skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The point of this, I think, is that we justify our behavior towards animals on the belief that they are not "the same" as us. That is, that they aren't beings capable of the same rich experiences of the world that we are and, therefore, their suffering is less important than ours. This same sort of rationalization has been used throughout history to justify similar behavior towards other human beings.

Evidence is increasingly showing us that the qualities we believed differentiated us from animals, that made our lives more worthy of respect, aren't actually unique to us.

If you're going to come back at that with "we're better at these things than they are", then that philosophy suggests again that there are lesser classes of human being as well, the ones that aren't as good as others at whatever metric you happen to be using.

It is natural that we seek to justify behavior on which our living standards are dependent, but that doesn't make our reasoning sound.
Looking back at Bugzilla and BMO in 2017
found some photos:

https://github.com/lexelby/inkstitch/tree/master/images/patc...
Deep learning: a critical appraisal [pdf]
I haven't tried it, but the idea is brilliant. I would love to be able to use the interface on a $5 machine...

I would also feel compelled to still buy an OP-1, though, since they obviously put a lot of effort into R&D.
Interesting if true. I am dubious about this because I know that congress has taken action about specific drugs before (notably crack) and I would be surprised if they hadn't passed legislation requiring marijuana to be restricted. I don't know how to search for this information, though, or how I would be confident that it didn't exist without being a domain expert.

Edit: Follow-up, wikipedia has an excellent article [1] about the complexities here. Either congress or the executive could easily make medicinal marijuana legal by rescheduling, but to legalize for recreational use, they would have to amend an international treaty [2], which would require congress to act. Apparently congress has not explicitly scheduled marijuana (as it has other drugs), so the executive is free to act within the constraints of the Single Convention.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Removal_of_cannabis_from_Sched...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Convention_on_Narcotic_...
So you know how animals work! Excellent. Please build me a machine that does the same, to demonstrate your understanding.

It can be slow and inefficient to make up for lack of equivalent materials and mechanisms. A simulated one will do.

Or just explain how it works. I've been looking forward to reading that book. You'd sell some copies.

Also, a nitpick: it's a few millennia of studies by now. For example you can read Aristotle on the topic from 1700+ years ago.
meh. sci-hub.tv has permanent free access
You're falling for the assumption the brain's role is generating consciousness. It could also not do so yet still be part of an organism which is conscious. I can say that confidently because I understand how consciousness is generated. I could easily say it here and have in the past. Sure, I'll be downvoted by idiots who do not know whether I do or do not know how consciousness works, but are instead acting on their instincts and emotions. But perhaps there's at least one person in the world who is truthful enough not to have to downvote and to instead ask themselves the question of what it would take for what I assert to be true.
Bitcoin is currently not what Bitcoin was when it was created.
Slow peer-to-peer transactions and high processing fees.

Average fees are hovering around 30 dollars. That's an average. Unconfirmed transactions has been at over 100k for months. The mempool is also hovering around an ATH. The Bitcoin is crippled. Sentences like "store of value" are now the term used to describe Bitcoin. Very far from what the Bitcoin used to be.

I think there is a real possibility of a "death spiral of the blockchain". Fees will increase and it will become impossible to move coins on the blockchain besides the upper 10% of bitcoin holders.
For traders on exchanges bitcoin seems fast; because no transactions are taking place. When you actually decide to move your bitcoins to a wallet you own you'll pay high fees... if not your transaction could take months to clear or never actually clear.

No wonder Visa cards are being cancelled.

The fork that occurred on 1st August created Bitcoin Cash. This fork is much closer to what the Bitcoin was. Bitcoin Cash is this today. Removal of the segwit code (which hasn't solved anything), disabling of RBF (replace-by-fee) enabling 0-confirmation transactions again. A new DAA (difficulty adjustment algorithm). Finally increase the block size to 8MiB.

The Bitcoin has been crippled on purpose by Blockstream deep in the pockets of bankers and insurance companies. Blockstream is the main contributor to the Bitcoin development. Look at the sponsors; https://www.blockstream.com/about/#investors

Before the bankers, and their followers, got indirectly involved in Bitcoin development there never was any discussion about limiting the block size to 1MiB; in fact the opposite was discussed. See; https://twitter.com/adam3us/status/636410827969421312?lang=e.... https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1314.msg15143#msg151.... https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/71h884/pieter_wuille_im....

Now all of this has led to a complete divide and clusterfuck of the community. It is an very ugly and toxic environment and is sad to look at. On top of that we now have thousands of alternative coins and blockchains.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaQu7kkQBPc

Imagine automated system for danger recognition on for example airport. These kind of deception attacks could make problems with these systems. Imagine if suddenly 10,20,100 airports all around globe would recognize weapons, bombs or any other dangerous items? I can imagine panic and huge news headlines badmouthing AI.

