skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You can be sure exactly how easy it is because in a perfectly competitive economy everyone has perfect information, and the experiment's key assumption is getting away with fraud is a endogenous variable in the utility function. The fraudster can manipulate this variable to optimize their utility. This means that every actor knows exactly what they must do to avoid getting caught. It's a simplification so we can consider the implications of the notion that getting away with fraud is as easy as setting your mind to it. Another assumption is entities act solely in their own financial best interest. In this setup, everyone who will be better off by committing some form of fraud, which will be everyone who participates in the economy, will commit fraud.
Everyone is talking about gaming but these are the kinds of resolutions you need for monitor replacement and more business related tasks.
By comparison, Shkreli is going to prison over a mere $10M fraud.
True for copper; less true for gold.

That is: The value of copper is set by its industrial usefulness. Gold? Not so much.

The price of gold, in my view, is set primarily by worldwide demand for a short on fiat currencies. Even if you don't buy that interpretation, though, financial (and therefore non-industrial) demand pretty clearly sets the price for gold.
creating a culture where superstition and idiocy is rewarded instead of knowledge for its own sake

Full disclosure: I'm an Atheist, but I share the some views with Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett with regards to the culture and practices of religion also embodying value which was accrued through a process of cultural evolution by natural selection.

What's worse than not having medicine for a sick patient is instead giving them poison or a harmful remedy, like bleeding or leeching. We seem to be replacing one set of dogmatic beliefs which can support toxic mentalities of moral panics and witch-hunting with another set of dogmatic beliefs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_bQTxNT-K8

From the Right side of the political spectrum, we see science denial and suppression of information through noise and obfuscation around the areas of biological evolution and climate change. From the Left side of the political spectrum, we see the same thing in the social sciences. There is indeed a closing of the American mind. Ideological adherence is enforced through bullying, logical argument is denied, and science is expected to kow-tow to politics.

The West is now struggling with its own form of Lysenkoism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism
"anything meaningful" isn't quite what they analyzed, they just analyzed the claim that they "contribute and enhance text" during publication. The fact that they didn't can't be used to jump to the conclusion that they didn't do anything meaningful. E.g. by determining a paper meets certain standards of accuracy, transparency and relevance would be some meaningful things that could still be done.
Smartthings integration would be nice. I mean I guess its possible to do it yourself, but out of the box would be sweet because all my lights and motion run off it.
> Are there non Apple competitors in the field?

I'm not in the market for a "smart" watch -- a cheap digital watch runs for a few years on a single battery, does most of what I want, and is indestructible -- but I would look to the companies making GPSes and heart rate monitors. Polar, Garmin, Suunto, and friends have been making durable and power-constrained devices for years. I think they will come at it from the right direction: rather than shoving in features and letting battery life catch up, they will carefully add features as allowed by battery life. I'm a bit surprised Google hasn't bought one yet.
If you add eye/focus tracking you can selectively render the part in focus in a higher resolution and use lower resolution for peripheral vision. The end result is that you are rendering at exactly the bandwidth that the human eye can handle, which is optimal and probably not that high. Going forwards, this is IMHO where the real optimization gains are.
Matt Levine is a national treasure.
I think it's pretty clear that extorting your customers is an awful business idea. ;)
> A model doesn't become a good model simply because

I agree, and

> nobody has bothered to make a better one

So bother! I have made 4 comments here and all of them ask the same question. What would you improve and how do you think it would affect the outcome?

Sometimes the simple model is (almost) as good as any in answering a simple question. For example, some people do not accept climate models (and probably never will), ostensibly for reasons that they are not good. I see the opposite - the models have gotten much better and much more realistic in the past 60 years. Yet, the same basic outcome (Earth will warm roughly 3 degrees by doubling CO2) was foretold by very crude models that even don't have the circulation.
17 years for 100% functionality in Boston and New York is not that long, really. It's soon enough for everyone from car manufacturers to city governments to be seriously considering their longer-term plans.
Richard Feynman's famous quotation is applicable here: "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself — and you are the easiest person to fool".

False positives are often more dangerous than false negatives. This is why the "fake it until you make it" trope can come back to bite you in the read end.
I accidentally scrolled down too far to see what you were talking about and the article automatically closed. Guess I didn't want to read it.
"Wait, maybe the name "Bain Capital" rings a bell?"

does mitt romney ring a bell.... bain is his
Haskell for Mac is great if you're on macOS: http://haskellformac.com. Highly recommended.
It’s almost as if no system is perfect. ;-)
FYI, the author regularly discusses unicorns in his daily column, and often gives them funny/appropriate names. E.g. Blood Unicorn for Theranos, Decacorn for Unicorns over 10b in value, and other ones I can't remember now.
> I think he does a much better job than the New Yorker article, too.

