skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I heavily disagree; axioms are never a good place to start, nor, historically, they ever were a starting place.

Working mathematicians do a lot of mathematics and constructions before stopping to look and say: "OK, we can distill this rich theory down to this small set of axioms".

Geometry has been quite developed before Euclid's axioms, and number theory took its sweet millenia before Peano's axioms were developed.

On a more modern side, a lot of topology has been produced before people decided to write down a list of axioms for homology, which all the different homology constructions satisfied.

The point is that understanding almost always precedes formal reasoning, language follows ideas, and rigid systems arise on a fertile soil of messy experiments - mental or physical.

If you look at the history of science and mathematics, nothing was ever built up from the formulas and axioms (criminally contrary to the way these subjects are taught).

There is an underappreciated beauty in our ability to argue about, reason with, and make use of concepts that we haven't even really defined. Everyone knew Newton's Calculus was full of holes, and people used it for centuries before coming up with solid definitions of limits, derivatives and integrals - the most fundamental concepts of the subject!

And on that note, people used real numbers for a long time before having the formal machinery to define them. Zeno didn't have the axioms to resolve his paradox. Didn't stop anyone from using these weird objects in reasoning and practice.

----------------------------------------------------

TL;DR: never start with axioms, end with them.
Ex-CIA contractor pleads guilty to taking classified information home
The 10-part series 'How to get Smarter: A guide to critical thinking, cognitive biases, and logical fallacies' published between in Jan-Apr 2018 at Life Lessons is also quite comprehensive. Covers 50 topics, 5 per post. I apologize for the length of what follows, but I believe this resource it worth it:

- Part 1: http://lifelessons.co/personal-development/howtogetsmarter/
50. Intellectual laziness
49. Intellectual honesty
48. Intellectual dishonesty
47. Willful ignorance
46. Self-deception

- Part 2: http://lifelessons.co/personal-development/howtogetsmarterpa...
45. Be a truth seeker
44. Be a realist
43. Open your mind
42. Don’t fall in love with your beliefs or your philosophy
41. Listen to your opponents and people who disagree with you

- Part 3: http://lifelessons.co/personal-development/howtogetsmarterpa...
40. Don’t dismiss things you don’t understand
39. Don’t assume you’re smarter than the stranger you’re speaking with
38. Don’t confuse your perspective for objective reality
37. Don’t confuse feelings with facts
36. Don’t believe every thought that passes through your head

- Part 4: http://lifelessons.co/personal-development/howtogetsmarterpa...
35. Beware of black and white thinking
34. Beware of the Dunning-Kruger effect
33. Uncertainty > The illusion of knowledge
32. Stand on the shoulders of giants
31. Have lots of gurus

- Part 5: http://lifelessons.co/personal-development/howtogetsmarterpa...
30. Don’t attack straw men (don’t misrepresent your opponents argument)
29. Beware of circular logic and reasoning
28. Watch out for red herrings
27. The genetic fallacy (examine the statement – not the speaker)
26. The fallacy fallacy (don’t confuse a bad argument with a false conclusion)

- Part 6: http://lifelessons.co/personal-development/howtogetsmarterpa...
25. Political correctness
24. Groupthink
23. Tribalism
22. The bandwagon effect
21. Doublespeak

- Part 7: http://lifelessons.co/personal-development/howtogetsmarterpa...
20. Occam’s razor
19. Look to where the finger is pointing
18. Sunk costs
17. Framing
16. Anchoring

- Part 8: http://lifelessons.co/personal-development/howtogetsmarterpa...
15. Meditation
14. Mindfulness
13. Psychedelics
12. Pseudoscience
11. Scientism

- Part 9: http://lifelessons.co/personal-development/howtogetsmarterpa...
10. Why you should try to prove yourself wrong – instead of right
9. Probability neglect & the relativity of wrong
8. Why you can’t trust statistics
7. Cognitive Dissonance
6. Sacred Cows

- Part 10: http://lifelessons.co/personal-development/howtogetsmarterpa...
5. Critical thinking questions & the Socratic Method
4. Follow the evidence wherever it leads
3. Motivated reasoning
2. Confirmation bias
1. Thinking for yourself
Took this class with Prof. Sahai last semester when they redesigned the syllabus. I would recommend to anyone who wants to understand ML with some math rigor. The class notes: http://snasiriany.me/files/ml-book.pdf is excellent. The hw problems are pretty fun too
There's a good luthier subreddit if you like seeing interesting guitars:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Luthier/
Absolutely this.