People don't trust AI. These kind of errors could only prolong proper integration, which in many ways could enhance the way we live.
> shows how weak their position really is

Or Elsevier’s belief that the opposition is tenuously formed. If temporary free access prompts a critical mass to decamp, Elsevier will have staved off both permanence and precedent.
The story behind our open source efforts
"Upstream Color"[0] by Shane Carruth, the writer and director of "Primer"[1] is another example of this kind of filmmaking. He aspired to create a film that you could watch in the same way one listens to albums/CDs over and over again and discover something new with each listen.[2]

[0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5U9KmAlrEXU

[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nj5MMURCm8

[2]http://www.indiewire.com/2013/04/interview-shane-carruth-tal...
Microsoft, Adaptive Bio Announce Partnership Using AI to Decode Immune System
Well, it doesn't fund it directly, but I think, since the public is paying for the drugs, the companies that make them can afford to spend money on them, knowing that they will be able to sell them afterwards, even at a raised price (the public can afford a lot more than individuals can). So there's an indirecty subsidy on drug development, I guess.

Which is fine by me, to be perfectly clear. If people can access the drugs they need, then fine, let the companies make a profit, why not. I mean, within limits and all.
>I really don't understand this feeling that humans need to be modest or that describing ourselves as special is wrong. We are special.

To simply state that humans are best adapted at certain traits is true, but humans have tended to think of themselves as "special" in that "we're not even animals, but beings made in the image of God and given divine right to conquer Nature and do with it what we will." That anthropocentric bias has led to a multitude of evils and scientific falsehoods, and that's what needs to be corrected. It's got nothing to do with misanthropy.
To the AP, they are both clients. The attacker (MITM) computer can be accessed by the victim. This would mitigate the attack. It's possible that the arp spoofing would prevent the victim from accessing the internet, but that depends on how the AP institutes it's blocks.
Behind the scenes of a bug collision
Buy cheap Facebook likes
Facebook likes are very crucial for your business. Will you purchase something from a commercial enterprise with 100 likes or from a business with one thousand likes.
Dr. Potters' reply about why he liked the negative answer:

"I like the answer at this time because it is the only intellectually honest answer. It identifies that we need to do more work to address the question. If we claim to know it when we don't, then it helps no one, and we only fool ourselves. Also, current samples are inadequate to answer the questions. Hope that clears it up.
Cheers,
Ben"
> That’s outstanding. And that’s the thing. It’s become very fashionable in the last couple of decades to forget what good government can do, what good union organizing can do.

In my opinion this is missing the problem. Government, in a democracy, is decided by the masses. I think people, as individuals, are generally quite intelligent. But I also think people, as groups, are quite stupid. Mob mentality is very much a real phenomena and it's something we've not come even remotely close to growing out of. Similarly for tribalism.

In the instance he's referring to (film critics associations boycotted Disney after Disney blacklisted writers from an influential publication, leading Disney to rescind the blacklisting) you had a very small and very well informed demographic working together. That has very little to do with the democratic process. Most people do not know much about any given topic, and so when you query the masses on anything the majority opinion is going to be heavily influenced by marketing and 'propaganda.' What people do or think is not really based on reality, but who presented their argument in the glossiest case.

So to bring this theoretic into the practical. Imagine you ask people about a certain hotkey issue, in most recent times perhaps it would be Trump's tax plan. Many people would have extremely strong opinions one way or the other. Now ask people to actually describe, without handwaving, what the plan actually was. People, for the most part, are going to be completely ignorant. We, collectively, form strong decisions about things we don't even know the basic fundamentals of!

I don't know how this can change in practical terms. It's the nature of a democracy. But that just kicks the can to another problem. If we can't come to informed decisions on an individual policy, how are we supposed to be expected to come to informed decisions on candidates using every resource available to make us believe that they are who we, collectively, want in office? As tools and technologies for directing the masses in one way or another become ever more effective, this disconnect between reality and mass opinion is only going to increase.
https://sociohawk.com
The will ban you quite fast if you attempt that. In fact, I think they ban (and have banned) entire IP ranges/whole universities for that.
Because when people say "language" they usually imply certain capabilities we have not yet observed in other animals, especially when talking about what humans have that other animals don't.

