skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> To game this, you would have to create tons of accounts upvoting bad arguments, downvoting good ones, and overloading the links to biased secondary sources.

Like what's happening in Reddit?

This is not too difficult to do.

The problem with fake news is anonymity. So long as it's possible to create tens of thousands of accounts without real world association to a human person, this problem, and all problems associated with trolling and brigading on the internet, will persist.

Anonymity is the best thing about the internet, and the worst thing about the internet.
I am reminded of the experiment where a cockroach had brain implants that allowed its movement to be controlled electronically. After a while the cockroach would figure out the signal the researchers were using and its brain ignored it effectively locking out the researchers. At some point it was figured out that if random noise (music) was constantly transmitted the cockroach could be controlled much longer before its brain figured out what signal to block. In the end it would always figure out what signal the researchers were using.

Right now fake news is merely manipulative signal wrapped in noise. If cockroaches can figure it out, so can every human on earth.

Alternatively we could start a reality tv show where every week fake news company executives are tried for treason and executed. Hell kick it up to 3x a week I'd watch it.
Perhaps some good will come out of all this.

Maybe in the future, when some PHB asks development to add a questionable data gathering function to a platform they can say, "Remember Facebook?"
I misread the title as, "just starting lying to yourself" I thought this was appropriate due to the cognitive disoance involved.
I like to think of frugality as something akin to adding the the "-O2" argument to $CFLAGS. It isn't going to undo fundamentally bad life choices, it won't make much difference if your code is already written in inline assembly, it might help you meet requirements if you were on the edge, it might not be a terrible idea to turn it on when you're building the release binary.
Extra-ironically, look at the opening line there:

> Procter & Gamble Co. PG 0.66% , the biggest advertising spender in the world, will move away from ads on Facebook that target specific consumers, concluding that the practice has limited effectiveness.

More-and-more-specialized online display advertising rarely delivers as (heh) advertised on any platform.

But on the other hand, the bit you leave out includes both that they weren't cutting their FB budget, and that they'd found some areas where it works better:

> Mr. Pritchard said P&G won’t cut back on Facebook spending and will employ targeted ads where it makes sense, such as pitching diapers to expectant mothers.

So the real question is: were these political campaigns the useless sort of micro-targeting, or the effective kind?
Water slide experimentation might be more apt.

Don't test in production. Or with human lives.
Does anyone care to comment on other countries and their handling of the hazardous waste from semiconductor manufacturing? Also are the unsafe practices long outdated?
My experience is coworker developers struggling-at-best to use git from the command line in the simple case, and having almost no visibility into the tree/history of the repository for use in debugging. Or being unaware of useful git features such as line-by-line selective staging (that I consider absolutely essential for dev teams).

I don't particularly like SourceTree, and it is slow and annoying in certain ways. But I'm extremely productive with it as a poweruser, and it's much better for beginners as well.
Facebook didnt loose $100B in 10 days: it's market value dropped in response to bad news. Stocks go up and down all the time on companies that remain around a long time. It's still making piles of money. Its users have a huge, switching cost to block a transition, too.
It seems more like a move to control their own software licenses. If a device isn't licensed to run GApps, then why should it be allowed to use the services?

And from another direction, if a manufacturer refuses Google's terms for including the software, then why should that manufacturer get the benefit of being able to include the software, outside of its licensing terms?
Could this spark a small tech bubble burst?

Will non-tech people be fed up with their data being abused by tech/ad companies? If this trend goes viral (ironic, eh?) it could mean less ad money. Advertising has had it really good compared to older days of TV and radio with targeted online communities and data about them.

Maybe this just sparks less VC investment towards freemium products?
Either the author works on toy systems, or is being disingenuous.

These are not problems with AI, they are problems with using only AI, and no viable-for-development system that I'm aware of in industry does that.
Tuition was free for in-state students during America's peak post war years in California and other places. It's not like it's completely alien to America. Nobody is advocating "throwing money" at the issue but you can't just sit around waiting for cultural change without doing anything about it.
Well if you get zero openness with both Google and Apple, you might as well get the privacy protection of Apple with it, right?
That is problematic for a number of reasons:

1. Hiring a new employee into an existing team permanently affects the team's dynamic and morale. Bringing in a bad fit can have undesired cascade effects. Bad team members can cause other good team members to leave earlier than intended, for example. You can counteract this by having the entire team interview the candidate, but this doesn't scale for teams larger than, say, three candidates, doesn't work at all for distributed teams and takes their time away from work that needs to get done.

2. Hiring an employee is also a legal risk. Firing people in "protected" classes is touchy and can take a while, for example: https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/62846. You're also opening yourself up to unnecessary lawsuits that just add more of a headache for Legal to deal with...if you have legal. (Early-stage startups typically don't have legal teams.)

