skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Please permit me to play the pessimistic man on the street: If Facebook can deploy AI to detect the early signs of suicide, why can't they deploy AI to detect "fake news" or those susceptible to "fake news"?

It's not about detection success rates, but economic outcomes if they screw up. If Facebook claims to detect fake news, but does it incorrectly they will be pilloried in the press (again). If they detect suicidal behaviour wrong the victim of said detection has little recourse.

In short, it's far safer to use vulnerable individuals as guinea pigs for AI than organizations that buy (digital) ink by the barrel.
In my family it was a running joke that anything that broke in an alarmingly unsafe or surprisingly stupid way, "Must have been made in the USA." Through the 70s, 80s, and early 90s, many categories of products, including autos, made in the USA were terrible. That's been mostly resolved, I think. There are still really cheap products made in the USA, of course, but I think on the whole there's been a real effort to modernize, automate, and improve quality across the board. Japanese and later Chinese manufacturers pretty much made it mandatory, I think. The US companies that didn't make those changes likely didn't survive.

One fun example of this "must have been made in the USA" joke (which turned out to be correct when we checked the label) was when my dad was installing a gas fireplace for my mom. It had a faulty shut-off valve, so it'd turn the fire off pretty much at random, but it wouldn't shut off the gas completely. So, the fire would go out, the pilot would go out with a loud pop, but gas would continue to flow slowly. Luckily it did it while we were testing it rather than some time later when no one was paying attention. US-made cars were pretty much universally awful through that era, as well. (My mom's Dodge van during that era tried to kill her multiple times through comically catastrophic failures. My dad drove a Toyota.)
You'll also get help with tax planning. This matters a lot when you have a complex estate.
My intuition is that it doesn’t matter, since that is basically the core function of copyright. No need to explicitly state it. You don’t even need to mark the work as copyrighted, since all works benefit from copyright automatically.

On the other hand, the explicit, implicit, or expected refusal of the owner to license it for certain purpose weighs in favor of fair use. This is because of the fourth statutory factor, the effect on the market for the original. It’s harder for the owner to argue that you are depriving them of a market if they refuse to serve that market. It can go the other way though if the owner can show that the use will nevertheless affect demand for the work in the markets the owner does want to enter.

The expected inability to get licensing is also one of the reasons for parody, and satire to a lesser extent[1], enjoying a presumption of fair use. Owners are unlikely to license someone to mock their work, but there is a fundamental free speech interest in allowing such mockery and commentary.

[1] Parody is primarily commentary on the original work, while satire is using the original for commentary on other issues.
It's the same in the US. Registration isn't required. It just allows you to recover specific statutory damages, rather than just compensatory damages (you don't need to prove actual damages if you register).
Long before WWW this problem was addressed with licensed stock images. It's a commercial project, not significantly transformative, and wouldn't be worth arguing fair use over.

The practice of downloading a random image from the web and modifying it is a good way to learn, but not a good way to work professionally.

Every design firm has a subscription to something like Getty Images these days. I suspect this was done in-house. Nobody should think to do something like this on a major production. It's just asking for trouble. (not that the major studios don't have their own snafus and that this kind of a thing is unheard of, but it mostly happens with things like daily news where people are trying to push things out as fast as they can)
If you're into game programming, Casey Muratori's Handmade Hero [1] project is worth checking. From the website description, “Handmade Hero is an ongoing project to create a complete, professional-quality game accompanied by videos that explain every single line of its source code”.

[1] https://handmadehero.org/
Might depend on whether you mean mean or median, whether you're talking about base salary or total compensation, and a couple other factors.

I would be surprised if the difference in the average for a midwest state university versus Stanford varied significantly after controlling for labour market (i.e. people taking jobs in St Louis or Minneapolis are probably getting paid a lot less than people taking jobs in the Bay Area or Seattle).

Of course, UIUC is a "midwest state university" and it is on (or very close to) the same level as Stanford.
Advent of code 2017 dropping midnight Dec First EST
I think this is a really good idea.

Also it would be interesting to test adding a compulsory text field when someone downvotes to include why you down voted.

Then add votes to down-vote reasons. Over time you would develop a good database of people who add value through downvoting (vs I disagree mentality) and weight these accordingly for better auto-moderation.
...are either doomed or are doing to jack up pricing some day.

...Thus dooming themselves to be, if nothing else, undercut by their own previous strategies.
Huh. Could you elaborate more on the relationship between Facebook editorial policy and the plight of the Rohingya?
> and fail to comply with it themselves

This photo has no copyright protection because it does not meet the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_of_originality so Netflix is not doing anything wrong here.
reading wikipedia blog post:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net...

