skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is the result of all the years of data mining and tracking. Now they can see your phone is at an open house and make an educated guess (which is all it is), that you're interested in buying homes.

All your web traffic is tracked too, unless you only use sources that explicitly do not track, such as duckduckgo.com. Check out https://ssd.eff.org, you might find it helpful.
lol, This a "press release" written by a PR firm employed by google

etflix, one of Amazon Web Services’ biggest customers, is expanding its use of Google Cloud, AWS’s biggest rival, according to two people with knowledge of the matter. The move, which hasn’t previously been reported, could portend a shift in the balance of power in the cloud computing market
The reason you don't like app's developed in a certain technology is because you are a developer. Normal users can't tell the difference, or don't care.
And I didn't vote for the President. Or perhaps more saliently, I didn't vote for Theresa May - and her government does an endrun around the surveillance protections I get from the US government.

I'm honestly confused by the idea that democracy means the outcomes we get are inherently more acceptable. Democracy only opens the possibility of influencing what one government does to us. Which beats the hell out of autocracy, but doesn't actually mean people are consenting to what the state does to them. Even assuming you get to vote your preference, 49% of people are still having things done to them against their will.
Should we use [paywall] tag where applicable?
Idea shamelessly stolen from petercooper: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16859287

With the grow of paywalled content getting to the first page, could we please start marking it somehow? It could help avoid disappointment when a link leads to an inaccessible content.
> Debit cards offer buyer protection. It's not as comprehensive as a credit card but you can report fraud and get your money back. Granted the cash will be tied up for a few days until the refund posts but it's not lost.

Protections on your debit card are bank policy, protections on credit cards are federal law. So basically with a debit card your just hoping the bank is nice and will give your money back. With a credit card they have to give your money back.

> I went many years without a credit card out of moral principal but having to travel and rent cars finally made me break down and get one. It was so much less hassle to rent a car with one vs without one that I did it.

And what moral principle is that, that says credit cards are bad?

> I hate credit cards.

Good luck building credit without a credit card.
I'm guessing you don't know many people over the age of 65.
Analytic philosophy was largely a reaction to the idea that philosophy was developing into a mass of meaningless, incoherent, poetic mumbo-jumbo. For example, Bertrand Russell said:

> Hitherto the people attracted to philosophy have been mostly those who loved the big generalizations, which were all wrong, so that few people with exact minds have taken up the subject.

Analytic philosophy is the tradition that grew out of this reaction, and focuses on precision in language and logic, with a particular focus on the philosophy of language because it turns out it's hard to map natural language to the kinds of rigorous logical propositions that analytic philosophers prefer. Continental philosophy is the tradition that rejected this critique and burrowed even deeper down the path they were going, eventually inventing postmodernism and poststructuralism and other new and exciting forms of what analytic philosophers would consider mumbo-jumbo.
Here’s what you’ll learn at Atrium’s fundraising workshop
When the system cannot handle more it is already too late. And don't compare times when everyone was illiterate with today, it is not the same background and a similar outcome is not likely.
> Why aren't people pricing in an earthquake discount?

Because it's a matter of insurance, and thus reduced to a recurring premium bill.

Why not price all maintenance costs and electricity too? Living in this house for the next fifty years will cost you all these utility bills; you should get a discount from the purchase price to reflect that! :)
Facebook wields absolute power over the platform, true. They do not coerce anyone by exercising that power, though.

Everyone on Facebook is on there voluntarily. People don't get to choose where they are born.

Don't get me wrong. I don't use Facebook, and I don't think anyone else should either. I would love if there were a (decentralized) replacement for it, and I think Facebook is on the way out.
Navigating the politics of user research
I know what your saying but all I could think of was Flint.
Even if the power of individual vote seems very small, It can be used to instigate change. One can argue that in order to increase the power of people, one has to reduce the power of corporation lobbying etc.

Corporations are vast entities of unaccountable power when they are unregulated by a government.

Chomsky's criticism of corporations holds good, and is becoming prophetic in all accounts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYxGkFxb7f4
And no A Thousand Plateaus by Deleuze & Guattari, in spite of having an impact on the anti-globalization movement over the last two decades-plus that is hard to overestimate. Plus, that work isn’t just relevant for contemporary political disputes or the perennial question of how to organize human societies; Deleuze and Guattari’s epistemology is a major contribution to human thought in general.
>AI software that helps doctors diagnose diabetic retinopathy like specialists is approved by FDA (theverge.com)
*Western.

There's a whole wide world out there.
I either got it completely wrong or the tariffs were one of the major income sources in US before income tax was implemented.
The Partially Examined Life podcast is fantastic. I'd definitely second that.

