skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The OP does not say the label distribution of the training data; it's entirely likely that the split is not balanced 50/50, which would make "95% accuracy" as an indicator of quality misleading.

This is one of the reasons why I recommend that Medium thought pieces disclose their data and code instead of just saying "I did AI magic!" to sell a product (and they do charge for their product on their website).
If you can't merge to master decentrally, that's not Git's fault.
Protect Your Node.js App from Cross-Site Request Forgery
I still haven't seen any repro of the capsule network effectiveness. Can anyone point to it?
Mainly I’m saying batteries currently suck. If you can make a nuclear battery (Hafnium isomer, perhaps), that would work, but it would probably also make M2P2 obsolete.
Tesla VR suit name is creating a recipe for failure: if you think you can make a long-term viable VR suit company without ever using batteries (always tethered!) limits future growth potential greatly.
You need to start thinking in 4D
Kinda. It approximates cash flows for some types of companies. For others it doesn’t. Hard to generalize here. Ultimately the best measure of cashflow is cashflow. It’s a good normalized measure of a stable mature business, but it can overstate or understate the health of depending on the revenue and billings model. So, basically, YMMV
But an electric carmaker using the name Tesla seems disingenuous in the first place.

What if I used "Turing" as the name of my cybersecurity/AI company?
Responding to a bunch of people individually doesn't scale, so that's not terribly unreasonable. Still, if you call, it does a couple of things 1) you do find out what they think about the issue 2) they know that their constituents care about the issue.
That was what I was going to point out. I understand peoples problems with colleges and what is painted as a rise of postmodernist thought in those arenas (which is really a fairly meaningless farce, many in college are still establishing their identity due to being prevented from doing so in adolescence by modern schooling and parenting styles, so they're doing the typical thing of seeing how far they can push ideas). Postmodernist thought has its place but is fundamentally flawed as a tool for addressing reality generally (to such a degree that if someone adopted it as a lifestyle honestly they would find themselves incapable of being certain whether they actually need to breathe or eat and they would swiftly die out).

But, reason supports freedom of speech and of ideas. It does not support censorship. It supports even the free expression of even the most odious ideas, so that they may be addressed rationally. The only exceptions to this are very few and involve our human weakness of certain speech in close physical quarters or when packed into physically close groups being able to rise above speech to reach the level of overriding the rational faculties of the listener. That's where things like not shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater lie. It results in a biological disabling of the forebrain when immediate physical mortal danger is at play. That can never, ever, ever happen when a statement is read. Not from a poster, paper, book, pamphlet, and certainly not from a screen.

There is an interesting argument to be made, though it is not really being made by any significant number that I've encountered, that the psychological manipulations of social media - the intentional things they do to optimize driving people to more extreme opinions and inundating people with false information in order to maximize engagement at the expense of absolutely anything else - might need to be treated differently, but even there the issue is not the speech. It's the manipulative analysis and other practices.

I don't even think the real primary motivation of most censorship of repugnant ideas online is motivated by a belief like "these ideas are wrong and we must not expose people to them, else they may adopt them". I think the mindset is more along the lines of "these ideas are wrong... I feel. But I cannot actually justify. And I fear if someone challenges me to dispute them, I will fail."

Reason also supports an absolute hard line distinction between the real and the fictional, a line which is increasingly ignored, though I chalk that up to factors that mostly go across political divisions. Both sides attribute the negative traits and consequences of real examples of things to images of those things without a second thought, conflating imagery and reality to a degree that it really makes me wonder if they could even explain what the difference is... or if they believe there is any difference.
Twitter responds to Project Veritas allegation that it can share Trump's DMs
There needs to be more of a narrowing of the gap between biology and tech. I feel like right now the giants in both fields are still very much experts of their own biology or technology domains.

The perspective one takes on the biological system in question is vastly different depending on where you are coming from. Biologist understands bigger picture ideas about the system and can narrow down potential solutions. Tech injects more rigor and organization into how data is collected and analyzed. The skills are very complementary.

I am optimistic because I am seeing more people coming up in the field who are trying to do both molecular biology and data science.
Yes and no.

I did pay for app.net when it started, so I know that I really would pay for it. App.net had a theory that if you made an elite social network, interesting people would pay to be on it, and then everyone else would follow.

In practice it seems these don't really work, when there are free alternatives.

On the other hand, the public social networks are becoming too abusive for many subgroups so maybe that would be a place to start.
Really it never leaked at all. It wasn't until several weeks after the linux known-now-to-be-meltdown-defense patches entered review that non-involved people started putting the pieces together and realized it was a security fix. Only at that point Google pulled the trigger on the revelation.
I got a good education and then got a job I was qualified for and got paid well. Which is how the law is in fact written. Sure I hear anti-immigrant sentiment but not worse than in my wife’s country, or mine, or those of my parents’ home countries.