"We believe that free access to public interest resources can be provided in a manner that keeps the playing field level and avoids net neutrality issues."

The program is partnering with carriers to give away access to Wikipedia (although no money is exchanged between the carrier and Wikipedia). It doesn't sound like it avoids NN issues. Giving away access to a certain website.. sounds exactly like an NN issue.

And I don't think Wikipedia's competitors would think this "keeps the playing field level" either. How would they compete against Wikipedia, when their users have to pay to access their service, but dont have to pay to access wikipedia?

Wasn't this the same issue we had with Facebook's Zero program in India?
It's a leveling down of standards.

The new global standard for the conditions a factory worker may expect is that they'll work 12 hour days, live in a barracks, get paid every three months and suffer routine exposure to dangerous amounts of Benzene---to say nothing of the wages. And if you can't or won't work under these conditions then you're non-employable.

So American worker gets thrown out because he's suddenly insufficiently downtrodden to be a competitive worker in his former line of work.

And maybe the Benzene is worth it to the average Chinese worker. I can't speak for him. But I can say that if it's not, he'll lose his job like the American did and they'll find someone even cheaper somewhere else.

PS: I guarantee you that there are no separate factories in China for export into the EU where workers receive EU-level protections. Don't be daft. The European markets are full of goods produced in horrible conditions.
Linking to SCP is almost as bad for productivity as linking to tv tropes.
> We should tax money that sits idle and provide tax benefits to money invested

>> You would force people to consume?

That's a complete misreading of the comment
“Bloggable” LOL
The "Seriously, calling the tech support line for a copyright infringement?" parts sounds like it could be calling out the author for doing something you feel should have been the obviously wrong to them.

I can't argue against having that part in there -- I wasn't personally offended I, and it's important to give what you write your own voice -- but it is good to know the kind of reactions that your writing will illicit.

(Just a side story -- I once posted a comment on a forum that was entirely meant to be sarcastic. Someone missed my sarcasm and responded with what turned out to be valuable information. Since then, I've tried my best to strip anything that might be unnecessarily negative out of my comments, but I'm sure stuff slips through....)
If the ME is drawing this directly to the GPU, it wouldn't show up on a screenshot. A picture would work of course.

Also, I would guess that it only works if you're using the integrated Intel GPU.

Non-xkcd reference: http://www.bash.org/?291262
Nope. There’ll probably be something in the contract that protects the client against this sort of stuff, and the agency is in hot water now. But beyond that, there’s no real process in place. For big projects the cost of sourcing images will be billed back to the client and so everyhing works like it’s meant to. But I imagine in this case, the DVD packaging was a last minute ad hoc peice of work where the client asked a bunch of agencies (or the clients main agency asked a bunch of smaller agencies) to pitch a design for a fixed budget on a short deadline. And probably a small budget.

The agency asks a junior designer to turn the brief around in a day and says “there’s no budget, but we need to keep this client happy (if they’re the main agency) or we need to impress this client (if they’re a subcontracted agency or an agency not on the clients book).

And that’s where things went wrong. No money. No time. And a junior designer eager to impress.
I don't understand... I live in NYC on a $130k income and am having trouble figuring out ways to spend more than 50% of pre-tax.

What exactly are people spending on? I'd think it'd be really easy for people in tech companies to save upwards of 70% with high salaries and the performance of tech stocks.
You need both but what is more valuable, the sculptor or the clay?
Shame on Netflix. They should have used a VHS-C in an adapter. Way to maintain continuity guys.
I don't think so, since there are a bunch of clothing companies in there, and 90% of them get most of their fabric overseas.
I completely agree with that, and it isn't crazy to write a blog post about it. That said, a blog post that had his written letter to the general counsel and Netflix's unsatisfactory response to that, would seem to merit escalation. Dr. Lui seems to have made a good start but it is early days yet it seems to me.
I tried do-release-upgrade on 17.04, and it failed. Maybe they should work on that first?

(The reason it failed was that I have the arm64 architecture installed to get cross tools, and those repos somehow return 404.)
Look I don't think you are wrong in the sense that your advice would be bad for the people taking it, I just think you are wrong in terms of the actual numbers you suggest.

15% of your money in something technically promising but risky isn't really worth the time you'd have to put into the research for it. Put in 50% at the very least. You'll make money if you are right and if you're bad at investing it will be safe enough for you to survive retirement.
Bear in mind that what will occur is that armed police will be dispatched to take the unfortunate individual into custody and transport them to a hospital to be involuntarily locked up in the mental health ward for psychiatric evaluation and it can be some number of days before they get a judicial hearing to attempt to secure their own release. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_commitment_interna...) By all reports, it can be a highly traumatic and humiliating process.