3. Hiring engineers is expensive beyond their base salaries. Firing bad engineers can be a huge waste of money.

If you're an early stage startup, you're better off hiring contractors for point work and taking time to find the best hires that you can. Later-stage or profitable companies can afford to not hire "false positives". At worst, a potentially-good candidate you're on the fence about can come back in six or twelve months and try again.
Nobody is saying that the user is in the wrong. Google specifically provides a mechanism for users of custom ROMs to register their devices and get around this block.
"I am afraid that this will have a chilling effect against innovation in this area" is the sort of way that software engineers respond to similar problems in their space.

We need to hold ourselves to at least this good a standard.
This is absolutely a case where an autonomous system should have out-performed a manned system. Lasers see through darkness very well. A camera-only system is insufficient.
two years, despite repeated reports of injuries, people reporting that they'd lifted off the surface etc, among other warnings.
Yeah, when it first opened and I saw the netting... that was a huge red flag. If you have to put netting up it's not safe end of story. The whole ride is just a lesson in what not to do, and hopefully other parks will learn from it.
You're ignoring that the percentage of people living in cities has gone up by 50% (56% -> 75%) from 1940 to 1990 (couldn't find later data).

The size of homes has also gotten much bigger.

So the $30,000 home in 1940 (in today's dollar) wouldn't look anything like a $300,000 home today.

I'd be more interested to learn what a townhouse in Manhattan cost in 1940 and 2010.
Wait 3 months and a new javascript framework will be en vogue.
maybe for a bit until the fed plays economy / wage growth wack a mole by raising interest rates. one of their main decisions for raising rates is they see inflation in wage growth. call me cave man, but i think its kind of sick.
I'm not sure what's scary there. It's got a low velocity for a lightweight round and penetrates light armor. As a trade off it doesn't have great terminal performance against people.
I partially disagree. I studied CS and business as a double major. I work in software now. While it certainly wasn't as important as CS to my career, I'm glad I also did the business major.

The technical business skills don't come up much (outside of properly using terms like "gross profit" and managing my personal finances), but I'd say the main thing I learned in the business major was soft skills. Almost all the work we did was in groups. We had to give lots of presentations. We had to study business communication. I've found that these skills are very useful for distinguishing oneself from one's peers, and they apply to almost any profession.
For one, the Muslim ban.

But really, everything. Other than trivial descriptions of ceremonial functions (“issued a Christmas proclamation”), and possibly some periodic renewals, there's not a lot that is remotely the same.
That's a universal human truth.
I have to admit, the latter part certainly worries me given the witch hunting obsession society seems to have with perceived harassment and creepiness nowadays. I'm definitely a tad fearful than somewhat on the autistic spectrum (or with various other neurological differences) could end up with their life destroyed by a social media mob due to something they couldn't understand.

And I suspect in many cases, that may stop those with those conditions even trying to attempt conversations with others, since they've heard the horror stories and fear their already tough situation could unintentionally end up becoming even tougher.
Eastern european living in San Francisco now. It's the lifestyle. Back home I would go out once per week, drink 2 beers max, walk-to-and-from (4-5 euro total cost of a whole week's entertainment. Bang for your buck!). If you wanted to drink more you 'd pre-game at home, drinking unlabeled homebrewed vodka! Food? You cook it yourself (or mom would since I lived with my parents), put it in the refrigerator and warm it up every day at the week.

Now in SF, I order sushi twice per week. Go out at least 3-4 times per week and lots of times pay for drinks for friends etc, never walk when going out always rideshare. And it's not only about alcohol and food of course.

I could be saving way way more if not for this lifestyle. That's how it goes. Everyone who tells you otherwise are lying to you and worse themselves. Basic human nature. The moment you make more money, you want to take your girlfriend/boyfriend to a fancier restaurant. You want to buy the nicer phone. Except for rent prices which are insanely high, the regular cost of living is not that much higher than living in eastern europe. Actually funny enough when I first moved here, I was shocked at how cheap everything seemed - of course taking into consideration the high salaries. In many cases actually eastern europeans pay more for certain things because for some unknown reason 1 dollar turns to 1 euro, instead of 0.75 of a euro or whatever the price at the moment is. Our petty $350 salaries can sure take it!

Mate, people here have a favorite whisky!I now have a favorite whisky. And as any self-respecting adult it needs to be fancy, not the cheap stuff. Ardbeg, tastes smoky, like swalloing in dim campfire and most bars here will charge you $16 for a glass. There you have it, how people aren't saving money.

