skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Those maths don't actually make me feel too great.

Considering the number of devices (cars, tablets, phones, laptops, heated clothes, robots, etc) in development or production that depend on lithium for batteries, not to mention any other pharmaceutical and scientific uses, it seems like only 1 billion Teslas worth isn't gonna cut it if we're planning to keep up with the pace of technology acceleration, penetration and turnover.

Oh, and I just remembered that Tesla is planning to make EV long-haul trucks... what's the math work out to for how many of those can be made? I think I saw a video that said the battery would need to be tremendous in order to carry feasible loads.

What about if we did the math on how much lithium the average western consumer is expected to use over the next 10 years given current device turnover and expected increase of lithium-based device ownership?

Of course this wouldn't even factor in working government and business use cases and the consumption based on new startups making destined-to-fail products.
Huh? I've used z-order inside database systems, with many millions of records. Works incredibly well.
Because nobody wants to train good engineers. It’s not like the people you’re interviewing set out to be bad engineers. It’s just that people like you won’t hire them unless they’re already perfect.
Banks' main reasoning behind the social structure of the Culture is based on the idea that oppressive hierarchies become physically unfeasible in outer space. Without some sort of biological conditioning, it's practically impossible to oppress an entire section of civilisation for long since they can just live somewhere else in space. Space is inherently, physically suited to a kind of mutualistic anarchism. I think Banks has a vague outline of how the Culture formed from various subspecies which were escaping their indigenous power structures.

Of course, societies with milder hierarchies do reach similar technical prowess to the Culture. However, they are often missing that "edge" that allows them to progress faster or last longer than the Culture.
It feels in some quarters like there is a focussed, well organised effort to take Dr. Peterson down, either by slandering or by association. Some people are genuinely afraid of his way or thinking and will go to any lengths to poison the well.
See e.g. Smerity reporting on Elon's talk in NIPS 2017: https://twitter.com/Smerity/status/938994837323259904
as well as
https://goo.gl/trX8SJ & https://goo.gl/aTMqv6

What's your evidence for saying he does not say so? A bit mean of you to downvote without asking for evidence.
If something is possible and you can't prevent it from happening then accepting it seems like the best option. You're arguing that you can prevent it from happening by regulation and education. I don't think it works if you apply a security mindset. Mallories don't care about rules. 3 letter agencies would be just one of examples.

Yes, you can lower the probability of exploitation happening, but you have to keep in mind that it is possible. Kind of like leaving your car open - it's quite unlikely that somebody will go and pull the handle checking if it's closed, but it's possible and you're probably better off taking that into account.

(now that I realized you are also parent of my original reply I'm a bit confused, I mean your two replies are kinda responding to each other)
Why do you say unmarketable
As can your children under some circumstances.
How about forgetting about GUI altogether? To keep things concrete, I intend to write a file encryption utility and a password manager. The first versions will be command line programs.

But of course, over 90% of computer users have this "unable to command line" disability, so they need a GUI. I was thinking of writing my own. Small, simple, and completely oblivious to accessibility issues—except maybe font sizes.

Would that be okay? I mean, who cares about GUI accessibility if you can do the same thing on the command line? Unless the command line is not accessible for some unfathomable reason?
I think the parent comment is silly, but there’s a pretty fundamental difference between something you are and something you do.
Do you need a Blockchain? Probably less than Wüst and Gervais think you do
> The abstract human reasoning required for even high level perceptual tasks is difficult for humans to consciously dissect, but it could easily be that it's actually relatively mundane

I don't think so. Philosophers have theorized about abstract thought for thousands of years. The materialist metaphysics that is uncritically and unconsciously held by the triumphalist philistines isn't even capable IN PRINCIPLE of accounting for it.

In any case, AI is useful, and will continue to be, but the fanfare is just noise distracting from the truth of what it is.
Can relate. I 'stayed awake at night' when I had to write a program to calculate salaries.
I don't remember how old the iPad was and I no longer have it. But it was old enough that support had been discontinued for its os and I was having trouble finding ways around that. Perhaps someone more technical could have found a solution. I did ask around, but to no avail.
Signal will accept literally any phone number, you can set up an account with any random voip number.

>Custom XMPP server running as a Tor hidden service with OMEMO enabled

Is not advice you can give in a "security guide for journalists"
This post is very interesting in a number of things besides the Google Maps.