The History of Philosophy Without any Gaps is also decent.
> 3. The end-product of science is not truth, it is explanations of observations.

The term 'science' is used in this way. Perhaps it should not be. Perhaps semantics drive the issue.

In the field in which I am familiar, we have 'expert witnesses' that will use reproducible scientific principles to analyze, for instance, blood scatter to determine the angle in which a shotgun was held when it discharged and blew off a particular person's head. The principles -- based on physics, chemistry, etc -- are sound and scientific.

The problem is, we will invariably have TWO very scientific expert witnesses who BOTH use reproducible and accepted methods. Yet, using their scientific tools, they will come to two utterly different conclusions.

It's left to a jury to decide which interpretation is correct.

While the tools used by the experts are scientific, their opinions are not. While their scientific tools are reproducible (for instance, the speed at which coagulating blood and brain tissue will slide down a stucco wall given all the variables such as temperature, humidity, friction coefficients, etc.) their ultimate reconstruction of what happened is not reproducible, and it is left to lay people to draw their conclusions.

There should be more of a distinction between Science and History. That is, science -- strictly defined -- is all about reproducibility. History -- by definition -- is not. Using scientific tools to reconstruct a past event does not result in a 'scientific' theory. Rather, it results in a historical theory arrived at with scientific tools.

Whether it is blood scatter from a murder (or suicide, depending on whom you ask), the formation of the Grand Canyon, or the development of finch beaks on Galapagos, the ultimate theories are inherently non-scientific as they can not be tested. The methods and tools used to derive the theories can be... but not the conclusion itself.

In short, perhaps the term 'science' is being used for things outside its domain. (Or, alternatively, if we wish to include such things inside the domain, we should broaden the strict definition of science. Like I said, there are some issues of semantics that may be driving some of the issues in the article... other issues, of course, pertain to sloppiness, errors, and the like.)
Yea then nobody is qualified to analyze the data.

And there is reason to consider opposing opinions on vaccines, and then after the best evidence from both sides are provided a real conclusion can be made (it has already been made) and then it's no longer worth considering unless new evidence arises.
Diet and bite sensitivity. I get a few tiny ones that I usually don't notice, a relative gets many huge swellings that need medical attention.

I believe different attractors are weighted more strongly in different types of mosquitoes too. Some prefer co2, some heat, other detect compounds in sweat or exhaled gases, like the aldehydes from bananas!
True, but everyone who uses a credit card without defaulting on it is.
I might try that, then.
That's straight out of my worst nightmares.
Who Loses in a Trade War? Everyone
This isn't a new issue, there have been CAD systems that outperformed average clinicians (on very specific tasks) since at least the mid 90s. At the end of the day in some jurisdictions liability drives the resolution process, efficiency in others.
This is definitely going to be an issue. Even in cases where you're measuring your tool against "expert consensus" (often 3-5 physicians), there's a reasonable likelihood that the consensus may be wrong in certain types of cases.

Though even in those cases, you might be looking to show that your tool agrees with physicians at least as often as physicians agree with each other. Malpractice is usually about failing to offer the standard of care, and if you can show a reasonable level of concurrence with the standard of care in research and trials, you may be able to move forward and reach those higher levels of accuracy.
> As far as you know.

Still better than leaving the capability right there in the open, no?

Also you do understand critical parts of Android like Google Play Services are closed source, and also outright malicious when it comes to a privacy standpoint (it’s right there in the name - Google Play Services).

Sure, you can build a privacy-conscious Android from scratch if you’re tech-savvy and have lots of free time and courage. We’re not talking about a tech person here, we’re talking about someone who just wants to sort this problem out and get on with their life. Buying an iPhone solves that problem easily and in little time.
A lot of it is probably some kind of generate and test in your head.

Generate a bunch of use case/questions/test cases/scenarios

generate a model

generate some kind of state chart

generate possible solutions/constraints

So the more mechanical you are about the process the less you might need flow state.
Power is also a concern that many researchers do not pay attention to (at least in psychology/neuroscience).

If the original study was under-powered, the estimated effect size in that study will be inflated and any replication attempt that uses this inflated effect size estimate will be severely underpowered.

Plus, two independently conducted studies that are both powered at 80% to detect a true effect will both be positive results only 64% of the time (assuming absolutely nothing fishy going on, e.g. p-hacking).
I've seen this view stated several times this week on hackernews. Ive always seen it stated with no evidence. How is it not the people vs the corporations?

Take any environmental disaster, BP in the gulf for instance. They cut costs on construction which caused a disaster and ruined the environment and livelihoods for thousands of people. They did this to put more money in their pockets. It's not like they were trying to save money that would be dispersed among the citizenry and the gamble didn't pay off. It's not like they even planned on the extra profit to have taxes taken out as we've seen every large corporation try to avoid every cent of tax possible.