It adds up. But I also have a friend here who on a 120k engineer salary and saved 100k in 2 years. Only eating at work, living on a shared room with 3 more people in treasure island. Reimbursing bus fares to work etc. The other side of the coin. Almost everyday I say to myself that soon I will do the same, and sure enough every day I don't. Just like not going to the gym and forgetting to call mom again.
Except NAZDAQ rallied today, so did Google. Facebook did not. Google's decline was part of the halo effect cast over big data techs as a result of the facebook debacle, and indexes in general were down over fears of pending trade wars with China that have now eased slightly. Facebook's decline continued despite these other factors getting some relief. Its issues are all its own at the moment.
What's interesting for me is that I finally deleted my account. I never used it anyway but now I feel empowered to say "I don't have an FB account" and that's ok.

I think this is a sea change - there will never again be this dominant of a social network imho. From now on the space will be fractured into niches (AngelList, LinkedIn, NextDoor, etc...).
... netting that is held together with metal hoops, through which you're shooting at high speeds.

If that situation occurs for which the netting is there, it follows that the riders are hitting those hoops at full speed at an oblique angle. You're not going to somehow nicely land between those metal hoops and be caught just by the netting alone. (If that were possible, it doesn't seem safe, either, for that matter).

A much more appropriate restraint (if we can even discuss such a thing here) would be for that section of the track to be a fully enclosed, smooth tube.
> Why would AI-driven vehicles not have dedicated, single-purpose subsystems such as anti-collision? I mean, are we going to also remove ABS, because the AI could learn to modulate the brakes itself? How much are we going to push into AI, when the purpose-built systems are both functional and effective?

This makes me want to pull my hair out. No reasonable system relies on AI from top to bottom. Take this article with a grain of salt, it is attacking a straw-man.
Smarter shareholders will just get the CEO ousted. An inside job, much cleaner than mud slinging through the courts.

A distinction without a difference.
See Selenium, Chrome headless, Firefox headless, etc.
Holy shit. This is some Action Park [1] level irresponsibility here.

A few other horrifying details:

* Riders were restrained by Velcro straps. These frequently came loose. One rider broke several toes after his restraint came undone during a ride, forcing him to dig his feet into the corners of the raft.

* The brake system on the ride was completely nonfunctional when the boy was killed, and had been that way for several weeks. Evidence suggests that the park planned to delay maintenance until the park closed for the season.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_Park -- aka "Class Action Park"
This is nitpicking a bit, but college is affordable, it's just very expensive.

A side effect of the government guaranteeing student loans is that universities could charge basically whatever they want, knowing that students would still be able to pay it. It funded massive expansions, but instead of universities taking on the debt, students did.
Not sure even the Black Knight could get over a decapitation.
Well there is a problem when it's now incredibly easy for say, a government to profile and find dissidents, etc.

Most people don't fall into this bucket and thus don't care, but the overall effect is to highlight deviations from the norm.
This is nice and pretty, but it still requires evaluating the function in infinitely many points. Is there an easy fix for that?
I smell a straw man argument.
> When one thinks that we could have had Scheme

My understanding is that we do (or did) mostly have Scheme with the first release of JavaScript, just with different syntax. What about Scheme, what features or syntax, would be so much better than JS that we should switch?

Would you elaborate on what makes JavaScript so bad? How much have you used it yourself? Having done lots of C++ in my life, I find writing JavaScript quite a bit more enjoyable. Especially recently now that the dev tools in all the major browsers have gotten so good.
You don't get a class action from one decapitation. You need to have a large group of people with the same injuries. Those are the people that shrug it off and don't sue.
Facebook runs a messaging service with ~1.2 billion monthly active users. One of the core features of the product is to integrate with other contacts on your phone, and you have to explicitly enable this feature, agreeing to "ongoing upload" of your "text and call history".

Apple runs a messaging service called iMessage. It logs all of your call metadata, SMS history, etc. There is no opt-in, it's just default behavior. Apple also runs iCloud. All of your data is sent there, too, including complete conversations.

Can someone for the life of me explain to me what makes Facebook the villain here? Apple does exactly the same thing.

Facebook has never sold this data. There is no evidence they've even used the data for anything except its explicitly-stated purpose.
I guess my comment is more confusing than intended, but a smartphone and modern living easily lets you be productive enough to afford a house. It's not difficult when half the planet lives on dollars per day.
So basically Wikipedia? Why do you think people will trust it and use it exclusively for information?
I'm surprised that any insurer would issue a policy for a place like this without doing enough due diligence to see how sketchy it is.
>"If we actually knew how to do this, and it could be done that easily, it wouldn't be that spectacular."