For whomever tells me verbosity isn't a limitation to a language: find me the single incorrect statement in a 100 line function vs a 10 line function.

And no cop outs with "I use {bolt-on sub-language that makes parent language more concise}" (that's not a mainstream language then) or "Well, you can just ignore all the boilerplate" (bugs crop up anywhere programmers are involved).

Or give me an ad absurdum concise counterexample with APL. :P

Ultimately language verbosity is mapped directly to proper abstraction choice. In that the language is attempting to populate the full set of information it needs, and can either make sane assumptions or ask you at every turn.
Only for postpaid accounts. T-mobile treats its prepaid customers like garbage. They even refuse to register correct callerID info for numbers they assigned in violation of E911 requirements.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/munchausen,_bar...

https://forvo.com/word/m%C3%BCnchhausen/
Thank you! I'm glad you see the benefit of a resource like this. And users can create the tools as well as the categories so feel free to add a DevOps category, as I'm not as well-versed on tools in that space.
Is there a way to find well-maintained non-broken preferably-actively-maintained libraries or those that the community considers to be the de facto solution? Like where would I start with doing data science or web dev (and related subjects like encryption and auth etc) or things like async or parallel programming?
The following lines from my makefile illustrate two tricks I enjoy.

%.pdf: %.text

pandoc -F pandoc-zotxt -F pandoc-citeproc $< -o $@

%.draft.pdf: %.text

pandoc -F pandoc-zotxt -F pandoc-citeproc --template=draft $< -o $@

(1) Automatically grabbing citation details from Zotero.
(2) Using the extension of the requested output file to choose the appropriate template.

Not emacs specific, of course.
Would you also say that the original phone system model (basically, ATT owns everything, including your handset) was equally immune to such criticism?

After all, consumers benefitted enormously from the phone system coming into existence. It only cost everyone else their ability to do anything with telephony ATT didn't like.

(Yes, government monopoly vs. private action. It doesn't change anything in terms of the presence or absence of actors in the space.)
How did you get the link? I didnt even get a full screen button
Pandoc can be given instructions on what to do with changes and comments on a per-document basis, but not a per-change and per-comment basis. It does mark the changes/comments in the output file, though, so they could be processed in other ways. Personally, it's not really useful for my workflow, but it might work for some others.
Facebook reportedly plans to launch its own cryptocurrency – The Verge
I think it was one of the first (possibly the first) to introduce serious package management and that had a lot to do with its sudden popularity. Suddenly developers could build upon each other's work really easily. That was definitely the jesustech of its day.

Perl's weak type system and cryptic syntactic muck probably had a lot to do with its decline.
Yep, this looks like the link it should be:

https://asciinema.org/a/113463
Not pretending
It just says it's under LA. And it says where it'll go. It doesn't say anything about where they specifically did 500 feet of tunnel so far.
AT&T paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to Trump attorney for Net Neutrality
"getting the two confused" implies that your terminology is standard, which it isn't. It is also quite common to use the term "type" to refer exclusively to properties that are checked statically.

Arguably "strong dynamic typing" is a property of libraries, not languages -- e.g. int conceptually has a method like:

def __add__(self, other):
if not isinstance(other, int):
raise TypeError(...)
return _unchecked_add_ints(self, other)

It's implemented in C for efficiency, but that's basically the semantics. Critically, this doesn't magically extend to user-written libraries, so unless you actually write all of that boilerplate nothing but a handful of methods in the standard library can be claimed to be "strongly typed". I've written code with a bunch of asserts in methods like that after determining that a large percentage of bugs were type errors that were silently doing the wrong thing. Without something like mypy, Python is untyped by any reasonable definition; it provides no support for users to actually work with types in any meaningful way.
So everyone was down with your toolchain. :) I've also done the LaTeX->PDF thing for several books for my publisher, but that was after everything got finalized in Word.
I've been following along (not from the beginning) but for some time now. Glad to see 1.0 finally here. congrats
For some reason people are deathly afraid of hiring the wrong person. So afraid that they'd rather pass on 100 good candidates to avoid hiring one person who doesn't fit.

It's particularly bad for programming jobs where they expect candidates to go through up to a half dozen separate interviews. The whole process is just completely broken.
12 Rules for Life reads like a skilled astrologer would write: many vague clouded truisms, lots of exceptions, covers pretty much all bases.