If the corporations are sharing their externalities and privatizing the profits, how is it anything but the people vs corporations? Because they pay wages? It's not like they won't stop doing that the second it's possible, all Uber's plan to rely on drivers until they have autonomous cars and plan to drop all of the drivers.

If someone has hurt you before, is openly planning to hurt you again, and openly states they don't see a problem with their actions, you don't have to wait for them to hurt you again before you call it a confrontation
Tesla factory injury rate is double the auto industry average
> I'm confused on why a launch with proper permits and communication with the city would change the situation.

If you have a permit for an activity, it's harder for the agency issuing the permit to argue you are acting without legal permission by doing the activity which the permit permits.

Hence, the name “permit”.
> They can be very different, and that is OK.

This feels odd to me. Isn't one of the major selling points of docker development-production parity?
The post talks about running "video" on a remote server for the RL training, but not how to take that image and visualize it locally (which would be helpful for debugging failing models).

Let's say I wanted to run a Twitch stream of RL training on a remote server (and stream directly from the server to Twitch). What is the intended way to render the video in real time remotely?
Disagree with Trump on most issues, but he has it right on tariffs with China. All those advocating to deescalate the situation never once mention the severe disparity in tariffs placed by China. Trump is simply giving them a (tempered down) taste of their own medicine
How do you differentiate not caring what number you gave them from not knowing

I said how in the comment to which you replied.

Where did I say, "fact that they showed no reaction"? Why do you interpret something unstated as a fact?
> 1. No result is 100% reproducible because you can never completely reproduce the conditions of any experiment.

This is why you include the error in your results. We don't care if your two experiments result in 100% the same results. We care about if your results line up within the error of your experiment.

> 2. Even a completely non-reproducible result can be scientifically significant. For example, celestial events are almost never reproducible. Our understanding of celestial mechanics nonetheless rests on solid science.

This is why we share data. That is in essence our observation. A celestial event might be caught by only one instrument, but several people can develop several different models. We wait and watch for similar events though, to check if models are consistent (within error).

> 3. The end-product of science is not truth, it is explanations of observations.

I just wanted to repeat this because it can never be stated enough.

> 4. The statistical tests currently in widespread use as a criterion for publication in peer-reviewed journals guarantee that at least one result in 20 will be due to chance and not because the hypothesis being tested is actually true.

While I don't like p values, because of hacking, (especially 0.05) that's not how stats work. Flipping 10 heads doesn't guarantee 5 tails, not even 1. I wouldn't use as strong as a word as guarantee.

But this is also an argument FOR reproducing. If multiple experiments are consistent with one another (within error) than that strengthens the argument.

TLDR: More brains that look at a problem helps solve the problem.

I will add my own statements about the reproducability problem in science. One is because there is less funding for it. Reproducing an experiment isn't sexy. Another problem just stems from that data isn't always open. It is hard to review work if you don't know everything about the experiment. Data can even have simple mistakes that just weren't caught. But it is also embarrassing to share data.
You can actually use multipole magnets to capture neutral anti-hydrogen. Not that they're trapping a lot of neutral anti-hydrogen, but some.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antihydrogen#Low-energy_antihy...
‘One Has This Feeling of Having Contributed to Something That’s Gone Very Wrong’
It's a combination of sample size and effect size. The larger one is, the more I'm willing to give on the other.
Wow scary shit. I hope she flies for free on Southwest for the rest of her life.
And this is one of the reasons why most airlines in the US ask to wear a seatbelt during the whole flight, not just on takeoff and landing.
One more reason to keep that seatbelt on.
I wish reporters would get this right. It's blown, not sucked. Vacuum doesn't exert a force on anything; there's nothing there. It's the high pressure air inside that does the work.
That has some super creepy implications--imagine the father of a teenage girl wondering why he's suddenly seeing so many internet ads for maternity products, for instance.
People are sensitive about Godwinning but you didn't really deserve to be downvoted for that comment. Rand's Objectivism and Hitler's mind droppings have at least two important things in common: they're derivative of Nietzschean existentialism and they've been used to rationalize varieties of political extremism.
Why does trying to get laid make one a dickhead? This is slut-shaming.
> How long ago was it that science was controverting centuries of populist knowledge that carbs are what made you fat, not eating fat?

I've looked into that and all I can say is the history is disputed - some people say there really was a nutritionist consensus, others that this was a popular misunderstanding based on overzealous popularisation of a small number of papers (similar to the myth that the consensus among climate scientists in the '70s predicted an ice age) and that working scientists never thought this.