The same logic applies for a majority of cryptocurrency and gig economy startups.
Except Android devices without their services are still perfectly workable.

Many security-paranoid people I know run Lineageos/plain AOSP happily.
Wisconsin teens take anti-gun march to House Speaker Ryan's hometown
AI savants, recognizing bias, and building machines that think like people
anyone who has ever owned a small zodiac can tell you about this.
Yes it is because that 13.3% is on top of your federal taxes (which don't change). A Californian making $150k is making $20,000 less than a Texan making $150k. That's sizeable! And Californians pay more in property taxes!
>It's terrible to be reachable 18h/day.

This exactly. Sure I could go do the undergraduate business thing and live what many would consider a more than comfortable life making 80k a year, but most companies that I would do that for would own me and I would only ever be a pencil pusher. The problem with this, for me, is that I would not really have a life of my own.
Alternative Lenders Are Easing the Credit Burden on Small Businesses
Microsoft surges 8% after Morgan Stanley says it will reach $1T market cap
If you’re looking at MV,MP, etc you’re pretty much requiring married people - it generally takes two highly paid people working full time to afford a house down there, and those cities are vehemently opposed to adding any housing. Similar for Cupertino - especially given the school district.

Seriously you just have to work on it - dating post college is much more work (for all genders and orientations) - like multiple dates a week for months to find someone you click with. That’s just part of life. I think (from over hearing conversations) many people do have difficulty talking about non-work things.

Shrug
Society has moved into a dangerous position of rewarding people for extreme risk taking, so long as it pans out. I'm not saying this guy wasn't responsible. He totally was, but things like this are going to keep happening the more we encourage disastrous risks.

They use to happen all the time before we started focusing on safety standards for cars. There's a great 99% Invisible episode about the shift from believing injury from car accidents was unavoidable/the fault of the driver to making cars safer in impacts:

https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/nut-behind-wheel/

Stories like this seem to be a step backwards. Regulation can sometimes hinder some industry (usually when one industry lobbies for it to keep competitors), but it also has an incredible track record of making things safer.
We all have exactly the same amount of time every day. How you spend it is up to you. You can choose differently, especially if you're on HN discussing it in the first place.
In point of fact, FB is also up today, although only modestly.
Staring != sustained, although defining that is hard.

What you're trying to do is establish that the eye contact is not incidental; "solid" may be a better word that "sustained".

If someone is unwilling to hold eye contact with you, they are unwilling to talk. That's the test you're trying to run.
This is why most of us aren't real engineers. When real engineers are sloppy people die. When we are sloppy, our industry leaders defend it as being 'pragmatic'.
Show HN: GitHub special files and paths (README, LICENSE, .github, /docs, etc.)
We shall see. Media lends itself to being highly concentrated. Social media, because of network effects, even more so.
- UI code spends most of its time interacting with a UI API (Android view framework, whatever iOS uses, DOM/CSS in web). These APIs are enormous and are rarely designed with testing in mind. Mocking or faking the pieces of API that you need to interact with is frequently a daunting or impossible task.

- Followup to the above: because so much of the "work" involved with UI code involves interacting with another API, usage of that API tends to spread itself through the entire codebase like cancer. You can create a careful separation of concerns, but it takes a lot of upfront work, verbose boilerplate code, and constant vigilance -- if you're just handed an existing UI codebase you won't have that luxury.

- UI code is highly stateful and highly mutable. A core skill in UI programming is managing your app's enormous state profile. Single-path, whole-world rendering techniques like React/other shadow DOM techniques really help here.

- UI is highly temporal. It needs to change over time. Testing anything to do with time is an enormous headache. Animations can force you to temporarily separate your underlying state from its representation, which is a testing nightmare. But just in general, writing unit tests that involve time passing is infuriating and fragile (even if you can control time passing via a mocked clock object).

- A lot of core functionality in UI involves different pieces handing off to each other -- one window transitions to another window, etc. To test that properly you need integration tests, but now your integration tests also need to interact with the underlying OS/browser (because you can't separate any of that stuff out). So your integration tests are in general way flakier than you can get on UI-less systems that really only need to worry about faking out a DB of some kind.
edit: The owner was arrested just today, so I had missed that.

Can someone explain why they are charging the 29 year old director of operations who started as a lifeguard and had no formal training or connection to engineering/design and not one of the designers or owners, both of which are mentioned in the indictment multiple times?

It doesn't make a lot of sense to me other than they needed to charge someone.
I'm not suggesting that Google isn't a monopoly or that it shouldn't be broken up. I'm suggesting that Google could withhold services from the EU instead of agreeing to be broken up. Unlike a bank where its customers could demand their money back, Google owes its users nothing.