No wonder people are getting insights out of the book. It is practically impossible not to!
Sure, extreme totalitarianism is bad. But isn't there a middle ground ?

In the grand parent post, we talked about "YT and FB could fix these social issues overnight, if they wanted to: turn off autoplay, turn off recommendations, restore chronological timelines, and dial down the ads.". It is quite different from the great evils of history.

And sure, we should work on reproducing social sciences. it's a big problem.

But i would guess that if you'd describe something like the internet that is today in very general terms(possible to predict once you know that attention/engagement is the lead driver) to psychologists, a decade ago, they would have told you that it may hold some serious potential problems.

Does it mean we need to stop progress ? maybe not, but slowing "progress" in the name of caution may not be a bad trade-off. and once we see the dangers, rolling it back(even against the addicted population's wishes) may also be a decent option.
How can you not love this:

> HP typically priced their equipment at the cost of the material list × π (or in an especially competitive market, list × e)
Legalizing Driverless Cars: Options, Approaches, and Controversies
> since these activists have no special power to distinguish change from regression, and so err toward stasis.

Citation needed.
I don't think you understand?

whiner doesn't have employees, they have freelancers. That they can ditch on zero notice at all which is, after all, the very point of freelancers.

Medium just treated whiners like freelancers and... whiners don't like it? Why, it's awful! To be fired with no advanced notice. How could they!
Its Reputation and Its Odor Precede It (2003)
Write hugs, not bugs!
DHS Seizes Aftermarket iPhone Screens from Prominent Right-To-Repair Advocate
If you assign a task that is estimated at 2 days of work and it actually is going to take 2 weeks, it should be pretty clear way before that 2 weeks has elapsed. At that point you could get a second opinion from another employee in the same role as the assignee. That kind of difference in LOE vs actual development time should be rare. If it isn't, then your team needs to spend more time researching LOEs up front, getting solid requirements, and assigning tasks to someone that has the proper experience to complete the task on time.

I've worked as an engineer for a company that had ridiculous engineering turnover rates because engineers were treated like children, and management would always give these kind of excuses where one guy was a slacker one time so everyone has to abide by ridiculous policies around required office hours. If you want to retain talent and accurately measure employee performance, you need to put effort into measuring outcome rather than working hours.
This is a really good idea that somehow I totally missed. I stopped playing at a level where this became important (as @elefantastisch noted above), but now I kind of want to pick it back up again. It's not guaranteed to work (different enemies might deal the same amounts of damage), but maybe location could help in those cases (i.e., if my warrior is being dealt a certain amount of damage and the space in front and behind the warrior is empty, one could infer the enemy is an archer).
A videogame that powers quantum entanglement experiments
Just to clarify, I'm using trivial here in the technical sense.

YMMV on what counts as trivial to you, of course, after three days straight tearing your hair out!
Increase your rates regardless. Clients don't know, or really care, about quality so long as what you build works.

Where quality is important is in keeping your costs low. Having to revisit old code to fix bugs or trying to work with bad code to add features has very little impact on your client. It affects you. Strive to write good code for your own sake.

Plus, if you take on fixed price projects writing code you don't need to go back to really increases your profit.
* I sit in bed
* I sit in the passenger seat
* I stand with the back door open with the laptop on the bed (it's at a great height to be a standing desk)
* I take a chair out to a shady spot under a tree, etc.
* I lay out a pad/blanket on the ground(outside) under shade and work from there.
* etc.

But no, nothing resembling a standard desk and chair, I'm in a van.. so roughly 6' wide by 10' long = 60 sq feet of space.
Creating that helicopter must have been a very interesting and difficult challenge. Lift L for rotor blades is calculated by the equation L = ½ ρ(v^2)ACL, where ρ is atmospheric density. v is the speed of the blades moving through the air (roughly speaking). A is the total blade area. And CL is the coefficient of lift, which is determined by the angle of the helicopter, if I understand it right.

Mars' atmospheric density at surface averages .087 psi, roughly .06% of Earth's average (14.69 psi). (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Mars )

That means right off the bat you're going to need to increase the speed of the blades squared times the total area of the blades (i.e., (v^2)A) by a factor of ~1666.66 just to get the same lift on Mars that you would on earth.
> how are they legally selling location numbers

shrug It's America, there's no general concept of privacy in law. It's not considered to be your data, it's their data. I'd be rather more surprised if this is legally happening in the EU.