Not shocking at all! Destin is amazing and it seems like the New Yorker article as written by a wannabe comedian or something who was trying to work lame punchlines in everywhere instead of inform us of something.
> then there will be more demands to make the blocks bigger again, eventually leading to centralization

Because having a bigger block size raises the barrier to being a miner. (CapEx and OpEx are both greater.)

Imagine the other extreme: mining is so cheap that every phone, watch, and — oh let's just throw in every mouse and pigeon cortex — can be a miner. This is near one extreme of decentralization.

That's unattainable[1], but it's an intuition hook for the fact that the more expensive you make mining, the more centralized it becomes.

[1] IOTA tries to get closer to this. It makes a couple of changes from Bitcoin / Ethereum / etc. (1) IOTA uses a graph instead of a chain — this is why mining is cheaper, and low-powered IOT devices can mine. (2) IOTA uses homegrown cryptography, (EDIT: that has been proven exploitable multiple times), instead of reviewed standards. (2) isn't necessary for (1), nor does it help decentralization; it just seems to be an attached vanity project.
A look at a comic that touched on everything that makes Batman great
By the early '90s, when most cold fusion as fusion had been pretty much debunked, there were some researchers with good reputations as careful, competent experimenters who were starting to get some interesting results--not necessarily fusion, of course, but they pointed to something interesting and not understood going on.

But by that time, most people were no longer interested at looking at anything connected to cold fusion, so those interesting results weren't followed up on by others.

David Goodstein wrote an interesting article about that shortly afterward, in 1993 [1].

https://www.its.caltech.edu/~dg/fusion_art.html
I can't speak for anyone else, but for me personally I just don't like the approach of trying to solve the problem by throwing more disk space at it. It feels... inelegant, and probably unsustainable long term.

Imagine for a minute a future where Bitcoin goes mainstream and needs to process ~2k transactions per second. (A reasonable estimate of the world's current credit card transaction rate, and 3 orders of magnitude more than Bitcoin's current max capacity.) Would that _really_ be possible to sustain just by raising the block size?

Bitcoin's block chain is already 150 GB after only a decade, and if we drastically increase its rate of growth like that (by 3 orders of magnitude) the hardware requirements for even storing the full chain are gonna get ridiculous pretty fast.

That's not to say that I think bigger blocks couldn't work, but I think if Bitcoin does go that route it then it will need to find a way to trim old blocks out of the chain without compromising security in any way. Otherwise there's a real possibility we might end up with a 100 TB chain on our hands within the next 10 years or so. (Assuming Bitcoin succeeds the way we might want it to.)
I left my Linux laptop unplugged by accident the other day and it suspended to disk before the battery ran out so I lost no data. It's like Linux became usable and I didn't notice.
This is a poorly-written article with typos (e.g. '$10 million of new worth') confusing explanations.

For example, it says "In order to then balance the financial statement, there must be a debit of $20 million to equalize the new credit of $20 million ($30 million of loan less the $10 million of new worth that has been eliminated). To do this, a “plug” asset usually under the heading of goodwill (here for $20 million) is added to the asset side of the financial statement."

Most people reading this would conclude that 'goodwill' is some accounting thing that is required due to the use of debt, or because the company doesn't received the money from the lender.

But goodwill has nothing to do with debt. Whenever one company purchases another, paying more than the book value (accounting value) of the target (which is almost always the case), goodwill arises on the acquiring company's balance sheet.
That seems like a terrible name...
The value of a currency is the effort required to obtain it.

And transitively that boils down to time - expenditure of the finite lifespan of humans.

It's a proof of burn system.
I'm a Jaeger developer at Uber, so this could be a bit biased. Jaeger is the only major open source distributed tracer I know of that conforms to the OpenTracing standard. OpenCensus and presumably Canopy require tracer-specific code to be embedded in your program. This makes you locked in to a given provider. You won't find many people who have tested them side by side. Jaeger follows the OpenTracing standard so you can embed generic tracer code and change your tracer on the fly. Once you do this, comparison testing is easy.
I guess my confusion is what the successes even look like. Are these all companies that would fold if they didn't take the buyouts? Because otherwise I can't work out what the potential upside is.
> I feel self driving cars need to do everything humans do and then 10x better to succeed

I hope that's not the case. Even if self-driving cars are only as good as the median human driver, a universal rollout of that tech would save countless lives. I really hope that when the first self-driving fatality happens the media or public fear doesn't blow it out of proportion.
That doesn’t answer the question at all. What’s stopping a big IP firm from buying your company for the database of license violations?
I'd try to explain to my parents why I was getting bullied and having a hard time making friends, asking them for advice.