Either way it's a failing of the process, but the appropriate response is quite different; in the first case all we can say is mistakes do happen, in the second we need to get better at ensuring that the real scientific consensus gets translated into appropriate policy actions.
He says it was a user space program not closing sockets.
I get the quest for more elegant and powerful parsing techniques, but it seems that some very interesting real-world problems - mostly arising in code editors - don't get enough academic love:

* Fast re-parsing when part of the input changes;

* Parsing of incomplete input, and enumerating possible ways to continue the input.

These can be very useful for code editors, for syntax highlighting and code completion. Some editors work around this by using a more restricted lexical syntax and avoiding to build a complete parse tree (Vim); newer editors - JetBrain and VS Code AFAIK - do have some pretty good techniques, but they don't seem to get a lot of academic treatise.
> though the chance is 5% in the next 30 years.

Not even close. USGS estimates over the next 30 years are:
72% probability of a M6.7 or higher
51% probability of a M7.0 or higher
20% probability of a M7.5 or higher

Source: https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2016/3020/fs20163020.pdf
> They do not coerce anyone by exercising that power, though.

I think you should elaborate on your definition of coercion here and what does and does not lie within its boundaries.
Perform more tests. Start preliminary treatment and continue to monitor. Medical care isn't a 1-bit decision process.
Many 1906 SF fires were intentionally set by the owners themselves, after the earthquake had damaged their buildings, because most insurance policies covered losses due to fire, but not those due to earthquake. So, if you burned your building down completely, leaving no evidence that it had been first damaged by the earthquake, you had a chance at being reimbursed. http://www.sfmuseum.org/1906.2/arson.html

It's not clear how much of the fire damage was due to intentionally set fires; there were also a significant number of fires started unintentionally when the fire department dynamited various buildings in failed attempts to establish fire breaks. (And, hey, you were still covered if your building was dynamited!) So, lets hope the SFFD is better in this regard than in 1906 as well.

The insurance industry claims that only 2% of the destruction was directly due to the earthquake; 98% was from the fires. https://www.iii.org/article/san-francisco-earthquake-1906-in...
OK but then the word "sucked" can't ever be used. Inhaling? That's the atmosphere blowing air into your lungs.
Good reason to go for the aisle seat.
Supreme Court Tosses Out Microsoft Case on Digital Data Abroad
Why is the kernel community replacing iptables with BPF?
> In those conditions, the goal should be to minimize the consequences of being wrong. We do that by decentralizing decisions to the greater extent possible.

In some cases yes. In others this doesn't seem to be the case - e.g. decentralised housing/planning/zoning policy seems to have lead to worse outcomes than more centralised approaches.
> kubelets ability to spot one of many turntables reaching a max...

Hm...how do you propose kubernetes / kubernetes users solve these kinds of problems? It could be a fairly common error that’s hard to catch on a system of large number of nodes where you’re not supposed to actively think about the fact that you have nodes. What’s the right tooling / monitoring to have on a system of 20nodes where one node is basically screwed?

These kinds of things make me think the entire K8s/container abstraction is just broken.
It’s vastly different in Western countries. I’ve hooked up with girls from Tinder and have brought girls from parties or bars, but have never been on a date. Most people I (a 22 year old) know are the same way.
If you want to split hairs: It's the pressure differential that's creating the air flow. I doubt the plane was flying in actual vacuum with a turbofan engine.
I was being flippant but... things actually line up if you force everything to tabs too (or “smart tabs” if you really really want alignment for some reason).

Except with tabs everyone gets whatever width they want. Tab width is configurable system wide (and even in GitHub’s terrible web view).

Spaces are objectively worse in every possible way and require workarounds and editor hacks to make them behave like tabs. Skip a step & just use tabs: much better.
ICANN and domain registries think WHOIS is necessary. Therefore, it is necessary. Technically, it is not required, you are correct.

And guess what? All that spam and stuff is still going to happen without whois and with the GDPR. It's cute that you think otherwise, but once your info is out there, there's no getting it back. Spammers don't care about your "consent" or your "right to be forgotten."
Show HN: I made 10 open-source Bootstrap 4 themes
I don't see a significant difference between algorithmic and old-guard mass-media taste-makers. Your personality reflects the profile used to target you with ads for objects like Eames chairs and MCM consoles. Your same personality pushes you to choose Architecture Review, which contains objects of the same style. Fashion magazines get paid by advertisers to showcase products of a certain style and cache even in their non-ad sections. The thin layer of a Vogue editor doesn't shield you from market forces buying your taste and making you feel like the sort of person who chooses a certain style. The homogenizing tendency of mass-media is present in either circumstance.

Most people aren't underground reading fashion zines or choosing to follow edgy fashion designers from Serbia. The dominant culture perpetuates itself either way.