skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
tl;dr: The choices made in these examples are political, but the words communicating them are not always so flexible.

the problem with too liberally being intolerant of "intolerance" is that the definition of "intolerance" is itself a political thing

It can be, but it can also be an attribute of the text. The fact that "Jews should be eradicated" advocates an intolerance of the very existence of Jews isn't a political interpretation because it's right there in the text. The advocacy, the desire to utter the sentiment, is political for sure, but the words that express those politics leave no room for interpretation.

If "too liberally" was meant to communicate this, it's kind of doing a lot of work for its mention in passing.

For example, opposition to more immigration becomes branded as inherently intolerant.

Is this an actual thing? Most of what I see is about a reduction in current immigration, including the deportation of people who have already been here for decades, which is indeed a kind of intolerance for the status quo of border policy. If there's a more charitable interpretation of this state of affairs I'm all ears/eyes.
Well, it's a highly specific situation, and what most people use - for widely deployed software - is blended code which is approximately optimal for current-ish CPUs. So probably most work goes into generating blended code.
Maybe the Intel compiler can get the code exactly right for i7?
We make driving far too easy. Narrower lanes, trees right next to the roads, and more potholes would probably go a long way toward making driving safer, both for the drivers and for everyone else. Because at the end of the day, drivers subconsciously adjust their behavior to achieve an apparently-constant risk level as roads and cars improve.

Or there's always the spike-in-the-steering-column theory.
https://jalopnik.com/theres-actually-a-name-for-a-steering-w...
Finally. I think the bigger companies are starting to realize that bitcoin cash is taking over the smaller payments. Payments on bitcoin cash right now are under 1 penny and confirm in less than 10 minutes. Try it out for yourself, it is pretty amazing really.
Taking rides in taxis and loitering where they congregate isn’t necessarily illegal. Bribing foreign officials and illegally tapping peoples’ phones is. There is a bright line between hustling and plainly violating the law.
The Deisseroth lab has a materials list of the proteins utilized to do these neural optogenetic studies [1].

And if you want to play with those proteins yourself or design your own, you can use our software to explore others' designs and modify them as you'd like [2]. (see specifically those proteins with "light sensitivity" like ChETA, AsLov, ArchT, Jaws, SwiChR, or ReaChR).

The optogenetic tools are very creative synthetic proteins using domains from within the human genome, as well as from many other sources to create light-sensitive ion channels and neural activity where there was none before.

Here's the mouse's brain being controlled by blue light by means of the synthetic ChR2 protein [3].

[1] https://web.stanford.edu/group/dlab/optogenetics/sequence_in...

[2] https://serotiny.bio/pinecone/

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7uRFVR9BPU
I do. I run with a Garmin, mostly to keep myself from running the first hour or so too fast. The rest of the race I check my splits (mile markers) but mostly run by feel.

When I ran Chicago last year my Garmin lost the GPS signal so I just went with the pace group runners. Usually only the mid-size to large races have pacers, and you never know how good they are, but at Chicago the pacers may as well be professionals.

Regardless, yes, running even effort is critical to the best performance. This can be tricky depending upon terrain, wind, and temperature. Also, personally do best going out a bit slow (the first 5K or so). Being able to pass runners as the race wears on is a huge psychological boost for me.
You don't always pay for these articles. Lots of the time press outlets are looking for stories, and PR firms know this. They send a few emails, maybe even give "press releases" that are super close to being an already finished article. The press outlets are cool with this because it helps them get more stories and thus more advertising dollars.
> https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents...

More than you could ever want to know (but see specifically B.4.7.1).
They have an app you use to checkin at a theater, you need to be near the theater when you checkin. The amount of the movie is added to your MoviePass MasterCard, you then pay for the movie using the MasterCard. Expensive movies like IMAX 3D or special showings are not covered.
> Speech is the one thing that can equalize rich and poor, and has the ability to evaporate decades of work and reputation.

Unconsidered speech from the rich and influential can disproportionately hurt the poor and disadvantaged. For example, the US President is not a shining example of "using influence for good." His behavior and speech has lowered the bar across the board for how we expect our politicians to behave, has given confidence to racists and those who would commit hate crimes, and has claimed all criticism to be invalid with faulty reasoning.

A major fault in @sama's essay is a false dichotomy: that we must choose between some sad world of uncontested ideas (even if they have major faults e.g hurting marginalized groups in society a la "gay people are evil" -- his example not mine) and one where innovation can happen. It paints political correctness (which is a movement couched in concern for peoples' well-being) as being antithetical to being able to make technological / societal progress.

This is just not true. In fact you NEED a world where people give a shit about each other so that people who would otherwise be excluded by jerks and awful behavior can be productive, moving us forward.

