democratizing" infrastructure services, it seems to also target other entities that are not in the media/entertainment center but still want a robust streaming platform.

The options for those dipping their toes into video streaming were:

(1) use Youtube, including live stream functionality[1]

(2) outsource to video streaming platform

(3) do-it-yourself -- difficult to implement before but easier now with the building blocks of AWS Media Services

In support of scenario (3), Alex Dunlap the General Manager at AWS Elementa wrote[2]:

>"This not only helps traditional video providers innovate faster, but it also opens up new opportunities for startups, government agencies, schools, and multinational enterprises that, before today, had limited access to premium-quality video technology."

[1] https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2474026?hl=en

[2] http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20171127005339/en/AWS-...
If net neutrality is lost, this could inspire a renewed invigoration of decentralized internet, e.g. Tor and P2P style. This may also inspire new ISP startups and create rapid innovation in networking.

The prospect of net neutrality being repealed definitely sucks, but great things can come from hitting rock bottom
You could try using a third party keyboard with a mac. I run an iMac with a mechanical keyboard, and the only thing I can hear is myself type :).
Isn't it more like they used that BTX standard or something like that?
The existing rules contain an exception to the no-throttling and no-blocking rules for "reasonable network management." Here is how the Commission has defined that term:

> A network management practice is a practice that has a primarily technical network management justification, but does not include other business practices. A network management practice is reasonable if it is primarily used for and tailored to achieving a legitimate network management purpose, taking into account the particular network architecture and technology of the broadband Internet access service.

It's debatable what exactly this means, but providing higher QoS for traffic that needs it--in a way that does not discriminate between providers of those services--would seem to be a strong candidate.
It was tried in the past. There were attempts to get newspapers to unite behind single group subscription schemes. The newspapers themselves rejected it. Problem is if a third party collects your income for you, you're not really independent anymore. Also, they don't want to receive pennies because someone read a single article they wrote, they want long term subscribers. Finally it requires them to all adopt paywalls which they didn't want to do back then (maybe these days it'd be different).

I wish I could remember the name of the scheme I'm thinking of.
Copyleft licensing: applying GPLv3 termination to GPLv2-licensed works
What's the difficulty in starting a private small business in the US? Most states permit incorporation/LLC formation online pretty quickly and you can always do business as a Sole Prop.

What's easier in the UK?
They can correct the record any time.
There is probably not as much money in ads as there used to be.

In the good old days there was no alternative to print media ads. Today there is so much more ad space available.
Civilian conservation corps, the make work program of the depression.
I think the effect on small businesses and farms are vastly overblown. In 2013, 20 small businesses and farms were affected. The idea that estate tax affects family businesses is mostly a stalking horse for extremely wealthy who just want to save themselves money and whose descendants would still receive plenty of money even with an inheritance tax.

https://americansfortaxfairness.org/tax-fairness-briefing-bo...
How China Helped Create First Crowd Developed Computer
> From the perspective of trying to get the budget balanced, taxing wealth is probably the single most efficient way to do it.

Why? As a total layman, wouldn't it be incredibly inefficient? If we tax the wealth of, say, the top 100 richest Americans, wouldn't that cause some pretty terrible downsides? If we force them to sell their holdings, wouldn't that ripple through the economy?

Take Jeff Bezos--if you forced him to sell a significant portion of his stock, wouldn't that depress the Amazon stock price, which affects a significant number of other individuals and businesses?
But you did not do so out of the goodness your heart. They provided a product which provided enough utility to justify the cost. Producing such a product is where the value is created, not in the purchase of said product.
But 10.7 is not PowerPC-compatible! You probably mean 10.5?
What would be a similar resource but for Ruby?
I certainly remember Wimpy, it was great back then - you got your food on a real actual plate :)

Something which is disappearing at the high and the low end of the market these days!
If you are getting a $70k salary AFTER taxes, which would then be roughly 90-100k BEFORE taxes, then that'd be equal in the bay area to what? 150k-170k? I don't think this is an equal comparison.
It's less a system of thought and more a way to think less.

If truth does not exist for a person, then that person can stand, sneering on the sidelines at those who dare stand up for whatever this or whatever that. Or they can squirrel themselves away, safe in their own make believe world.

Some people need that illusory superiority or distance to get through life.

At least until they hear a knock at the door at night.
> in a way that does not discriminate between providers of those service

Exactly. Anti-NN (broadly) wants to be able to discriminate on the basis of provider, not service.
Thanks, that was what I wanted to know.
Actually, with minified JS you do not have to "decompile" anything. It is just pressing the pretty print button in your dev-tools and you can use your normal debugger (just without propper names) to step through the code.
This article has too many holes to count and reads more like someone in denial.