I could go on at length at what is fucked up about the US, and I could go on at least as long about what’s great about it. Some things are better here, some are...pitiful. My wife never adjusted to the lower standard of living in the US (the 1% don’t live as well as the 50% in Europe for example) while I found it more than compensated by the work and other interesting things.
Not only did he pull out of stocks but he was shorting the market.
I was mostly being facetious, but the reality is that things are a little more complicated than that in the trademark business.

The court will start by asking one question along the lines of, "Is there a good chance that a typical customer in the market for either product will be confused regarding the origin of the goods?" The weasel words in that question will leave plenty of room for argument on both sides.

(IANAL, but have had cause to look into this question recently.)
They don't.

https://signal.org/blog/private-contact-discovery/
The last President was a Democrat and he sure didn't care about American's Privacy even though he used it on his campaign trail to get elected... Please don't act like _only_ Republicans do this...

From my comment down thread

>Unfortunately Obama almost quadrupled funding to these agencies[1]. Throughout his administration he allowed the Alphabet boys to try and steal more american's data without warrants (See FBI v Apple and the FBI attempting to get access to your browser history with out warrants)[2][3]. Obama even EXPANDED surveillance on his way out of office[4]. Obama also said he was pro whistle blowers we all know what happened to Chelsea.

[1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/surveillance-in-the-obama-era-1...
[2] https://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/29/apple-vs-fbi-all-you-need-to...
[3] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-w...
[4] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/01/obama-expands-surveill...
What do you consider enough time? Google maintains a strict 90 day grace period so that the other party can figure out how to address the issue. If not 90 days, what should it be? In a world of complicated software, we need to have a discussion of what vulnerabilities users are subjected to by using a product, and whether/when users should be notified that those vulnerabilities exist
> Sounds like the Nirvana fallacy in action. Unless you have a better proposal

Pointing out problems with the current system is not a logical fallacy, and having a working solution in-hand is not a pre-requisite to observing the existence of problems.

Also, accusing me of using the Nirvana fallacy while also accusing me of not providing an alternative policy is literally a contradiction...
Why would reputational analysis of sources not be part of analyzing news trustworthiness?
The fakebox doesn’t detect fake news, it detects articles which are factual/real and everything else is labeled as “fake”.

Where’s the dataset? How did you verify the ground truth? Where are the annotation/labeling guidelines?

What’s the definition of factual/real articles? The dataset appears to be created by the author - which isn’t necessarily wrong but to paraphrase Karl Popper (in the context of human knowledge and scientific endeavors):

There are no ‘pure’ facts available; all observations are functions of subjective factors such as interests, expectations, wishes etc.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/popper/#GrowHumaKnow
Twitter Employees Admit Censoring Conservatives, Ban Them for Political Reasons
Facebook Bug Bounty 2017 Highlights: $880,000 Paid to Researchers
Build a company to sell it to a big player and get $$$$$.
That's also not the way trademarks work. To violate Tesla's trademark they need compete in the battery market.

Trademarks don't get you rights to every market that utilizes the type of item you sell.
tldr know thyself
The website lists domain name as a model feature: https://machinebox.io/docs/fakebox

> Domain name - Some domains are known for hosting certain types of content, Fakebox knows about the most popular sites

Fake news sites typically register bespoke domains, though.
He needs to release/train at least 3 versions with whitelist-blacklist variations for rt, al jazeera and fox news.
VR is dead. I can't believe this company is going to burn through so much money with this. This will literally never launch.
Don't forget eBay! If you're willing to do some simple repairs, you can save a ton of money when revving up a new lab.
What is your concern with the carmaker's name? Branded as an 'all electric' carmaker, so a name that evokes electricity seems fairly appropriate. Does feel a bit odd to be using a dead mans name for your company though.

Even still, two wrongs don't make a right.
I'm surprised there isn't a single person here advising you to stay and figure out something that the token can be used for in your app. This is exactly the type of software and product design decision that a CTO should be doing, and you might even be proud of the result if you come up with a good idea, not to mention the potential financial benefits. Maybe it's a little flaky, but it's not fraud if you tell everyone what the token is and what it's used for beforehand.
Both parties are the same in that in neither case should "party" be taken as sufficient evidence of someone being worthy of office. It would improve the quality of your votes if you ignored party entirely and forced yourself to find out what your representatives actually believed.
Somehow I don't think you've met very many 5-year-olds.
The twitter link discusses no votes on the Amash amendment. Your house link is not the vote on the Amash amendment.
When are you changing the name?
Personally speaking: family, friends, and coworkers have long equated the "Fake News" label with the pap put out by mainstream media monopolies, and, the agendas pushed by trendy social networking corporations. Many of the people included this cohort are working class democrats and self avowed "liberals".