And he uses Galileo, who was silenced by religious elements, as a comparison point vs a small group of startup ideas perhaps lambasted by media for being out of touch. It's not an accurate comparison.

"When we move from strenuous debate about ideas to casting the people behind the ideas as heretics, we gradually stop debate on all controversial ideas." I'm curious to hear just which cases comprise his experience of valid ideas being cast as heretical.

Is it unscientific for me to not "strenuously debate" with someone who is a flat earther out of judgement for how well my time is spent? And does it hurt progress for society to brand flat earthers as unscientific (which influences our "worth my time" metric)? I don't think it is. There's a lack of nuance in Sam's argument.
It's amazing how quickly this goes from tolerating someone who says disparaging things about gay people, to emboldening those people, to actual violence to the conclusion that Sam's essay is DANGEROUS. It's the thinnest of arguments but this seems to be how a lot of people think about speech today. I find it to be very off kilter with reality, I don't think that anyone is preventing violence by branding someone a heretic, quite the opposite in fact.
If it's not on Strava, did the run even happen? :-)
You can still run a 0.8 node on the bitcoin network if you are so inclined, because changes have been implemented via soft-forks. Bcash is a hard-fork of bitcoin. It is not bitcoin, or you would be able to use your existing wallets with it.
Seems like Elm would be a good choice for a more Haskell-y UI solution.
Yes, I mentioned this one in my comment ("editing the host file with ES File Explorer"), but it requires your phone to be rooted.
If you buy coins, those coins are going to be transferred either from a wallet belonging to the exchange or a wallet from another exchange user which the exchange knows about. The difference between the two is a trade-off of speed vs reliability: if the source is an exchange hot-wallet, then the transfer happens immediately-ish and you, the purchaser of cryptocoin with fiat, can wait however long you wish to wait to confirm that legitimate nodes accept the transaction. If the transfer is from a third-party wallet, then you wait until the third-party authorizes the transfer, and the exchange then has a preset wait time to check that the transfer went through before transferring fiat to the third party. Either way, the counterparty risk is denominated in fiat, not cryptocurrency, and therefore much better understood, controllable, reversible, etc.

As you point out, this causes massive transaction fees, but that's built into the model. The transaction fees would be lower if they would increase the block size....
Why would it end? It won't just go away with time.
People tend to fall into routines when doing the same things day after day. The behaviors are predictable like training pets.

When you leave for a year all that predictability and programmed thinking goes away. It really alters how you perceive many parts of the world around you. I have done this three times when my part time second job magically becomes the full time primary job.
One's life is not directly threatened by intolerance when it comes strictly to speech. It is only action taken upon that speech (or imminent action caused by it) that threatens lives.

And preventing the restriction of ideas such that "augmenting intelligence" or "radical life extension" are not suddenly unspeakable is very much unlike being intolerant of others anyway.

Self-preservation is important, but it's also important for people to avoid being drunk on their own self-righteousness.
If the left has achieved cultural dominance, why has it not achieved political dominance? I think that divide speaks to the argument that bigotry is dangerous and powerful. I agree that there can certainly be a chilling from leftist critiques but don't see that it as equaling McCarthyism.
Like Lucene?
> I fully agree, but I didn't read it as Sam advocating that people should feel free to discuss highly sensitive subjects in every setting, but rather that he feels that said ideas can't be discussed in any setting. (For this post, I specifically don't take any position on this.)

I completely disagree with him then. It is possible that his own professional and social circles are like this, but there are 7.5 million people in the bay area. There are people outside of his group. I have had "difficult" discussions with plenty of people, both in professional and social settings. Perhaps this is the disconnect- maybe the dude just needs better friends.
> I don't think that anyone is preventing violence by branding someone a heretic, quite the opposite in fact.

This is very interesting and I believe I tend to agree.

When a person is branded as a "heretic" for their ideas, doesn't it increase the division between those two groups? The winning group (the one doing the branding) begins to dehumanize and rage towards the losing group. The losing group has to find other ways to fight back or remain in insolent silence.
That's exactly what the blog post wasn't realizing. Throwing out ethics is like throwing out law and order because it inhibits you from doing whatever you'd like to do. Does anyone really think they can stand upright against the winds when the weather turns nasty?

Just like laws, ethics are there for a reason, and the social changes going on are happening for a reason.
But the thing is that there is no tricking or lying. There is simply a syntactically invalid entity. And idiotic software that does completely irresponsible things when confronted with such syntactically invalid entities, such as feeding syntactically invalid JPEG images to the javascript interpreter.

MIME types also can not be misleading. MIME types are the authoritative declaration of what something is. If it's not that, then there is nothing misleading, it's simply invalid.

