skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The "walled garden" is knowledge. To understand legalese, you have to know the definitions of the words. Specifically, you have to know the definitions as used by the courts. Many words have very precise legal definitions, which may or may not correspond with the non-legal definition.

Why is it that way? When you're writing a contract or a law, having words that let you state precisely what you mean saves a lot of trouble and confusion. We can go to court about people actually breaking the law or the contract, rather than about what the definition of "is" is.

And, as that snarky example illustrated, sometimes it doesn't work. Sometimes you wind up arguing exactly about the definition of words. But the precision of words in the legal community means that that happens a lot less often than it otherwise would.
>What a rollercoaster.

Decades ago everyone _knew_ smoking caused cigarettes. As a middle schooler I could intuitively see that overeating sugar would lead to diabetic issues that are just now being "proven" by science.

Is it possible that the UK health system has figured out something that is obvious through their experiences with so many people? If you are overweight and unhealthy in general, that in general you will have more instances of every disease?

But until there are actual concerted scientific studies, not intimidated by social/political bullying, to consider behavior as a risk factor for disease, what can be done?

We can only rely on common sense, simplistic views, spreadsheets of private data we aren't legally allowed to share, etc... People in health care are stuck between a rock and a hard-place. (scientific studies vs what is obvious in front of them)
Have you done these things?
The key one, I think, is number 4. Nothing moves Congresscritters faster than something posing a risk to their reelection campaign. But everything here is accurate.
I used to think this but after working in a large image processing team, I've come around to believe it's something management just rationalizes. In a lot of cases you _do_ need a big team with diverse research skills, otherwise you are deeply unable to pivot your own products and services for changing customer demands or adapt to situations when new models or competition elevate the minimal level of features that customers expect.
Building this stuff in a way that won't fall apart is really hard and you need a lot of people who are happy to be focused on the integration, deployment, and maintenance for sure. But you do also need a lot of people who are dedicated to the research, prototype, and model performance understanding side too, without trying to squeeze extra work out of them by trying to sell roles as a "hybrid" between integration and research.
Saying that "people don't give a shit about models" is vacuous, because ultimately the stack trace of what they do give a shit about will bottom out at issues with models that require a diverse team of experts to debug and solve.
I think companies are still stuck in a dreamworld right now where they want to believe that very junior engineers with tangential interest in machine learning are going to slot in at your standard $130k - $160k job offer (in major urban areas) and do just as adequate of a job as senior experts who might earn twice that.
But it doesn't work, and this type of penny pinching on the modeling side, rationalized by a false belief that you only need a tiny bit of research expenditure, I think is responsible for many start-ups failing and many projects being unwound in larger corporations.
But they aren't profitable (and never were), right?
The real irony is between SESTA/FOSTA and the CLOUD act we've basically regulated Internet companies into mandatory consumer violation instead of protection. There is no end to this. If this extends to telcos then decentralization will not help. Today, we made the Internet into broadcast television. Congratulations to AT&T.
I'm not sure how easy Rust claims to be... The main idea here is " I love that Haskell-esque feeling where a compiling program is usually a working program." Rust will probably get easier, but it's main goal is safety.

The main problem I have with a pure safety focus is that the warnings often feel like overkill for 99% of programs. For example, when gcc yells about comparing signed and unsigned ints, I find that there rarely is a true safety concern involved. I hope Rust is better than that.
I have a new goal-

Get so big I can give the middle finger to Apple.

Although I've gotten less bitter since I found React-Native.
There are plenty of things to complain about re: Baby Boomers, but this article is silly on numerous levels, particularly with logic and statistics.

"the rest of the worlds’ factories were destroyed, while ours were not. Globalization hadn’t taken off, so there was no competition between, say, auto workers in the U.S. and auto workers abroad." Not sure what factories being destroyed has to do with globalization, but OK...

"Digging into Chetty's data" - what a joke - those who did not live during the Great Depression earned more than those who lived in it - holy shit, what a conclusion - going to be tough for the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences to ignore such astute work...

The fact that the author is a PhD candidate at NYU, will soon be an assistant professor at PSU, and is presumably a millennial isn't going to endear any Baby Boomer (or reasonable human of any generation) to the millennials with such a half-ass screed.
"Can "most people" afford paying $600 yearly fee to edit images?"

Considering Adobe's Creative Cloud is pretty popular, it seems that yeah, they can. But that's irrelevant to whether a piece of software is FLOSS or not.

"although they may not know that these problems are caused by Adobe apps being non-free"

How dare those bastards ask to be paid for their work!

"I just don't think that suggesting proprietary alternatives in this context is particularly helpful as they also lack features of freedom, e.g. sharing, privacy and absence of vendor lock-in."

