skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's becoming pretty apparent that regulation is necessary in the advertising space. Left to their own devices the biggest, most well-funded ad companies are doing little to combat scams, misinformation, and outright fraud.

> It is a weird type of projection or something like that -- a denial of responsibility.

There's denial of responsibility at every level. What's funny is that Facebook has absolutely taken on the responsibility of censoring content - blocking nudity and certain other topics. But at the same time has denied responsibility for misleading or fraudulent ad content that gets on its site. I think the difference is that one is cheap to do (object classification via machine learning) and the other would require some real manpower.
Pretty much stopped reading when I got to “hedonism and greed” part. Plenty of other communist rants to read. Is this an article or editorial?

The people currently driving for Uber/Lyft will be in the same boat when automation comes. Driving a car requires a pulse and peripheral vision. It’s ripe for a race to the bottom.
> When I went vegetarian a lot of people did the same. Most new acquaintances that discover my vegetarianism respond very positively, specially left-leaning people. Although I try not to preach, I'm too often the only one that orders a salad. But they always follow it with "I see that it's wrong, but I could never stop eating burgers/cheese/jamón". I'm not even sure they truly think it's wrong, but feel a need to say it.

That's how it starts, but I've noticed that over time, more and more people have learned more about why one would be a vegetarian (among others because they ask as part of small talk, and I quickly mention a few non-obvious points before moving on), and have experimented with eating vegetarian for a month. And the important part is: when they're around other vegetarians they know, they're proud of giving it a try, which is extra motivation for them to keep it up.

After having formed a habit, many of them keep it up for at least most of the time. And then, of course, they will go on to have the same effect on other people. That's how cultural change happens.

Of course, the problem with Facebook is that the primary method of showing off that you're quitting Facebook would be Facebook itself. I guess the 72h grace period is a good way to deal with that to some extent.
Sure hope I'm not.
and once you transfer money from your onetime address to your main, everyone will be able to see how much money you have.
the only difference is, that they will know it "little" later. still good enough f.e. for eshop to categorize customers and retarget them
Yeah, I think GIMP has this "open source best in class" status that it maybe deserved ~20 years ago but now it's kind of punching above its weight in terms of popularity.

That said, I actually think the current devs are doing good work, usability has totally improved and I'm somewhat optimistic that once this big, important, multi-year development branch is out of the door we'll see continued improvements.
He obviously doesn't watch South Park.
Ok, so let's break that down and tease apart the bits that are ok and the bits that are not ok.

> Me: Oh, before we watch, you have to listen to this. X. X is the thing. It's super awesome...

> Me: Let's take a break now, and talk about why you really should look into X right now!

Having you to do something for them sometimes, while they do something for you sometimes: normal part of friendship.

> Me: Oh, it's simple. I've been peeking through your windows for the past few days, and I see that both you and your wife regularly look for A, B and C, which are related to $FOO. Also, I've seen your recent purchase receipts in your thrash can, and it again confirms you're on the market for a $FOO.

Looking in people's windows and at people's rubbish: creepy. Remembering what people told you in conversation: entirely normal, even positive. Remembering what other people told you about a mutual friend: also positive. Advertisers aren't looking in people's windows or going through their rubbish.
I can't get onboard with this interpretation. There are a ton of people who are very charismatic and prone to making sweeping statements about the universe, and yet they don't gain a substantial following. Reza Aslan, for example. He's popular, but not nearly on Peterson's level. There are people who are drawn to Peterson simply due to his charisma, but I think at the end of the day there's something else going on. I think he's hit some kind of nerve though it's difficult to pinpoint it.

Edit: Ha, maybe I should read the goddamn piece before commenting.
I agree with the core idea of the article - that open source developers often get abused by "freeloaders" and that their time shouldn't be used "for free".

I think that the best way to show respect to the developer is to contribute time and/or money to the project.

At the very least, be thankful and don't act like a jerk!
There are also CLU, Ada, Modula-2, Modula-3, Eiffel, Sather, BETA as possible inspirations for implementing generics, all the way back to 1976 (CLU).

As for C#, people keep forgetting .NET always had a JIT/AOT compiler since version 1.0.

Just because not everyone bothers to sign their applications and call NGEN at installation time, it doesn't mean it isn't there.

Also Mono always supported AOT compilation, it is the way Xamarin works on iOS and the deployment story on Windows Store since it was introduced on Windows 8.
Automated Cashflow Forecasting
My co-founder and I have developed a cash management tool that connects your accounting software to Slack.

We're using machine learning and proprietary financial models to automate advice on where you can save money on expenses, cash runway forecasts and opportunities to enhance revenues.