---

BUT, as an aside: I think a decent argument exists for the non-certainty of intelligence explosion.

The argument goes like this: it takes an intelligence of level X to engineer an intelligence of level X+1.

First, it may well be that humans are not an intelligence of level X, and reach our limit before we engineer an intelligence superior to our own.

Furthermore, even if we do, it may also be that it takes an intelligence of level X+2 to engineer an intelligence of level X+2 (Etc. for some intelligence level X+n.), in which case we at most end up with an AI only somewhat superior to ourselves, but no God-like singularity (for example, we end up with Data from Star Trek TNG, who in season 3, episode 16 fails to engineer an offspring superior to himself -- sure, Data is far superior to his human peers in some aspects, but not crushingly so).
Critical Exim Security Vulnerability: Disable Chunking
Thats cool and all, but now do it with a hyperloop
Certainly. But there is also an order of magnitude gain available (in theory, at least) if you can get in on an early round.
An update on the fight for the free and open internet [Reddit Blog]
The idea pitched for Stellar is very feel-good, but there are a number of drawbacks. First of all, the creator is a little sketchy. The way he acted when he bailed on Ripple and set up Stellar was very childish. Second, the non-profit status is questionable. There are a lot of unknown people that stand to gain a lot of money if the currency increases in value. They claim to give away a lot of their currency, but very few people actually claim it, so in the end, the company itself gets to claim it (and set the stage for a profit down the road). They did get IBM to throw their name in to the mix, but even IBM said this was temporary.

I don't know. I just don't get a good feeling from them.
There is a page on the site that can help you with this
https://www.dnsleaktest.com/how-to-fix-a-dns-leak.html
I don't think even recursive self improvement is needed for superintelligent AI. Evolution often gets stuck in local maxima. It could be that there are relatively simple algorithms much smarter than humans and that as soon as we find one the AI will be much smarter than us without any self improvement.

In the same way that birds fly with flapping wings, but human flying machines with propellers were immediately stronger and shortly thereafter faster than any bird.
Thanks. Will do some research on it.
Oops! You're right. Good catch.
I take "legitimate network management purpose" to mean improving some metric of overall usage satisfaction. This is tricky, and already leaves a lot of room to maneuver.
QoS is decided by the user/service. Paid prioritization is decided by the ISP.

Every connection can have a max high-priority bandwidth and a max best-effort bandwidth, so people won't benefit from just marking every connection as high-QoS.
I’m kind of hoping for a cube again.
Tumblr founder and CEO David Karp is leaving the company
Review of the Tech in Ghana Conference
Who is to decide the direction of our shared, aligned economy and development? Why is this alignment preferable to a more competitive free market or a command economy (China)?
Prioritization is only necessary or useful when bandwidth is scarce and your endpoints would use more than you have if they could. The best solution for all of the applications listed is more capacity, not prioritization.

What, then, does their eagerness for prioritization tell us? It tells us that these companies would like to stop investing so much in increasing capacity, and instead squeeze as much money as they can out of their existing infrastructure.

They're going to make things worse (or let them gradually become worse over time) just so they can charge extra money to people who need something better.

Beyond that, prioritization is not in conflict with net neutrality. If my ISP wants to offer me a premium subscription that prioritizes my traffic over normal subscribers, that's fine. Where we run into trouble is when they start doing this for other people who aren't their customers. If they want to charge me more for better service, that's fine. If they want to charge Netflix more to provide me with better service, that's not fine.
It's part of HN's cultural fabric. It'd be a shame to lose it.

A useful exercise: What's the difference between answering the title and writing a tl;dr?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7789697

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13028168
ya right, look at all the other "feedback" they have ignored on the macbook and macbook pro.
>For example, abolish the Senate, end the electoral college, end gerrymandering, and reform campaign financing.

I can get behind a lot of those but the Senate? What's your problem with it? Seems like the founders had very good reason to create it.
GitHub Pages: Free Static React Hosting
> Corporations have been operating under the mistaken belief that they are legally obligated to maximize shareholder returns for a couple of decades now

Thats because its very expensive when you don't, from the shareholder lawsuits.

You can try to scale up your worldview without getting sued to oblivion, but it is a parallel fantasy.
> because Gawker committed a crime

What criminal statute was Gawker convicted of breaking?

It would behoove everyone to understand the difference between civil and criminal law. A tort is not a crime. They were found to have caused injury to the reputation of a person. That is not a crime.
Most alts in the top 10 market caps just follow the swings of bitcoin anyway