In response, they'd assure me that obviously the students with the best grades should garner all the respect like it was for them in their childhoods

From my personal experience: Some Asian parents make it all the worse, if they then insist they know better in the face of reality on the ground. When they do this, they destroy their own credibility at a time when children most need to hear advice. Furthermore, they cut themselves off from the information they need to give the best advice possible.
Yes, is does. However, the amount of electricity used isn't directly correlated with the number of transactions on the network. It instead follows the number of miners validating those transactions. A empty block validating no transaction takes more or less the same amount of work as a full block to mine. That was GP's point, I think.

That being said, having a lot of transactions going around is probably correlated with Bitcoin getting more popular, which is again probably correlated with more miners coming in, which would indeed lead to higher energy consumption. That's an indirect effect, however.
I don't think that explanation works. In your scenario, you wouldn't expect humans in Asia to have more Neanderthal DNA than humans in Europe.
In addition to some areas of genomics, China has likely surpassed the US in quantum communications and some AI applications (not yet overall AI research), esp those involving NLP. It's probable that more are forthcoming.
For those who may not know the context, this has to do with long-term scaling of the Bitcoin network.

The very first public response to Satoshi's announcement of Bitcoin was an expression of doubt about scalability:

We very, very much need such a system, but the way I understand your proposal, it does not seem to scale to the required size.

...

To detect and reject a double spending event in a timely manner, one must have most past transactions of the coins in the transaction, which, naively implemented, requires each peer to have most past transactions, or most past transactions that occurred recently. If hundreds of millions of people are doing transactions, that is a lot of bandwidth - each must know all, or a substantial part thereof.

https://www.mail-archive.com/cryptography@metzdowd.com/msg09...

And the comment was spot-on. Naively implemented, Bitcoin can only scale linearly by putting every transaction onto the block chain. Double the transaction capacity means doubling the size of blocks.

Lightning Network scales the Bitcoin network by offering a secure method for keeping many, if not most, transactions off the block chain. This is done through a clever use of Script, Bitcoin's built-in programming language.

Two parties who want to transact at high speed jointly lock up some money with an on-chain transaction (thereby creating a "payment channel"). Then they send each other half-signed transactions spending the locked funds. Each transaction represents a kind of private ledger. Although any of these transactions can be published at any time, it will usually be mutually beneficial to avoid doing so and continue passing half-signed transactions back and forth. When it's time to call it quits, the last transaction is published.

In other words, the intermediate transactions never need to hit the block chain. Only the final settlement transaction needs to be published.

Lightning takes this one step further by providing a mechanism whereby a party can pay another party on behalf of a third party. This means that you can make Lightning payments without necessarily having an open channel with your intended payee. You just need an open channel and the network routes your payment.

Lightning Network has been in development for years. The idea has been repeatedly disparaged as "vaporware." The first mainnet release is a big deal because that characterization no longer applies. It also means we're going to see a real-world test of an idea that up until now hasn't been widely-tested.

The Bitcoin Cash split was due in large part to a group of Bitcoiners rejecting Lightning as a scaling option. They tend to believe not only that Bitcoin can scale by increasing block size, but that this is the best way.
I can tell instantly from the poor spacing of the justified text. Word makes obviously poor choices that TeX would not. Word could use the same algorithm used by TeX. I have read that the codebase for Word includes a significant amount of legacy code attempting to maintain backward compatibility, so they are probably stuck with the layout code currently used.
Let me offer an alternative (why my wife and I decided to try it).

We get tired of cooking the same homemade Indian food and the same dozen dishes. We only know how to cook about two dozen dishes total. If we want to try something different, the only option is restaurants, which can be pricey when you eat out often, and also often not terribly healthy.

Blue Apron and similar products allow us to try new dishes without having to think about what to try. They allow us to try different cuisines without having to research ingredients and buy the wrong amount.

Yes meal kits are more expensive than cooking at home. But for us, they gave us often the same amount of food "newness" as a restaurant, without spending as much. That was worth it.
How do self driving cars make blide left or right turns. I sometimes have to slowly creep out until I can see its safe to go.
Not sure about Prime, but more and more of stuff on Netflix to me is great because it's available in French (and other) language or subtitle.

Great for my multi-lingual family. I almost don't care what the content is (well as long as it's appropriate) as long as they're getting immersion while watching.
Does the hardware on x86 even know which cache is owned by which process? It knows which is elevated (kernel Vs. User Vs. Hypervisor, etc) but process isolation on x86 is largely a kernel API construct rather than a hardware one.