All this, based on some algorithm of unknown quality flagging posts for evaluation and reporting by moderators with no psychiatric or other medical training. And somehow this is supposed to be a good thing?
I don't know about international and only know the basics in the US. As a photographer I own the copyright the moment I create an image but to actually be able to sue for copyright infringements (and get money) I would need to register with the copyright office. I can register an individual image or bulk. If I don't register I don't think a lawyer would take my case.
right, in my example, they take two candies. my point is not that the democrats aren't somewhat corrupt, but that the level of scope insensitivity that you have to have not to see a difference between republicans and democrats should probably count as a disability.
> I downvoted your parent comment for misspelling Gandhi[0]

That's not a valid reason to downvote, unless you're sure they did it purpose as an insult. You could have just pointed out the error.
Oh, surprised to see my old post up here!

The closest to a game I ever got with this was dwim: http://hcs64.github.io/dwim-game (keyboard controls)

It has the basic idea of figuring out what the symbols mean, but I took the "deception" part out.
I think snapchat should have a longer format video interface inside it and then maybe after that is successful pivot it to a apple tv app / separate app / website..

Amazon can open up twitch into a more direct youtube competitor.. Apple could buy vimeo and do something similar, and/or build out their own HQ video sharing site.
I understand what you’re saying. I simply don’t see another way.

I get you’re concerned that if someone were to be given an accusation they could lose their career and then we could find out later that it was all fake. Nothing legal went down, society simply decided to shun them.

Outside of making it illegal to publish any kind of accusation in less it has been proven in a court of law… I don’t see how we could avoid people deciding to shun the accused.

And maybe that’s fair given the number of women who have had their career is ruined because they chose not to work day in and day out with someone who harassed and/or raped them. Who had to leave the workforce instead, or take another job and start at the bottom of the ladder again.

There’s no good solutions to ANY of this. It’s a giant mess. We’ll just have to see how it society sorts it out.

In the end the long victimized group has gotten some temporary power. That seems like a step forward even if it raises the possibility of false accusations a small amount.
Your medical system treats people as beasts. On world good, there are many other countries who contribute to world good as much as the US. As a Canadian, my impression is that most of the US genuinely only cares for themselves and has an over inflated ego.

I'd sooner see resources poured into countries that really give a damn about the world.
> And Windows Phone 8.1 was actually a good platform.

Also, Nokia was a world leader. Imagine what all that manufacturing and design capability could have accomplished. Sad waste.
Great link! In fact according to this Dr. Lui actually did all of the right things. Let’s recap:

The link says “make a copy of the infringed work.” It seems from this blog post and what he sent to the customer service and PR link he certainly did that.

“Determine that the use was actually theft.” Again I think Dr. Lui did that as well. It seems he has at least a basic understanding of copyright law.

“Do some research.” Well he has a hard time finding the corporate information for Netflix, or even a phone number. In his post he points this out. So as a means to find that information he did contact customer service. I guess he could have contacted their isp ;) which is another suggestion that your link gives. But I’m not sure he would have found any additional help by doing so.

My point is two fold. First, your helpful checklist isn’t actually that helpful in this case. Second, he actually followed all of those steps. I guess he could have googled for Netflix corporate. This would have shown him officers and directors. Whether that would be useful is hard to tell. It’s also important to remember that General Counsel is an American term. It does not always translate outside of the US.
> But if we assume that Facebook is acting purely for the benefit of the society and the people, I think this is a great step.

Why would anyone ever assume this? Does anything in Facebook's past suggests that this might be the case? And even if the motives of the individuals who spearheaded this were pure is there any reason to think that this won't change in the future as people at Facebook change roles or move on?
> That said, many of those brands are of exceptional quality.

but then it's nothing about "being American". I can point you to extremely high quality producers in France, Japan, Belgium, Switzerland... so what does it say? Citizenship has no correlation to greatness.
Yes, I've read elsewhere that they're often not the same items. Whether this is good or bad for consumers is hard to say. Are the corners being cut things that their customers care about? If the customers are happy with what they get, the lower price is a win, and Walmart is right to encourage their suppliers to economize where they can.

Of course, there are also places where quality shouldn't be cut, and other side-effects of the drive to lower prices (lower pay for workers, etc). But this still seems like a subjective judgment call to be made on a case-by-case basis, not an obvious black-and-white issue.
> I'd sooner see resources poured into Countries that really give a damn about the world.

Lucky for you, you are free to spend your money where you please.
That's... odd.