We're currently beta testing to become a Xero partner app. If you're interested in joining the beta there's more info at http://gordonhq.com
There is no conspiracy here. Being publicly scrutanized is not good for business, there is no win for Facebook to be had in this format.
Well, if energy were cheap enough you could just dig huge, multi-level tunnels, fill them full of grow lights, and raise all the grass-fed beef you wanted.

It's the same with water -- there's plenty of water in the ocean. If energy were cheap enough, you could just distill seawater and get all the freshwater you wanted.
That's the thing about addicts. They almost always pick their addiction (wouldn't be addicts otherwise of course), and aren't very happy about it.

> Here I am, having this largely pointless Hacker News conversation, instead of completing a Deep Learning course or something.

Yes, like that.
To be honest, I actually feel bad for medallion owners, even if the medallion system is a bad one.

The gov't sets ups a system, tells you the rules and says "if you buy an expensive medallion, you can drive a cab and make a living". The value of the medallion is purely based on the gov't promise to maintain the system.

So you buy one (or many) and a few years later someone does a work around and the gov't says "oh well, I'm not going to try to enforce the medallion system any more."

That sucks.
The important distinction drawn is between the brain, a physical organ that exists within each human, to the mind, which is at this point an interdisciplinary concept which is defined and explored by psychologists, neuroscientists, and philosophers alike.

In general, I find the intermixing of science and philosophy an increasingly common situation for those interested in "the mind." For me, it is hard to reconcile the falsifiable and evidence-based nature of science with the inherently linguistic nature of philosophy. Philosophers have come to this question not due to their knowledge of neurology or psychology, but rather to heap on more theory to the word "mind" itself.

My question is: What is the practical use of this theory of mind? How does it "expand" my mind to be reminded that I use tools and props? Since it is clearly not news that all of us use tools and props, is the author's primary insight to claim that these are part of the mind? How does that claim aid society?
The equations don't describe anything like collapse, and Copenhagen doesn't really explain what's supposed to be triggering it. No, I don't think it's a match.

There are plenty of interpretations that do match the math, though. You're not stuck with MWI.
Zuckerberg declines to appear before UK MPs
It's not that the article is false, it's the timing. Facebook has been doing this for years, as people in the tech universe are well aware, why the sudden flood of varied content in the mainstream media?

Of course, a lot of these articles are going to be good old fashioned self-serving opportunism, but another possibility might be behind the scenes coordination. Impossible? Has there ever been a coordinated propaganda initiative in the history of the world?
> Or, if you want to make it a little more humorous, ask "So what do you think of the recent Facebook scandal?". At least a few of them would say "Oh! I don't use Facebook anymore! I only use WhatsApp"

Or: "what was the scandal?"
> if you are tricky enough doesn't mean Facebook is responsible for people being scammed by them

Come on. If you think FB is not responsible for people using it for bad purposes, then what is the difference between Voluum, the tracking tool he created and FB advt suite?

If a company builds a multi-billion dollar business by showing people what to buy and how to behave(/vote), it is a basic ethical responsibility to make sure, the users are not outright scammed out by bad actors.
If you have a single asset worth a million dollars and you hope renting it out for 3% of its a value per year, you should immediately sell it and buy a well diversified investment portfolio instead. You can still sell 3% of your portfolio every year.
Yeah. It's really obviously terrible. I don't understand the social media fad at all. (I'm 31 and used Facebook at college until they rolled out the news feed which was clearly evil)
That just describes MWI, though.

You can recover normality from it, so I don't see the unending superposition as being a problem.
Vote Leave 'cheating' may well have swayed EU referendum result, Wylie tells MPs
What about those thousands of Enron employees who lost their life savings because they "gambled" on the fact that their retirement savings will be invested responsibly?

I don't think his idea was such a massive gamble when he paid that money for the medallion.

You can argue about the system as such. But I don't think his idea was unreasonable.
I don't think the parent poster you replied to thought of -Microsoft- windows, but the ones in your home.
Agreed. A lot of the criticism against facebook is warranted, but a cynical part of me also thinks the timing on all this not coincidental to the Algorithm changes FB rolled out last month. In fact, I can't believe I haven't heard this from anyone else.

Facebook's shutting down of organic reach was devastating for publishers: http://www.adweek.com/digital/after-facebooks-algorithm-chan.... Now, just weeks later, it seems like all of media has turned on Facebook. We've known about the Cambridge Analytica scandal for over a year, but suddenly it's cover story material again. This is an article on it from last May: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/07/the-great.... It just seems like the media is dumping on whatever it can at this point.

My cynical view on how this ends would be that FB comes to some compromise on organic reach and the media begins to cool down on all the FB hoopla. FB gets some sort of slap on the wrist fine from the FTC or some other governing agency, and nothing genuinely changes in terms of consumer privacy.
It used to be easy to tell non-technical people that a Nigerian prince trying to wire money (or whatever) is a scam. How would you summarize the deception involved here to tell your non-technical Aunt? Basically, don't use facebook, or don't click on anything that isn't from someone you personally know?