Unless I'm mistaken.
Probably means you don't go to jail in 2018 for mean tweets. Or some other modern Nazi line, amirite?
Indeed, no one bothered me when I did well. Perhaps because I kept a low profile and wasn’t annoying about it.
The hate is because the Clear Channel business model destroyed local music stations, with ties to the local community and culture, by buying up stations, firing everyone, and running them as automatons by remote programming. Complete with phony "we love XYZ" promos by well-known local personalities whose entire involvement was 15 minutes in a sound booth and a check.

It's a business model designed to mine the value of local radio, extract the money, kill the host organism, and move on. The zombie shells left behind are vanilla, deceptive, and empty.
Atari sold millions of 2600s that had 160x192 resolution because joysticks are easier to use than hand waving.
Iota is horrendous(they rolled their own crypto and its bad) and no IOT company will ever bother with it.
This is actually really interesting when you're dealing with large pools.

Last year, I was in a pool with 10,000+ people and serious $ were on the line and I actively negotiated with other brackets to buy them, split ownership, etc.

A few questions/comments:
- Would you also be able to sell a % of the bracket rather than just all of it?
- Would you also build out tools to predict the current odds of the entries?
While I don't think the investors/advisors were necessarily in on this, you're actually mistaken here.

First of all, an advisor could certainly be making money just by drawing a salary or any other compensation. As did Elizabeth Holmes, actually, who drew a salary of 200k (not very large for a CEO, I believe, but certainly this is a very real compensation she got from the fraud).

As for investors, theoretically speaking, early round investors could've sold their shares to later round investors and cashed out.

Again, I'm speaking hypothetically here - I assume there weren't that many people involved in the fraud, just by virtue of the fact that it was kept alive for many years and it's hard to get many people to keep a secret.
Oh, it's like the Grid Square system that Ham Radio operators use: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maidenhead_Locator_System
Just with a greater precision since it seems to go down to a very localized area, such as a building.
Yes, OpenPose gave us a lot of inspiration. DensePose is similarly impressive and came out recently.

We did the course together but met many years before, in high school in Canada in '07.
John Mappin Offers a Meeting Location for Donald Trump and Kim Jong-Un
> Its quite possible that with progress made in brains wavelengths readings, the true vr in form of iphone1 will be a head cap you put on and your view/smell/touch perceptions are overwritten by cap’s sensor.

That sort of headset would be such a massive breakthrough in neuroscience that the VR aspect of it would be tiny in comparison.
(better if you're > 5% because having only 2-3 in a class still 'others' you).

I was also in the gifted program. There are special problems with being a hypo-minority. For one thing, you're highly visible to every sociopath in the area. This is a part of what women can experience in the tech field, when they are only about 1% of the local population.
Amazon's basically just cutting a check to "W. Chump & Sons" (The production company Wilman, Clarkson, Hammond and May each have a 25% share in) for the show. They supposedly have very little to do with the actual making of the show. The BBC was more involved, from my understanding.
Much of the technology that kickstarted the Japanese economy's recovery was freely sold to them by American companies in the 1950s-60s, who were delighted to make back R&D costs by licensing their ideas to Japan's then-puny economy. It came back to bite them a decade later, but they had no idea that would happen.

This is different from (as another poster has mentioned) keeping your domestic market walled-off unless companies agree to share their technology with you for free. They (American firms) are making this choice in full knowledge of how competitive China is with the US right now.
I get these titles in Apple Music daily playlists a lot too, so it's not just Amazon.

I see topX lists as "what studios want you to listen to". Only Spotify's discover weekly seems interesting at all.
Unless you want to get acquired by Oracle, that is.
Is it basically a smaller Kinect without the Xbox platform tie-in?

Looks very neat. If you open the API, I’d love to play with it!
That was, partially, explained part way through the article:

These sensors make the whole system more accurate and keep things comfortable. That might come at the cost of overheating another area of your home that you’re not in, though. Unless you’ve got smart vents, heating systems are nowhere near precise enough to set different climates for each room.
I had a similar thought on the OpenPose library. How did your team end up with such a robust model without using OpenPose? As far as I know, OpenPose is only licensed for Academic use and was created using the Panoptic dataset which I believe is open. The problem is, creating a system that reaches the parity level of OpenPose with simple 2D image rec could be a startup in itself. I'm a bit cynical...

EDIT: you answered my question with DensePose. Had no idea that exists!
I am wondering why all VR device is designed like a glass.
Isn't it more comfortable to the user if we design it like a helmet?
SOF – Open source audio DSP firmware and development tools
That 500 million includes the UK...
yeah reverse engineering another company's IP so you can steal it is definitely ethical behavior
VR is not dead because the resolution isn't high enough. It's dead because it's been around for 30 years and no one has found a useful application for it.
I hear you. I've made it my mission to reduce physical mailbox clutter and it amazes me how many of them take my contact request as permission to sign me up for their email spam...