In this context, nobody gave a shit about that. They wanted the features that let them get their work done. If FLOSS doesn't have it, it doesn't get used. End of story.

"If Adobe freed the source code of Photoshop, how long do you think it would take for missing features to make it into Gimp?"

Irrelevant, cause that's not going to happen. If the Gimp developers aren't good enough to make those features themselves, without copying off of Adobe, perhaps they should work on something else.

"... except if the task involves working with other people who may not have access to that software, or may not want to run proprietary software, or may not want to give up their privacy or freedom."

So, nobody? Photoshop is the industry standard. If you're not using it, you're the one who's the odd person out, not them.
radical liberal

Most radicals don't consider themselves liberal...
PS: we are running a b2b app. The data stored is transactional. So any downtime is way too damaging for us and our clients.
6 or 7
the mentioned nested epolls is interesting, will be great if there are meaningful benchmarks on some real world applications.
If you paid with your credit card at the dentist they probably connected you that way.
On that note, I wonder how many people might disagree with the bill's heavy-handedness but don't want to be seen as "opponents" to something like FOSTA.
As long as NAT is the default mostly everywhere we'll be stuck with 3rd parties to interact between users, if only to poke hole in those NATs. You can fire up a local HTTP server on your machine very easily if you want to share a file but it's no use if your IP is not reachable.

Of course there's more to Dropbox than that, you also have 3rd party "cloud" storage which is an important feature, especially if you want your file to remain available to 3rd parties when you shutdown your machine.
But sex work IS legal in the majority of western nations.
Every Data Protection Office in the EU Member states has published guidance for business and individiuls.
Here's the British ICO: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-the-general-da...
That's an interesting corollary... Hanlon's razor applies to sentencing, but not to guilt.
The laws may be similar, but the punishments are not. In the UK and other authoritarian EU countries, people are fined or jailed for certain speech. In China, people "disappear".
Not really answering your question, but in the interest of protecting a critical ecosystem I think some theoretical privacy loss is an acceptable trade off. Privacy is not the be-all-end-all.
this company has no future. Amazon and Google can kill it easily when they want.
Well it is the same thing.

I'm not a pro-gun at all. But this is a political move as an after effect of the school shootings, pushed by a left agenda for banning guns (which on a personal level I agree btw).

The issue is that you have a private company taking a political position and therefore forbidding specific videos based on that position.

This is something we saw in the past on other political subjects. They are abusing their power as platform as they know they are the de-facto platform used for video. It is about freedom of speech.

How would you feel if they suddenly decided to remove videos about evolution and darwinism? Or videos about abortion rights ? (this will never happen as youtube leans super left, but it gives you an idea how the other side sees it)
> they have turned something that should have been a commodity into a profitable business

Commodity businesses are universally profitable businesses for the survivors. The companies don't stick around otherwise.

Convenience stores, typical pizza places, liquor stores, tons of grocery store products, most office supplies, generic clothing, power adapters, most physical digital storage, brick & cement companies, the 58000 self storage facilities, the world is filled with profitable commodity products and businesses (and they're often very large).
not the best time to go public :) the stock market is about to take a serious hit.
Hello HN, author here. As the title says, this post visualizes three of the most basics math operations involved in neural nets:
1- Calculating a prediction in a trained network
2- Sigmoid
3- ReLU

It's meant mainly to encourage people not to be intimidated by some of these concepts. Once you understand them, they turn out to be much simpler than would appear on the surface.

Any and all feedback is appreciated. Thanks!
"Whether or not markets are perfectly rational is irrelevant."

When the crux of your argument is that the market will make things right, it very much is relevant.

"I haven't seen an economic argument,"

Economics are not the sole thing in this world.

"an argument that suggests it's better for the employer if they keep the older workers, that justifies forcing them to against their will."

How about "Society said that discrimination is bad for the rest of society, so if you want the benefits of being in society, you follow the law."
I don't think that comment is necessarily unfair. Dropdox does charge for the service if a user wants over 2GB. I think the more questionable comment is that first point:

>For a Linux user, you can already build such a system yourself quite trivially by getting an FTP account, mounting it locally with curlftpfs, and then using SVN or CVS on the mounted filesystem. From Windows or Mac, this FTP account could be accessed through built-in software.

That is the epitome of not getting it.
I thought Cruz came in 2nd? To the guy who was on every channel of TV all the time. Keep in mind R primary voters get more of their news from TV than the general electorate, which explains why Trump beat Cruz more than he beat Clinton. Keep in mind also that Cruz is a total pariah in Washington. The only people who will talk to him are those who are paid to do so. Based on previous form, one would not have expected Jeb and the rest to all lose to Trump and Cruz.
The trouble with a "safer C variant" is that it must remove features, or at least more heavily constrain programs to a safer subset of the language. This makes it not backwards-compatible.