I find it odd that some think the problem with "fakeness" in news reporting is being caused by anything but monopolies over media outlets; curating sources and blacklisting hardly seems a solution. Try antitrust.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentration_of_media_ownersh...
No, it isn't. It's a result of a surprising and non-obvious legal doctrine established in a case regarding the 14th Amendment.

Citizens United itself was a 5-4 decision, so it's fair to say that CU was also a far-from-clear result.
>You dismissed one assumption and named three more. Please explain which applies to Occam's razor.

Because there is a direct correlation between observable characteristics like obesity and poverty to health outcomes for people of all races. If a fat, poor white woman in Appalachia has heart problems in her 40s and receives low quality care, is that a result of systemic racism?

And as others have pointed out, we don't know the entire scope of genetic effects, but we know they exist to some degree (which was the whole point of the article).
Maybe the best way would be to put those wiki/issue/whatever-data in the repository itself and just build tools to throw at them. This could be github, gitlab or something local.
> All of them more credible than „theres a giant conspiracy against women“.

Why is that not credible?

Remember that until the 1860s, the United States literally had a giant conspiracy against black people - so much so that huge parts of the US economy were absolutely dependent on black people not having the rights to life, liberty, and property.

Women didn't have a constitutional right to vote in the US until 1920, when the Constitution was changed to add one.

Why is it not credible that there's a giant conspiracy against women? What changed in the last 100-150 years that made humankind more reasonable, given how completely unreasonable humankind was just a couple of generations ago?

(Note that I'm only speaking of the US, which is what I'm familiar with and where the US is based. It's possible that countries other than the US are more reasonable.)
Chargebacks (i.e. unhappy customers) are a part of any business. Remedies might be business or legal, but you can't just wish them away by excluding them from a payment solution.

I have no idea why you think that's related to time to confirm that a customer has money to pay for goods, which is an entirely unrelated problem which bitcoin solves badly in comparison to current payment networks, and due to its distributed nature is unlikely ever to solve well.
Same boat, If they had a $5 tier - even for only 20gb I would be a paying customer. As is I keep using my free plan.
any details to methodology, which news sites are being used?

also, any plans to add analysis from medium / twitter?
Nice Story but i know some one that write stories with their full love. i read and happy if you won't any problem you also read here. https://goo.gl/EThqPg :)
... which is why I listed genetics under "other explanations". Did you read the whole comment?
This.

Seriously, I run a bunch of FREE websites and I'm amazed by the stuff that shows up in my inbox. When did it become ok to harass someone running a FREE website?

If you don't like it, hit the frigging back button. And get a life.
Can Data Science Help Save Lives on the Road?
Does Patching Meltdown/Spectre Slow Down Your Gaming PC? [video]
yeah... um. Why would Signal (OpenWhisper) sully their name by coordinating efforts with MS? MS doesn't have a great track record at being an advocate for privacy or user security...
Sure, there are plenty of meat eating Buddhists but there are plenty of vegetarian(ish) Buddhist schools as well. Full vegetarianism isn't as common as among Hindus, but restricting meat consumption to fish and poultry is fairly common (mostly among schools originally influenced by Chinese Buddhism iirc).
And so we, knowing this limitation, must ignore it?
He’s not detecting fake news. He’s detecting articles that match the writing style of a handful of publications and labeling everything else “fake”.
The Most Important InfoSec Events That Should Affect You in 2018
I feel like Ready Player One has a better presentation of haptic suits in VR environments.
Just because someone is wrong most of the time doesn't mean they're wrong all the time. It's ad hominem
We have 7 billion people on the planet and in my lifetime we went from more than half of all people living in rural environs to more than half of all people living in cities. Your hostile description of living in a bubble was the default norm for human life until very recently. The aberration here is not people with limited contact to others. The aberration is that in recent decades it is the new norm to work at a job that exposes you to many people every day and attend a public school that exposes you to many people every day.

We do nothing to really account for this being a historical aberration for the species and then wonder why we have antibiotic resistant infections. They get that way in part by running through many, many people and having vastly more chances to evolve.
Ah, that makes sense! Thanks for explaining. Sadly, that was the interesting part.

But I don't really see the privacy issue if the name is left off and there's no way to figure out who it was you interviewed.
I feel bad for Dolphins. They evolved from land animals and seemingly got much smarter underwater; only by the time their brains came online, they were, like, stuck underwater.