It's similar to being able to use tools (which we've seen in many species) versus being able to create tools (which we've seen e.g. in certain corvids). The former is a significant first step but the later is what proves a certain amount of abstract thinking beyond the immediate here and now that goes far beyond mere instinct.
>die for it's country

Sure you can argue semantic about how animals don't have countries, but it's a fact that animals do fight and kill each other to protect their territory.
In a pure capitalistic model I only can see how things would converge to the maximum profit possible and not to the best for society possible, you need some lay that considers the people and not the money.
Why is paying x% tax to go to the health budget such a controversial thing?you still have private hospital and doctors that compete with public ones and you still have a choice, the only issue I see doing this requieres some solidarity and maybe this sentiment is missing in a diverse country like US.
I was thinking the benefit would be the ability to audit it, but yeah, not going to happen.
So what you are saying is that if you never install closed source software, you will never (intentionally) install malware because you define all malware as closed source. This is a meaningless tautology. The advice you are giving is both objectively wrong and actively dangerous.

Firstly not all security issues involve installing 'malware'. Take heartbleed; a major security vulnerability in open source software. To be hit by that you didn't need to install any non-open source software. You could have had the most pure and open stack of software and hardware ever created and it would have made no difference because the flaw was an information leak that didn't involve installing software or even unintended remote execution of code. That bug was due to the existing already installed open source code copying past the end of a buffer. Similar information leaking bugs could feasibly exist due to CPU bugs or compiler bugs or undefined behaviour in the code etc (i.e. all sorts of ways that don't involve installing malware and aren't even obvious from reading the code).

Secondly, even exploits that do involve "running malware" are very often not because the user intentionally installed malware. They happen because the user did something like download and decode an image file which took advantage of a vulnerability in their (open source!) image decoding library to execute code on their machine. Again in this scenario it doesn't matter that the user would only ever intentionally install open source software, because the malware was executed unintentionally when they performed an activity they didn't expect to lead to code execution (viewing an image).

E: These CPU issues are fundamentally timing attacks that leak information. I don't need to execute code on your computer at all to run a timing attack against you that leaks valuable information - I can do it by sending packets of pure data and don't need to be able to execute arbitrary code on your machine at all. Side channels like timing attacks don't necessarily require any kind of code execution on the target machine (although obviously having a high precision local timer makes it easier). This isn't just theoretical, it has been demonstrated in reality. For example see this paper[1] which demonstrates doing timing attacks against a browser to reveal the users browser history without the need to execute javascript at all. It's all done by sending CSS, which isn't code.

[1] https://www.nds.rub.de/media/nds/veroeffentlichungen/2014/07...
Related:
Automated testing for League of Legends
https://engineering.riotgames.com/news/automated-testing-lea...

And the HN discussion
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11601278
This is actually lower than the US in a few places, including California where the top bracket including local, state, and federal taxes can go up to 52%. On mobile so don't have a reference on me.
Mine support it: http://www.oregonlive.com/marijuana/index.ssf/2014/10/mariju...
> We're being oppressed!

Oh dear. I hope that was said with tongue firmly in cheek, because anyone who truly believes that their Bitcoin Visa card being cancelled is a form of "oppression" needs a reality check.
I have a use case! I travel with my smartphone (and leave my desktop at home), but I receive links to huge files via document sharing sites (gigabytes and up - not the medium I would choose, but the choice isn't mine: the clients like those, for some strange reason). The links expire quickly, are not downloadable through console browsers (JS/images/CAPTCHAs), and I might not even have enough space and/or bandwidth to download them locally, to the smartphone. Up to now, I've had to resort to weird hacks such as "X+ssh forwarding a remote xpra session from the desktop, with a browser window in it", which sort-of-worked, but was painfully slow. This is a different approach, one that seems workable.

Zooming is necessary due to the smallish smartphone display, "latency issues tackled by RDP" is mostly wishful thinking (okay, it's gone from "unusably bad" to "just bearably bad").
There's precedent for blocking DNS and other similar stuff. It's effective for a general audience but probably not most of the scientific one.
See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14998429
Looks great!

Here is something to remember about doing this kind of work: It's never done! There is always something else to do. So, I hope you enjoy doing the work.
As far as I can tell from that section this is more about show-and-tell. There's a difference between demonstrating something to teach it (mimicry) and using language to teach it (explanation).

If I tell you that you can put a stick in a certain tree and get honey out, that's different from me bringing you to that tree, putting a stick in it and showing you the honey (while being swarmed by angry bees but I digress).
I haven't heard of it before. They do seem to have a lot in common visually.

The version history on KVR is interesting: https://www.kvraudio.com/product/circle-by-future-audio-work...