I still have an old iPod touch, the iPad 1, and dayly use my iPad 3 (iPad with Retina). I also own the new iPhone X. But especialy on the iPad I have no use case on updating it besides it is running this old iOS, for which no update is available anymore. Because there is no update all the apps for it are also not anymore updated, because Apple requires in Xcode a minimum iOS version for compiling. So I am more and more cut off from many services just because a newer iPad does not provide more except to stay up to date with the services I use.

Comming from an industrial background where systems are running for 20 years, 30 years, and more that is really frustrating, when even 5 year old technology doesn't run for other use cases.
> Companies are reaching out to IOTA

In all the cases so far that IOTA put forward of this happening, the company came back denying it.
> artificial barrier due to compute resources

That's not really an artificial barrier. The program which encodes General AI can already be discovered by brute force, given sufficient compute resources.
The Computer Part People Are Hoarding: ‘I Felt Like I Was Buying Drugs’
> Plus, opioids have never been advertised on TV, so you point isn't relevant.

Yes, but products related to them have. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naloxegol
Abu Dhabi massage full service
All trust is relative.

Is HR more trustworthy than, say, the Chinese government ? Yes

(in most cases) is HR more trustworthy than far-off management of the company ? Usually, yes.

Are your friends and colleagues more trustworthy than HR ? Definitely

Is your family more trustworthy than your friends ? Usually

Of course your situation may differ, and some common sense needs to be applied, but HR is VERY low on the trust ladder.
You've correctly identified some of my heaviest influences. ;)

I've met Richard Wolff and have read his book Democracy at Work (which he signed). I'm also interested in what Gar Alperovitz talks about among others.

Chomsky has talked at length about automation. AI is a new one, but even back in the 1960's Martin Luther King Jr was talking about how to overcome the problems of automation. This Noam Chomsky interview [1] from 1976 talks about his belief in something like The Machine. He says that it makes sense for an advanced technological society to automate away the drudgery of survival. He goes further to elaborate how work that can't be automated could be shared amongst the people rather than relegating one class of society to do that work. In a way, deciding not to have class suddenly means you want to automate as much as possible, because in either case you don't want to do the hard work yourself. We can only maintain a class based society because we're satisfied making some people do work we don't want to do.

What I write about, is how you can make your society in to sort of a small closed system, where there becomes a fixed number of things needed to maintain a certain standard of living. People can then decide if that standard of living is better than life in the more traditional worker-based capitalist system, where most people end up being workers. And to reiterate - the system I'm describing still meets the definition of "capitalist" by most western libertarian standard, because it is still based on voluntarily agreed contracts and depends on the notion of private property (shares) to operate. It also necessarily requires economic (capitalist) exchange to the outside world to get things the society cannot itself produce. It's an engineering solution, in my mind, to what Chomsky and others talk about.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_x0Y3FqkEI
"linear transformations with soft thresholds sandwiched in between"
Can you post a source about the carriers margins being paper thin because looking at the last annual reports for FedEx and UPS, it doesn't seem to be the case. The biggest expense for them is labor and I think Amazon is going to do a good job of controlling that cost. Goodbye Teamsters.
7 billion people don’t need 7 billion cars. Many dense cities don’t require cars, and many households don’t need one car per person. Our multitude of battery devices use far less lithium than a single car. Yes the math sucks but it’s not as bad as it looks.
Can We Keep Our Biases from Creeping into AI?
Good luck convincing anyone of that; capitalism is basically built on the idea that employees can't create value only owners.
Protectionism is exactly how China ended up with > 1 million Foxconn jobs in the first place.

Did that not help China in the long run? Is China worse off than 30 years ago?
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Machine learning is specifically not magic. It only works to the extent that we can build our own priors into the model.

A typical media story... deep learning really is great. It represents the first time we've really figured out how to do large-scale nonlinear regression. But it is certainly not a magic bullet. However moderate headlines don't get as many hits as overhyped ones so every day we get another ridiculous article spouting nonsense...

Very tiresome. The truth is pretty interesting, can we talk about that instead?

For instance, how and why deep learning works at ALL is very much an open question. Consider - we're taking an incredibly nonlinear, nonconvex optimization problem and optimizing in just about the dumbest way imaginable, first-order gradient descent. It is really amazing that this works as well as it does.

... Why does deeper work better than wider? It has been known for many years that a shallow net has equivalent expressivity to a deep one. So what gives? (actually some interesting work towards answering this question in recent years by Sohl-Dickenstein et. al)
The gunboats didn’t create a free trade scenario. They created merchantilist, extraterritorial trade zones.