I think the only successful "subset of C" is MISRA.
Most programming languages do an initial period of internal development before a public release.

When I started on the project ~3 years ago, it took me about 2 weeks to work around the (then current) set of compiler bugs to make a 100-line benchmark program -- naturally a public release at that point would not have been fruitful. Today our compiler generally works, and we're looking forward to making a public release once we get a couple more features stabilized.
I wouldn't give up on GCP that easy. Did you try the slack channel, they are pretty responsive

https://gcp-slack.appspot.com/
You are sidestepping the question, engaging in practice of irrelevance you highlight. Is debating the mistranslator a becoming reply? Moreover you said them making a case somehow casts shadow on the critic's analytical powers, where in fact starting debates around their intents bypassing the issue put forward points the exact opposite.
As someone who has been programming in Rust for nearly a year, even for commercial purposes, this article is baffling to me. I've found the compiler messages to be succinct and helpful. The package system is wonderful. It's dead easy to get something off the ground quickly. All it took was learning how and when to borrow.
I was following along until this:

> universally terrible documentation and lacking examples, unstable APIs, type annotation hell, and so much more.

The docs in Rust are by far some of the best I've seen, without specifics it's really hard to understand what issues he hit.
No most of those gains are still accruing with the management team, employees and early investors.
Drew and Arash went to MIT, where their everyday computing environment was UNIX systems with home directories on AFS. For those who haven't used it, AFS is a networked filesystem sort of like NFS, except with a better authentication model and the ability to support failover on the server side.

AFS, NFS, Coda, 9P, WebDAV, SMB/CIFS, FTP, Windows roaming profiles, AFP, etc. were all around and (to varying levels) built into OSes well before Dropbox. Dropbox was a fundamentally different model: files stay on your local machine and get synchronized, instead of living on the network. The entire idea that live synchronization is the correct approach is almost entirely due to Dropbox's success; any OS designer before 2007 would have said "Yes, we have something as basic as a networked filesystem."

If you're objecting to the fact that it takes a commercial venture to explore and develop these sorts of ideas, I too dislike that we're in that place. But it's true. We haven't achieved a way to develop standard computer infrastructure without capitalism, yes; but we've certainly achieved meaningful technology that did not previously exist that's actually working for people.

(And, also, almost all of those protocols I mentioned were developed by profitable businesses like Sun or Transarc or Apple or whomever, and only made non-proprietary at great effort. The ones that started off with public specs, like WebDAV and FTP, were the worst.)
Got it! Thanks :)
Broadly speaking, I agree.

But at a certain point, it's reasonable to start objecting that an outcome was so obvious that people claiming they didn't intend it are either dishonest or incompetent, and in either case unfit to make the decision.

In this case, I suspect the answer is a little of each - a lot of anti-trafficking campaigns are run by people who openly oppose voluntary sex work, and also Congress is grossly incompetent at knowing which technology laws will limit free choice.

Given all that - I agree that it's worth knowing whether this was intended, but I worry "not our intent" becomes a shield for Congress to hide behind when they do things with horrible outcomes they were warned about well in advance.
While I agree with your first statement and generally am okay with YouTube's intention here, I'm willing to bet that their implementation is going to be another shitty algorithm that just blocks completely unrelated videos
I think it really depends on what you're working on. Rust is designed to make some specific hard problems easier, like performant memory management and threading concerns. As a result of its focus it makes a lot of easy problems harder. Some of those will get better as the ecosystem matures, but it will likely never be as easy to use as other high-level languages which prioritize developer ergonomics.

For a select few domains, Rust is a god-sent. But if the performance-critical aspects of what you're working on are already abstracted several layers away from you, you're probably better of using a language which hides all the book-keeping which Rust puts at the top level.

Rust is a better C, not a better C#.
The salient fact about unemployment is that anyone who stays in that state faces destitution and is likely seeking some other work (we rarely talk about wealthy heirs being "unemployed"). For someone in a premodern agricultural lifestyle there wasn't really anything calamitous about this regular period of not-working.
the point is, people spend far more than they have to on college education. The cheapest 4 year degrees are much cheaper than the average ones. And, if you're not shopping around based on price (most people seem not to be), most likely your doing yourself a disservice. Of course, it also depends on your career plans.

I myself, went to the cheapest college in my area, even though I could have gotten into a far more expensive/prestigious college. I chose not to because I knew it would put me a great economic disadvantage to have so much debt. Software engineering careers and many other careers don't always benefit from more prestigious schools.