Helm's first release was August 3, 2015: https://github.com/mtytel/helm/releases

Circle's first release was also August 3, 2015. Maybe they're developed by the same person.
Do you think living in the West...is fine with China's state enforced ethnic nationalism is a big group of people?
Is there a way for individual investors like us to buy it before they go public?
Does the NSA use Intel chips? If so, it would seem unlikely that they made their own compute infrastructure insecure.

Their mission isn't to make everything less secure, it's to make the other team's stuff less secure (where "other team" includes the citizens of the US apparently).

Furthermore, given the number of bugs in just about every piece of software (including kernels), I don't think these bugs are even an anomaly that needs an explanation. Bugs exist in every complex system, and CPUs are very complex these days.

That said, to address your direct question of "would it be possible", I'm fairly sure it would; we have hints from Linus that Three Letter Agencies have asked him for backdoors, so I'm sure large hardware companies have open channels with the NSA et. al. as well.
Ask HN: Pinboard defective?
Hi,

since Pinboard's support and responsiveness rivals Google's, have others seen the same problems as I have over the last months?

1. Archiving stopped working seven weeks ago; no archive icons are shown next to the bookmarks (and that's nothing new, it stops every now and then and resumes working, but now it seems to be dead for good).

2. On some days new bookmarks are marked "500", all of them, across all domains. Clicking the reload icon next to the bookmark has worked so far, but it's getting tedious.
Ask HN: Improvements to a SaaS product to reduce customer support requests?
Hi HN, I'm currently building a B2B CRUD-style SaaS. For those of you who have been through this before, are there any particular universal improvements I could make that would drastically cut down customer support requests later on? Thanks!
He's was the CEO!!! He oversaw all the morally reprehensible things Uber did and did little to stop it.

If he is not responsible, then who is? I'm sorry but CEOs can't have it both ways. If you want to be paid at the (insane) current levels you have to take responsibility for the outcomes of your actions. The only other entity that might have some responsibility is the board for not getting rid of Kalanick sooner.
I did it with kids. It's not so bad. I only regret not doing it properly when I was in school.
In London Uber has lost their license to operate, and that decision will come into effect this year.

They cite passenger safety concerns, but there's been not-too-subtle protests by Black Cab drivers who simply refuse to change their archaic business model and a very stark lack of actual Uber users concerned about safety. Not only is it far less convenient than Uber, calling a Black Cab means you need to venture onto the street and if you're not in central London you're basically stuffed. There's also the matter of cabbies being many times more expensive than Uber - a £20 Uber would be £50, at least.

The Black Cab drivers are being petulant children about it. I'm sorry their livelihoods are under threat but they either need to evolve or die. They literally blocked off a major London road right outside my offices in protest against Uber a few months ago; right off Blackfriars Bridge they parked horizontally in the middle of the road, causing absolute mayhem. Usually I'm fine with people striking, but there was no legitimate grievance here - a better competitor came along and instead of embracing change (and progress) they simply threw their toys out of the pram and demanded the politicians (who are in their union's pocket) simply get rid of their competition.

The politicians didn't take much persuading, and just like that we rolled back to Black Cabs (which half of Uber users were priced out of in the first place). Unions are generally a force for good, but this was just a shameless attempt by the Black Cab union to have the competition erased, where previously they operated in what could easily have been described as a monopoly - previously they only faced competition from minicabs and Addison Lee, which largely had an entirely different customer base.
If a critical mass decamps, they still don't have a contract with Elsevier.

I don't see how granting free access unilaterally improves their negotiation position other than goodwill in manipulating the executive and legislative government..
> It's not like the administration has a whole lot of political capital to play with right now.

Sure, and if this administration showed any sign not of conserving political capital based on consistent coherent priorities rather than burning it on a whim, that'd play a bigger role in my assessment of the risk of them deciding to stand and fight on this.

Then again, if they had been doing that, they'd also probably have a lot more political capital pright now.

> Vetoing their own appropriations bill doesn't seem like a winning strategy

OTOH, threatening to over Rohrabacher-Farr might be—at least in the immediate term; it's quite possible that Congress isn't willing to shutdown the government over it but would believe the President might be.
Virtuozzo Addresses Intel Bug Questions
The vast majority of humanity can't accomplish that. I guess we all get credit for the achievements of any of our species? Are we then also burdened with credit for any individual's atrocities?
I agree with you, but then I think the same can be said of movies such as "Close Encounters of the Third Kind", wherein the pacing was awesome back in the day, when you had to actually be somewhere to watch a movie, but now when everyone can stream to their own private space, 'tis a bigger challenge. I watch a lot of 70's movies with this slow, boring pace ..