I'm now curious if Facebook reports what market segments their ad revenue comes from? Like what percentage is pill pushers?
Facebook doesn't have to anything you didn't unconsciously agree to surrender. That isn't very sketchy.

Fixed that for you.
> Combine those 2 facts & I think it’s fair to say golang is willing to base things (central ones even) on untried ideas, which directly contradicts your stated position

It absolutely doesn't contradict my stated position. I was clear about that in my previous post.

CSP inspired Go's features (in that sense alone it is "the basis for Go's concurrency" as alluded to by the Go FAQ) , but as I mentioned, it's not integral to Go in any way, and very few programs are modeled in CSP fashion.
samharris.org
NASA chief explains why agency won’t buy a bunch of Falcon Heavy rockets
The problem is not only Facebook that distorts the reality, it's most of the media. Look at mainstream media like CNN or RT which favour one side and totally ignore the arguments of the other.

All of that will continue to happen no matter what until people start to think critically and question all the information they get, be it from their parents, school teachers, news outlets or social media.

In my circle of friends in fact a lot of people are using IG and WA and ditched Facebook long ago. I use all of the three solely because my business generates a lot of sales through these channels. So I think yes, people will continue to use it in the foreseeable future. But this opinion is based solely on my bubble that I live in.
Is there still a need for performant JavaScript now that we have WebAssembly?

Edit: Apologies for wording this poorly. Clearly there is a need for performant JavaScript. My question is more about how much we expect WebAssembly to take over from what JavaScript is currently used for. Thank you for all the insightful comments!
Note: you are likely being downvoted not for what you said, but for saying you will get downvoted. It's a frequent enough thing that it gets mentioned in the HN guidelines, last I checked.
The whole gathering of them should have been flamethrowered.
Yes, that's what makes this a difficult problem. You don't want to ban companies from influencing legislation, but then you also can't say they were just playing by the rules, and that they did not influence the rules not being tougher on them.
If you want an artifact repository for Go, several exist with varying levels of immutability/reliability/etc.

However, Go also has an answer to the situation of "I want dependencies directly from the community without a caching/authorizing intermediary, but don't want to be a victim of someone rewriting their history on GitHub/account-squatting/whatever", and that answer is vendoring plus checking diffs on package upgrade. That's often less convenient than using a trustable caching registry, but it's comparing apples and oranges: a cache like that requires a centralized solution at present, though usable distributed ones might come about at some point; vendoring just requires some of your disk space and a git clone.
IBM’s Dario Gil says quantum computing promises to accelerate AI
I hope they continue to lose money. That's a pretty negative feeling to have towards a business for me too. However, they started harvesting text and call info back in 2006; that is about the time I first started looking into anything technology related. I thought fb was terrific as it grew and helped enable more connectivity. Now that it has been shown to be true tho, the invasion of privacy is absolutely ludicrous.
None of this is false, but none of this is new information, either. Watchdogs have been saying all of this for years.
Shell Oil just outlined a radical scenario to halt climate change
While it could make it less safe in very specific circumstances, note, it's the same as with a human driver

The system kicks in when there is a high probability of a collision ahead. Think of it as the instructor in the driving school that slams the brakes when you're doing something wrong.

So basically, the driver (be either human or another system) did something wrong already if that system kicks in
"The Antisocial Network"?
So many excuses. The story "Of course I agreed, but its all their fault because I didn't know what I agreed to" gets old.

Everybody has known for years that Facebook uses this data against you to make money. If it didn't upset you before why would it suddenly upset you now?
While this is technically true, the history of how it came about seems forgotten already:

It was ironically done for privacy. Users actual e-mails were shared with friends, and people had too many "friends", causing their e-mail to be leaked. After a bit of trial and error on hiding the e-mails from scraping, they eventually hid all e-mails by default and only exposed the @facebook.com emails. The original idea of people only having 'real' friends turned out to not work. You can't trust your Facebook "friends", which should be alarmingly clear for everyone by now.
On the other hand, artificial intelligence is not actual intelligence. The definition of artificial intelligence is the ability to perform a task that would normally require human intelligence. An ABS system would fit into this definition as it is a task that normally would require human sensing the conditions to know how to apply the breaks.

Although I can see why some point out that AI is a moving target, representing only what still seems 'magical'. If you showed an ABS system to someone in the early 1900s, I truly believe they would see it as some kind of intelligence. Now that we have acclimated to the technology, we don't see it the same way.
The question is not whether it's false. The question is what is the purpose of making this a problem for facebook but not for your TV channels or for Twitter etc.