Framing this as "MIME spoofing" is about as sensible as calling a buffer overflow in some font renderer "machine code spoofing". If your font renderer under some circumstances takes pieces of the font description it is interpreting and feeds them to the CPU for execution, that is not "machine code spoofing", it's simply a buffer overflow vulnerability in your font renderer. And just as a font renderer shouldn't feed pieces of the font to the CPU for execution, a JPEG parser shouldn't feed pieces of the image to a javascript interpreter for execution.
Remember that a lead dev for Node was attacked not too long ago for discussing the potential downsides of CoC's.

https://twitter.com/rvagg/status/887652116524707841
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15073022

This is the kind of thing Sam is talking about - we should be able to discuss things that are controversial without getting mobbed for it.
Feds look to cash in seized Bitcoins at record prices
It’s not a framework problem, it’s a CSS problem.
Oh my, the FCC does not look kindly on private companies using Stingray cellular intercept devices that masquerade as legitimate towers.
This is definitely not a request to do a free audit on my behalf, but one of the other commenters recommended this, which I guess is open source:

https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard
hmmm... wikipedia doesn't support your claim, tho [1].

it seems like a lot of folks were encouraged to go out and kill, given machetes and told to kill, and in the end there's one study that suggests 10% of the violence could be attributed to the radio station (which was created to broadcast racist propaganda and obscene jokes).

specifically, I take issue with the notion that "hate speech" is a meaningful descriptor of a way of talking. racism, bigotry, etc... are more specific.

tangentially, I did find this:

> On March 20, 2017, Pope Francis acknowledged that while some Catholic nuns and priests in the country were killed during the genocide, others were complicit with it and took part in preparing and executing the genocide.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_genocide#Preparation_f...
Mitch Lowe, CEO, was interviewed a few months ago about the price drop and how MoviePass plans to make money.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robcain/2017/09/17/ceo-mitch-lo...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robcain/2017/09/18/ceo-mitch-lo...
A Twist
Upon further reading I find myself chuckling and agreeing with your thesis statement: "There is a depraved desire in all of us to use our momentary power to achieve final victory."
Really, Uber paid $7,500,000 to "settle" that little dispute -- although his lawyer got a 40% cut, leaving him with "only" $4.5MM. To me, at least, it seems even worse when you think about it that way.
"A major fault in @sama's essay is a false dichotomy: that we must choose between some sad world of uncontested ideas (even if they have major faults e.g hurting marginalized groups in society a la "gay people are evil" -- his example not mine) and one where innovation can happen. It paints political correctness (which is a movement couched in concern for peoples' well-being) as being antithetical to being able to make technological / societal progress."

But that is precisely what is happening. The aim of political correctness seems to be to make things "safer" for other people. I would argue that safety and freedom are inversely related: a free society is inherently unsafe. But in the same way that we learn and get stronger by making mistakes, I think that erring on the side of freedom helps to strengthen individuals in the long term.

The other issue that comes up with these topics is arbitration. If you're going to cast a safety net across speech, you have to figure out who decides what the standards are, and how they are enforced. And if you disagree with those standards, what recourse do you have?
Maybe someone's anticipating some massive selling by folks who own a lot. Perhaps some of those folks are known personally to Lee, or includes Lee himself. I suppose he'll be able to say, I told you so.
It is also traditional that the first author, in addition to doing the most of the scientific work, takes on most of the writing He/She also edits together the various other authors contributions.
I'd include in that email an estimate of how much money has been spent on the preservation campaign so far.

"If your ancestor hadn't decided to dedicate X dollars (inflation adjusted Y dollars for current year) to this project you would have inherited calculateInheritant(tauntEmailRecipient, currentYear, familyTree, preferredCurrencyDenomination). PS - please reply to this email with contact information for any new descendants. If email is going out of style as a communication protocol, please reply with a program that, when executed, will take from standard in a filename that contains a message, and as a second parameter a contact address. Attached to this email you'll find a project spec describing this program more rigorously.
I think the heart of the issue Sam is trying to address is that in today's society you can excel at one field and yet be hindered from success in it because you make a generalized statement that the majority of society disagrees with, in a field completely unrelated to the one you participate in.

If a Nobel prize winning physicist speaks about the inferiority of gay people, he is not necessarily a "threat to their safety". You don't have to like him, you don't have to be friends with him -- hell I wouldn't. But he has a right to not be fired as a physics researcher, because he is good at it. If he was a student counselor you can bet he should be fired.

If he actively discriminates against a gay physics student should he be fired? Absolutely. But I don't think he should be fired for simply holding the opinion. But he would be in todays world.

That's the problem I have with the politics of today -- it's that people get fired or disregarded if they make even a statement that makes other people feel bad, and disaligns with the majority opinion.
Well said. It doesn't reveal problems with current methodology, it reveals problems with its application, and understanding. Larger sample sizes would fix quite a bit. Studies, even "pilot" or "priming" studies, are not reliable at a .05 significance. Especially when most of the false positives will get published, but nearly none of the false negatives will see the light of day.
hilariously evil
> Dead users don't click.