If more people shopped for colleges based on price then maybe universities will start competing on price and we can finally see them planning ways to make college cheaper instead of adding yet another good for nothing expensive wing to the campus.
counting PTO as vacation is disingenuous. That's all your time off for the year rather than exclusively vacation
If your code isn't exception-safe, then carrying on after an exception may crash the program.
> Suppressors have a legitimate purpose in reducing hearing damage

Flame throwers have a legitimate use as a brush clearing tool. Fortunately there are straightforward and safer alternatives.

The best way to prevent hearing damage from a gun is with ear protection.
Your last sentence shows that you are not interested in a discussion; you are only interested in bragging how much better you are than the people who had the rug pulled out from underneath them.
The only way to make C safe without losing performance would be to accompany your C code with a formal proof that it avoids undefined behavior, and use a compiler which refuses to compile the code if the formal proof doesn't validate.
I think you've a bit over-analysing it. I doubt the conversations are even audible at the places where these phones are attached. Then there also is the fact that no one will probably even get close to these for most of the time.
The author immediately qualifies those numbers, which addresses your question.

> Now, 6h left is a high estimate, obviously; work and private can (and do) expand on a daily, fluctuating basis, as they do for all of us.
There's something really odd to me about describing a $100MM acquisition as "middling"; wouldn't that almost guarantee multi-million paydays for the founders?

Yeah, way below Dropbox's valuation, but still significantly more money than I expect to ever be a party to.
from the article:

> It is true that race is a social construct. It is also true, as Dr. Lewontin wrote, that human populations “are remarkably similar to each other” from a genetic point of view.

> But over the years this consensus has morphed, seemingly without questioning, into an orthodoxy. The orthodoxy maintains that the average genetic differences among people grouped according to today’s racial terms are so trivial when it comes to any meaningful biological traits that those differences can be ignored.
Continue reading the main story
Related Coverage

> The orthodoxy goes further, holding that we should be anxious about any research into genetic differences among populations. The concern is that such research, no matter how well-intentioned, is located on a slippery slope that leads to the kinds of pseudoscientific arguments about biological difference that were used in the past to try to justify the slave trade, the eugenics movement and the Nazis’ murder of six million Jews.

> I have deep sympathy for the concern that genetic discoveries could be misused to justify racism. But as a geneticist I also know that it is simply no longer possible to ignore average genetic differences among “races.”
The charity shouldn't be allowed to make this claim in its press release (here) or blanket advertising campaign (ongoing). It's a bad faith claim which doesn't really benefit anyone.

Even if it is the case that weight is correlated with cancer, it's not evident that weight causes cancer. The scientist dances around this statement because he can't say it.
Probably around 0.06 * 10,000,000,000

Assuming no subsequent investments, dilution, selling of shares, etc.
Right but you have to address the solution which is proposed by the authors of these laws -- don't be a sex worker. It's not exactly a secret that the goal is to outlaw any kind of sex work but you don't get anywhere punishing the victims so you go after people trying to legitimize it.

They view sex work as fundamentally abusive and degrading, something that no one should even consider as an option, and therefore needs to be illegal so that police can intervene -- just like organ harvesting, suicide, and a lot of drug laws. Then you make the punishment for facilitating it in any way steep as a deterrent.
I’m observing some similar muttering in the JavaScript community with Promises. Chain them incorrectly and you get an error with no actionable context.

The most popular 3rd party promise framework in JavaScript collects extra cause and effect data when you run the code in development mode. It helps but it still isn’t always enough.

I fundamentally don’t understand how people still think writing tools and libraries is the same process as writing production code. Which is to say: I wrote it, I understand it, ship it!

It’s a profoundly different process. I don’t think we give enough kudos to the people who can do it well.

I keep telling my ambitious jr devs the same two pieces of advice. The one relevant here is: nobody is going to look at your code until something is broken. Which means they are already having a bad day. Don’t make it worse.
My suggestions would be to:

* take as many opportunities as you can in presenting to others. Public speaking skills are important
* refine your skills in creating good product demos of your work
* spend time writing concise and well structured documentation
* Do some self reflection every time you get into a heated argument with a co-worker. Think about what you could have done better to prevent emotions from flaring up. The best engineers at my company are the ones who are really good at managing discussions
* Make sure that any meeting you attend flows well. If people (including yourself) are meandering from the main point of the meeting then lead the group back to the main point. Take good notes. Make sure the meeting has an agenda. If it ends early then tell people they can leave rather so you can give back attendees time. If you have a shy person in the group pro-actively ask their opinion. On the same end if you have a verbose person in the group make sure to end their discussion if they are meandering.
* Put yourself in your user's shoes as much as possible. Don't just evaluate a feature from a technical standpoint, but also a user standpoint. Your product manager will be happy that they can trust you to wear a "product manager" hat