They bought Chinese goods with opium, not because they were fighting for liberty and free trade, but because they didn’t want to buy silk and other goods with silver. The hard currency was needed to hire the mercenaries (who are all about cash and carry) that kept Indian peasants growing poppies.

The result of this forced trade and loss of control was devastating inflation and collapse of governance within China and the circumstances that led to to horrors of the 20th century.
The Stoics of ancient times had something profound to say about everything, it seems. The reason for that, of course, is because what they actually describe is a way of thinking, a way of life. As you can gather from the article, there is also some religious context which is really fairly optional. Or at least you could substitute your own religious beliefs in with all the talk about God. But you can apply Stoic principles to really any situation you could think of. No kidding, and as implausible as it sounds, I've thought of things I read from Marcus Aurelius in the heat of combat, just having sort of popped into my mind. Though I will say that I'd been through a really tough stretch of life around that time, and had been reading some of the Stoics (among others) as an escape. So it's just as likely chance as anything else that brought that dude's writing to mind. Marcus Aurelius is kind of held up among the other greats of Stoic philosophy, but Seneca is really IMO the best. Epictetus is a close second. But Marcus Aurelius is popular because of course he was the Emperor, and never intended on publishing his diaries (which we today call "Meditations"). You want a rabbit hole that will save your life, perhaps not only figuratively? Here it is!
Stockton, California, to Test Universal Basic Income Program
Except I failed in my attempt to fix it and now I’m embarrassed :( !
This is exactly what everyone thought about Reader, and Wave, and Picnik, and Revolv...
More realistic than SkyNet was the only qualification given, but point taken.
Put it this way, I found a better job within 1.5 months, that pays almost 30k more. I really don't want to rock the boat.

But lets just say this: if you're a policy driver and you contract out networking operations, have an indepth review of all the servers they maintain. Things are not rosy underneath.
This simple horrifies me. Why would you do this to yourself and your family?

I don't see myself ever getting anything smart, and if I can't avoid it there is no way it touches my internet connection!
Related to another thread on this discussion:

Z-order combined with sorted array/tree/etc. generalizes to non-point objects quite easily. I think the Z-order NN algorithm will "just work" with non-point data.
Corollary: fewer jobs mean lower costs; social assistance could be more affordable.
Most people don't realize how bad all sorts of things in their life are. (Dietary dangers, sedentary lifestyle, financial irresponsibilities, etc)

That doesn't make them less bad, or less concerning overall.

If you think things in the world should only change because of popular opinion & sales, then things like emancipation, environmental protection, worker protection, consumer protection laws, and other such things would never have happened.
Great point -- but by taxes, I meant to include all that stuff. I guess that could get really tricky over time, since Switzerland--I'm guessing--introduced these laws within the last 30 years. But given that the economist article only covers like 30 countries, it doesn't seem like it's that much work. Maybe I'll take a stab at it.

Comparing them is a good point as well. The economist article doesn't go far enough in my opinion.

I'm interested mostly in mortgage payment vs rent. And mortgage payment vs income (after taxes).

Even income after taxes is a little tricky. Not sure if they're are any countries with REALLY high sales tax, but things like that could be worth considering.
Except it really isn't entirely your own genome. You share most of it with your relatives, and to lesser extents, the rest of us and all other beings. Since it's a shared resource, they should have a say.

Can you follow the argument if we flip it around? Your right to do anything you want should include not making it public. Others publishing "theirs" would mean publishing yours, whether you want it or not.
A student called Kevin holds the fate of the Merkel coalition
The US does not silence you until it does (ask Snowden, if you find him). And, more importantly, its game does not require silencing political oponents as long as they are irrelevant (communism in todays US), but extending soft-power around the world (with some aircraft carries for support). This model worked in the US interest for decades, but is not so effective anymore.

What the US did to the USSR, China is doing to the US: outmanouvering.

I find it just, since I consider the US attitude highly hipocrital, and criminal throughout.
> If it's bad, you also collect as much documentation proving that they're a bad actor, and that you did no wrong. (....) But you need to protect yourself.

This, a thousand times this!

In my last job, we had a media license that was set to expire after some months. My employer, thinking I was a fool, told me that we could just keep using it for a few months after the expiry and when we got caught we would just call it an "accounting error."

All along, the plan was to hold me responsible and fire me when we got caught. It's not the first time he's pulled that, so I wrote it down. He's the sort to take credit for your ideas, but blame you for his failures.

Because of him, I never trust someone who has skin in the game. They'll sell me out in a cold second ("nothing personal, it's just business.") if it'll help their bottom line or career prospects.