I wish this could be my mission statement.
What if your "controversial opinion" harasses and alienates other people? According to his logic that pain is collateral damage. And any innovation from the people who would have been productive except for that collateral alienation / harassment is now lost -- and this is a story as old as time in the valley particularly from women and PoC.

But his writing indicates that he's only thought from the perspective of some innovator he's perceived to have been unfairly branded a heretic.
Someone help me with this, but why do people need the full history of the Ethereum blockchain? Shouldn't having a few of the last valid blocks be enough?
"Automatic update" implies updating of an _already_ installed add-on/program.

This was not an automatic update, it was an installation.
bcash handles a fraction of the transactions of either bitcoin or litecoin. If you want a cheap option, litecoin is great. It's been around for years, and isn't controlled by the chinese government. In bcash, the nodes, the developers, the miners, and now the payment processor, are all owned by the same chinese company.

Currently litecoin is processing about four times the transaction count of bcash. They also have a block creation time of 1/4 of the time (2.5 minutes) to bcash or bitcoin (10 minutes), so if speed of confirmation is an issue for you, then they might meet your use-case. It obviously doesn't have the decentralization of bitcoin, but at least it isn't controlled by a single chinese company.
Credit cards are more convenient than cash. If crypto can be equally convenient (which I think it can -- see venmo), I imagine people will use it. Are the savings of centralization really enough that Visa will be able to stay competitive and profitable?

I don't doubt Visa will continue to be used, but I imagine it will be for fraud protection rather than cost.
34 SEO Free Tools to Boost Your Rankings and Search Engine Visibility 2018
Because many of us techies fortunately or unfortunately live off of VC capital, indirectly, via jobs. More information is better than less information.
The theory is that you might be inclined to pay in order to avoid a scandal that would be costlier.

For this kind of scandal, my armchair opinion is that you still have to do something at least a bit murky in order to allow yourself to be black mailed.
Everything is relative. The significant part is that increasing the block size steadily can scale to huge transaction volumes. Visa level transaction levels of around 2,000 TPS can be achieved with block size increases and higher end computer hardware. If we are talking visa level transaction volumes then the user base has to be at least 500 million users. If the userbase is that large then think of how many people would be willing to run full nodes. Not everyone but probably 10,000+. The current crypto ecosystem is probably a few million people across all coins.

Also it is important to note that BTC could be like BCH at higher transaction levels if they increased the block size but that won't because of this lightning network idea. Which is what I don't get. You can increase the block size right NOW and work on the lightning network as well. Yet, they don't do that because the lightning network is everything and any other solution is not even considered.

I used to also think that bigger blocks were always bad but that is simply not true. The original block size limit was purely implemented to stop spam when bitcoin's userbase was very low. Satoshi actually wanted to implement bigger blocks as the userbase grew. Bigger blocks is the not the long-term solution but it is a solution that we have right now that works.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SJm2ep3X_M
Anything with the word Berkeley comes to mind. Honestly, outside of tech and the Giants (baseball team), the only times the bay area tends to make the national news has to do with people protesting something.

Here are some examples I found searching the interwebs: http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/01/11/sjws-tech-conferenc... I remember the incident about Douglas Crockford as a big WTF that confused the hell out of people.
Is this a bot which comments exact same thing on every Uber story? Just an observation because of how most of your comments make sense but every uber story has exact same question.
Bitcoin uses proof-of-work for its consensus system, but not all cryptocurrencies do. Bitcoin is a technological wonder, but it's ultimately not as advanced as its younger brethren.

The Stellar Consensus Protocol, which MobileCoin say they're using, uses something more akin to a web of trust rather than proof-of-work. You do not need the SGX to get rid of proof-of-work.
What's the VeraCrypt container for? Isn't the DB already encrypted?
> disaligns with the majority opinion

It doesn't even have to be the majority opinion. Just the opinion of someone with a loud enough voice.

> But I don't think he should be fired for simply holding the opinion. But he would be in todays world.

Sadly, he would be fired, publicly smeared, and become unemployable.
So few resumes indicate why the candidate applied. When triaging resumes, I really appreciate a paragraph explaining motivation. I rarely read past paragraph one of a long cover letter unless the resume itself is compelling. Then I’ll read it in full.
Sometimes even without monthy HR training
I recently spent a day deleting every "friend" (600 or so) on facebook.

FB sometimes reminds me of that scene where John Coffee gets all teary eyed about how the child-rapist-murderer used the little girl's love for eachother against eachother.

the longer I stayed friends with those people, the longer I was doing them harm by providing them engaging tidbits about my life, or liking their posts. it's not just good for me not to use FB, it's bad for my friends to use it to see me.