And then us land mammals evolved to hunt them and accidentally destroy the oceans. That sucks.

They seem like a really chill species that we seem to have a lot in common with. They have language and stuff.
> In fact, the only reason MJ had to pay up is because their state doesn't have anti-SLAPP statutes.

Their state (California) wasn't the problem. The problem was that they were being sued in a different state (Idaho). You aren't safe until all the states have anti_SLAPP statutes.
Last I looked at FileCoin, you were going to need much more than a small machine to compute the proofs of storage, They seemed to be the main economic impediment to FileCoin as a competitive storage mechanism.

Have there been technical developments since the whitepaper?
Why I Built a Historical Cryptocurrency Trade Simulator
That was my first thought. This is how they kill Signal. It was how they killed Skype. Take a P2P communication system that is difficult to spy on, give Microsoft a big pile of money on the sly to buy it and re-engineer it to be a centralized system and restore spy-ability. It almost seems so laughably obvious as to be childishly unwise to attempt.
You're right. But, they don't need to be technically in violation for a lawsuit to still put them out of business.

A dash of legal ambiguity is often enough for a deep-pocketed company to cause a lot of pain, regardless of the letter of the law.
You're critiquing my proposal for a new federal law.
I will sell you water from my sump, only $10 a bottle.
> I found myself drifting in my own interpretation of fake news, getting angry as I came across articles that I didn’t agree with, fighting hard against the urge to only pick ones I thought were right. What was right or wrong anyway?

A good question and I'm not surprised he went a bit crazy.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth/

> The problem of truth is in a way easy to state: what truths are, and what (if anything) makes them true. But this simple statement masks a great deal of controversy. Whether there is a metaphysical problem of truth at all, and if there is, what kind of theory might address it, are all standing issues in the theory of truth. We will see a number of distinct ways of answering these questions.
Portman is not a smart man.
I don't think things are nearly as bleak as the GP poster sees them - my optimistic guess is that e2e encryption will be the default in most messaging systems within 10 years.

On the other hand, this sort of integration is a symbolic baby step of little practical impact or increase in security. Not only are these features not enabled by default, they're so deeply buried in the UI they're hard to find even when you know they're there. It's easier to accidentally send someone an animated gif of tapirs playing poker and smoking cigars on FB Messenger than it is to deliberately start an encrypted conversation. Skype and Allo are not much better.
I had to stop reading after that typo... how does that happen?
American telecom market is a joke. Only very few Americans buy their own phone. So you have to make deals with the big carriers if you want to reach beyond the technophile crowd. Those carriers are shit.
I haven't claimed there's a perfect solution. I haven't even claimed there is a solution. I'm just pointing out that your proposal is not a solution.
> Security-First Pledge

So, I take it Intel will be sharing lots of info about the Intel ME, as well as supported ways of disabling it? Or am I getting my hopes up?
It's poetic if you think the language of hostile takeovers are poetry.
Please no! Some of us need to do performance analysis. Surely the proper fix is to not expose the sensitive information, rather than to try to constrain the attacker's ability to see it easily?

Given that "silicon is cheap" why don't we work around these problems by ensuring that processes within different security domains run on separate cores with their own cache and branch prediction cache? At context-switch, flush all that.
the last one is creepy but informative. Btw: bloomberg managment doesnt know about it; its just their webdesigner being big fan of Musk.
This isn't obvious at all, but you need to create an account with them (you only need an email address).

Then, in your account page, you scroll down and there are instructions for installing/running fakebox (and others).

The "demo" is actually a docker app that spins up a web application of some sort. I'm firing it up as I type this, and I'll checking it out soon-ish.
IANAL, but these statements seem to fly in the face of the general requirement that a actor must have the requisite mens rea to commit a crime. There certainly are exceptions to the mens rea requirement, but it seems like if you're making a conclusory statement like "Yes, you could be held legally responsible.", then you should provide some reasoning for why that would be the case.
Knowing that context (besides the suicide) makes the question so hilarious to read!
[Q&A] Which way are downstream and upstream services?
No, he's one of the few people whose free speech I'm not terribly concerned about. (Don't be confused: I think he should have the right to express his opinion, I just don't think that right is in any jeopardy).

I mean the free speech of anyone who doesn't have $N million needed to fend off a civil suit. If cases like this and the MJ one become common-place, there's a very real risk of chilling effect.

Incidentally, I think it's probably possible to allow Thiel the ability to sue Gawker into the ground without also having a system where genuinely legal free speech is reserved for people who can afford massive financial risk. So there's absolutely no reason for you to disagree with me just because you think Thiel in on the right side of the Gawker issue...
'Sex Party' or 'Nerds on a Couch?' a Night in Silicon Valley