In short: get everything in writing, take photos of the computer clock and calender when you finish after working overtime, write down the details of any meetings or discussions. If you're in a place where health and safety issues aren't ever dealt with then photograph everything, with as much dating evidence as you can (front page of the day's paper, perhaps). Don't attend disciplinary meetings alone, have a lawyer with you.

Most importantly, know your rights and assert them. All the time. Don't let something slide just once, because "You worked one hour overtime last week, so it's now part of your job..."

Don't trust them.
Vanilla Android does not require any accounts, and Google Play Services allow to skip account setup. However, it could be that some vendors have mandatory account setup in their crapware.
Maybe lack of actual community existing causes childhood depression? The way so much of our society is set up to allow for individualism and solitude it doesn’t surprise me that the kids are not alright.
Let's say I'm implementing an application blind users should be able to use (not an FPS game or drawing program). Aren't GUIs a pain in the butt even when properly implemented with the right accessibility hooks?

How about writing a command line version of the program? Wouldn't that be much more accessible? I'm not even thinking ncurses, I'm thinking about a REPL, or even non-interactive like grep or awk.
How exactly? Do you have a codeable definition of General AI?
I like this Spolsky article that - as well as supporting your point - suggests that there's inevitably a lot of dross in the remaining pool of candidates. Anecdotally this chimes with my experiences from both sides of the interview table! https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2005/01/27/news-58/
That's kind of the problem - no one has a magical process to quickly/easily separate good engineers from the mediocre ones, you can only filter out obvious incompetence.

So simply offering lots of money is not sufficient to hire good engineers, you'll still get a mix of good and poor ones, and will need to figure out to filter them afterwards when you've had sufficient time to see what they're made of.
I just read it a few weeks back and was disappointed. His views on life seemed to boil down to something like "make as much wealth as possible, so you can retire as fast as you possibly can, so you can spend all of your time on whatever is meaningful in your life, and by no means ever have any fun." It seemed full of selfish anti-social advice for the extreme curmudgeon. But I also listened to it while on the road, so maybe I missed something.
China succeeded because it was in the prime position to take advantage of western manufacturing looking to move production facilities elsewhere for wage arbitrage. Right place, right time to reap massive export surpluses - and they were smart enough to use the opportunity to have built up a domestic market/technical knowledge base when wages inevitably started to raise and manufacturers began to move elsewhere again. You're going to see a lot less 'liberalization', and probably some reversals, in China in the coming years.
So what? That product reduces the efficacy of opioids so people can take a dump.
The most recent progress on Haskell 2020 seems to be a GitHub issue in which the committee members admitted work had stalled and put forth some ideas to improve things. That was 9 months ago though.
Upvoted because it's an interesting topic, but the statement in the title is straight-up inaccurate and reflects the author's biases regarding what meets the criteria for "SaaS company."

In the blog post itself he wrote, "As of 2018, I believe it is now impossible to start and scale a SaaS business without significant capital. [...] Bootstrapping SaaS to sustainable revenues and profitability is so hard in 2018 because of the time it takes to grow organically. [...] That said, it is still possible to gradually build up a profitable small software business in a niche area that can grow over time."

Yeah, that last example? No reason why a niche software business wouldn't be considered a SaaS company.

Really I'm annoyed by the phrasing / terminology here. He should have specified that he's talking about a large SaaS company... but at that point it's banal to say that you can't do it without raising capital.
> There may be many "engineers", but they are not really dedicated to their field.

What qualifies you to decide someone isn’t “dedicated” enough?
Elon's training is in physics and economics. He understands linear algebra and programming perfectly well. He also understands that policy (economic or otherwise) won't be developed unless people put it on the government's plate. And he understands that government tends to be reactive - they are invariably way behind the curve in governing tech. So he's using his bully pulpit to get the troglodytes (a concept that maps nicely to many Republicans) and luddites (a concept that maps nicely to a lot of Democrats) in Congress to start working on the problem (for context, Ted Cruz of all people runs the Senate science and technology committee).
Come on. China is no utopia—it isn’t even a country I would want to live in—but equating them to Nazis instantly discredits your arguments.

The Chinese model is unique, and why shouldn’t it be? They are the first country in history of their size to industrialize and become a world power.

Let’s stop making cute generalizations that only serve to make ourselves feel better and think of what we actually don’t like about their system of government so we can fix it in our own. “The Chinese are Nazis!!” doesn’t help anyone.
In order to reflect the subtleties Politifact use a sliding scale instead of purely true/false, and the article you linked is over 20 paragraphs in length.