Don't underestimate how well this works for the traditional media. It both help undermine one of their biggest competitors and it creates traffic by keep sensationalizing what is really completely normal practice and have been for as long as there have been advertising.

Shady advertisers, pollute... those aren't the media reporting thats the media shaming what they themselves do all the time.
« Sonic the Hedgehog », un film en preparation par Jeff Fowler
No user, even if they read the TOS, believed they were opting into perpetual call and SMS logging.

It’s dark UX and the terrible Amdroid permissions system that tricked them into it.
Palantir worked with Cambridge Analytica on Facebook data, whistleblower alleges
Americans are subsidising Facebook for the rest of the world? It seems like we should get more for our money.
That's neither a "overzealous/conflicting" system nor a "safety system", so if anything, this would bring the score to 2:0 rather than 1:1.
Rahasia Menghindari Kekalahan Dalam Permainan Bandar Q
I'm not involved with any cryptocurrencies, so I have no dog in this fight. I am curious, however. Whenever ZCash comes up Monero is mentioned as "also providing" anonymity.

Being on the Monero team, can you comment on the differences between the privacy guarantees provided by the two platforms?
But the info you post on Facebook.com is not the only place FB is getting your data. They purchase Credit Card data, follow you around the web with pixels and Facebook login, allegedly track cell phone calls (I don't know enough about this), encourage people to install their VPN (thereby knowing everything you're doing on your device).

I do agree that the easiest thing is to delete your account there is a lot more to it than what you engage with on their products.
What in that is evil?
That seems like a technicality. He's not searching his couch cushions for beer money.
But it's promoted by the Prime Minister, or the head of the government.
It could potentially allow you to stack 3 infront of eachother to render color instead of needing alternating colored subpixels.

Not sure if that would actually be useful for anything besides a density increase, but it could make color vector displays feasible.
He has absolutely hit a nerve, or hit a few nerves and done so with great accuracy.

You see the thing about Peterson is for whatever reason (could even be just for the purposes of marketing himself), he is very much the controversialist.

Time and again he'll say something controversial that he knows will troll a huge audience and then he's always got research and facts to back it up. That his take is often facile isn't really of consequence as any typical interviewer doesn't have the tools to take him up on it.

The guy is a professor of psychology. You may not like him or his views, but he is "smart", and fundamentally the meat of his message is actually quite benign so you can't even really accuse him of being "bad".

It's like he's built his own persona into this gigantic strawman that looks like an ogre to everybody.
The difference being that when you work in a sallaried position you can rely on a certain economic baseline.

You can expect a regular salary and defined benefits.

The gig economy very much uppends those facts massively and gig economy can be profitable because they externalise the real costs.

To summarize: I don't disagree that too miuch concentrated ownership is a bad thing, but disagree with your conclusion that it's not specific to the gig economy.
"But I actually acted as a slightly better person during the week or so I read Jordan Peterson’s book. I feel properly ashamed about this."

This is what happened to me as well. Strange stuff, I think it is well worth the time.
Yes, the medallions were stupid, although I think they shouldn't have allowed Uber to operate without medallions, or get rid of the system in general.

>Relying on their "value" for retirement is crazy. And like another commenter has said - if it was worth 1.1 million, why not sell it and retire

Because he took out a loan of 1.1 million to buy it. It's not that he bought it for next to nothing and it rose to that price, it was always a stable asset. Because regulation didn't allow non-medallion taxis in the city. Until Uber came and they just allowed it.

>like all gambles, this one had a possibility of failing - and it did.

We're not talking about the smartest people here. Something that had a stable (and slowly rising) value for 100 years didn't seem like a gamble until the lobbyists came in and convinced the lawmakers to allow unfair competition.

I think medallions are stupid, but as long as the system exist, everybody needs to adhere by it, otherwise it's just f*ing over the working poor.
Samsung site uses hypnosis to erase memory to Experience TV series as first time
That makes no sense, SaaS makes it harder to be compliant with GDPR since you have to rely on other companies to ensure erasure, and compliance. I know of specific companies who were left vulnerable since they had no idea what was being kept on AWS
How about "where there is smoke there is fire"?

When a scandal erupts the media starts digging around to search for more skeletons.
But because you/I/we know does not mean that everyone knows. For a lot of people what is being lres3nted is not clear even though some have heard something about it previously. This is something media channels pick up on and push the stories when there is interest.
HN is highly critical of everything, especially closed-gardens and data manipulation. Of course there’s a distaste for FB.
Shouldn't a deletefacebook involve stopreact? surprized to see react articles on hn now...
No they aren't just like newspapers aren't either.
If you've already agreed, then that is too bad, that data is already in their hands. However, if you would like to make sure to let Facebook know that your agreement is over, feel free to go here: https://www.facebook.com/help/delete_account