It's been a long time since I've used a full desktop environment, but back sometime around Ubuntu 10.04 it was by default the two-click Unity version you described. Even nowadays (on 16.04) if I start nm-applet, it's just two clicks.
> Choosing to buy local and locally sourced goods is preferred by more people than you think.

So where do you buy your locally made iPhone? People don't care about where it comes from as long as it meets their needs. For most items you don't even have a choice to begin with.
That list seems rather short...
if the package plans make companies more money, and they are being perceived as more strategic, then your best effort default-free internet may just disappear or become drastically more expensive just because.

look what happened to static ips. not saying the situations are completely comparable, but with only one or two large corporate providers to choose from, that situation isn't implausible. I'm not looking forward to calling Comcast service to talk to them about why I can't ssh into AWS anymore.
> [...] ignores the fact that many may have preferred not to have had the choice imposed in the first place. E.g. subsistence farmers forced off their land and into cities, either by mandate or through unchecked externalities.

Do you have any sources for these claims?
It's not really a customer service issue. That team isn't equipped to handle it.
You forgot the part about getting divorced and going broke.
Sometimes, it's worth waiting a bit.
> ... when ISPs have a monopoly.

Or they collude to keep fees artificially high. Witness the disparity between American and European cellular plan rates. They all just happened to decide that we can't have sub-$30 plans despite "competition".
Having been on the "creative" side of several of these kinds of graphic design projects, with some fairly large clients, I can assert that it's likely that the agency who did the design signed something to the order of "indemnify and hold harmless" for any copyright infringement suits, and has insurance for that eventuality.

That insurance is likely to get a lot more expensive unless Netflix and the agency can come to an amicable resolution with the OP.
Yes, I was agreeing with you, I don't think down-voters read your comment properly.

I really don't think the outrage here on HN or the original post is in any way justified, legally the image may or may not be subject to copyright, but it is clearly of extremely low value.
It's actually kind of funny to think the legal system is actually more pragmatic than the commenters here.
It's not though.. because of how it works. When you enable online searching, it sends those searches off to Ubuntu's servers and 3rd parties.. and Ubuntu explicitly says they will collect and store everything you type into the dash along with your IP address.

And because of how central the dash is to Ubuntu... it's a huge piece of spyware.

Depending on whether you have opted in or out (see the “Online Search” section below), we may also send your keystrokes as a search term to productsearch.ubuntu.com and selected third parties so that we may complement your search results with online search results from such third parties including: Facebook, Twitter, BBC and Amazon. Canonical and these selected third parties will collect your search terms and use them to provide you with search results while using Ubuntu.

By searching in the dash you consent to:

the collection and use of your search terms and IP address in this way; and

the storage of your search terms and IP address by Canonical and such selected third parties (if applicable).

https://www.ubuntu.com/legal/terms-and-policies/privacy-poli...
The internet just increases the amount of information flow - what one does with it reflects whatever their values are.
Yes you can but then you would have to be able to prove that an infringement took place after you registered. I don't recall the site off the top of my head but there is a service for photographers that will scrape the web and search for their images and see who is using their images. I think the software will even help a photographer collect damages for a cut. I saw a commercial photographer demo the site and he makes a lot of money. The laws are confusing and photographers lose out in tons of royalties by not registering their copyrights especially if a huge company like Netflix uses your work.
> I think we need to talk about how a huge portion of the US misunderstands "tax brackets"

I know engineers that are guilty of the misunderstanding you describe. How does anyone graduate from a university in the United States without at some point having been exposed to the idea of marginal taxation?
There are 4 criteria used for evaluating whether fair use applies. The first being:

1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

Source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#U.S._fair_use_factors

To be clear, commercial usage doesn't automatically indicate a violation but it would be considered.
Bitcoin stirs volatility fears
Something to ensure that courts were the first to decide would, in the current situation, only benefit the perpetrators. Does a very long history of courts not being willing to take this seriously or listen to the evidence, or problems with short statute of limitations meaning that it’s very hard to get a conviction if a woman waited before making an accusation.

In abstract I think it’s a understandable/useful concept but in this particular situation I think it would only benefit the side that needs help the least (due to historical factors/biases).
> But no matter how wealthy someone is, they can always point to the more-rich and say those people are the problem and should be taxed, not themselves.

This is obviously untrue. There isn't an infinite number of people wealthier than Gates or the Waltons or the Rothschilds. At some point there is no one further up the economic ladder in whatever location you're talking about.
Since the list is mainly expensive hipster fare please consider adding Filson.
This analysis seems pretty shallow. It's interesting that Amazon is losing money in North America. But why? That's clue worth investigating further, not a reason to immediately assume predatory pricing.