(I would not be surprised to discover that most EU carriers are compromised by some quasi-private intelligence service organisation like Cambridge Analytica/SCL group, illegally selling location data or derived results.)
There's no reason why my editor would see I'm using Pandoc in a back and forth exchange if we use a decent DOCX template. Furthermore, DOCX is an open format, and I don't have the luxury of a Windows or Mac machine plus an Office license.

In fact, all documents I typeset with Pandoc -> DOCX look like really carefully typeset documents on Word because the style is so consistent and in line with what latest versions of Word encourage: separation of content and presentation.
Nuclear reactor that could power future spaceflight tested in Nevada
I am all for pragmatism, and if I was to try to publish a novel, I would probably use .docx.

But if you discover a good text editor, be it Emacs or Vi or something else, it changes the way you edit text. There are things that a good text editor does exceedingly well that are painfully hard - if even possible at all! - in a program like Word. Some of these are specific to programming, but some are specific to editing text -- Which kind of is what writers do, isn't it? ;-) -- and once you crossed that barrier, going back to Word - useful as it may be - is like going back to chiseling your writing into slabs of rock.
It was slightly charming when I happened to notice the ones in Town hall but it was quickly turned to disappointment as I realised it is just part of the general ugliness and backwardness of Sydney train stations. Looks like the renovation they did at Wynyard turned out well so there is still hope, maybe one day they will also fix the internet.
Apparently US companies can do this if they "get concent". I don't know what that means though, it could be a couple terms buried in your contract. It's definitely huge, I haven't heard of it before either.

Does anyone know if there's an EU directive on this? I looked into my contract, and there's a completely abstract and vague paragraph noting how they can use personal data for some reasons (including commercial) but they don't even mention what that might be. It could be "just" the insurance/tax identification numbers and the full name, or it could be a lot more things.

I guess it also depends on whether the tracking can be done with existing hardware and a software solution or not. If it's easy, (ie they can easily figure out the tower and get signal levels) they probably do it. If you need better hardware, they probably don't, mostly because of lower buying power and more legal implications.
Show HN: Baby's First Mobile
> I just don't see how monadic IO is relevant to this issue

Monad is effectively Haskell's definition of time: `A >> B` means A followed by B, `B >> A` means B followed by A. Yet Monad can't express concurrency; for that we need something else (e.g. Arrow).

> putStrLn either acquires a lock or it doesn't

It's not that simple: there's no point aquiring a lock after the text has been written; or relinquishing a lock before it's been aquired. To specify what we want, we need some way to sequence actions, and that's exactly what Monad is, i.e. we want `putStrLn` to be:

getLock >> writeTheString >> freeLock

Then we need to consider the sequencing that's going on in the middle, since we need the first character of our string (e.g. "foo") to appear before the second, and so on. Hence we actually get:

getLock >> putChar 'f' >> putChar 'o' >> putChar 'o' >> putChar '\n' >> freeLock

Hence we need Monad (or at least the definition of >> for IO) to orchestrate a single sequence of actions. I find it a little unsatisfying that to orchestrate multiple sequences we might just defer to some complicated parts of the runtime system like "locks" and "threads", written in C :(

As an alternative, we might imagine an "execute concurrently" combinator like `<&>` to complement `>>`, where `A <&> B` evaluates non-deterministically to either `A >> B` or `B >> A`. Yet this isn't particularly good, since `(A >> B) <&> (C >> D)` can only evaluate to either `A >> B >> C >> D` or `C >> D >> A >> B`; there's no possibility for traces like `A >> C >> B >> D`, so we lose a lot of the reason to use concurrency.

One way to fix this is to define another way of sequencing, e.g. `A ->> B`, which behaves like `A >> B`. We can then pick one of these, e.g. `->>`, to interact with `<&>`, such that:

(A ->> B) <&> (C ->> D)

will evalutate non-deterministically to:

A >> (B <&> (C ->> D))

or:

C >> ((A ->> B) <&> D)

With a setup like this, we can then reframe the problem with `putStrLn` by saying that `putStrLn "foo"` evaluates to:

putChar 'f' ->> putChar 'o' ->> putChar 'o' ->> putChar '\n'

Whilst we want it to evaluate to:

putChar 'f' >> putChar 'o' >> putChar 'o' >> putChar '\n'

From this perspective, the problem is absolutely about monadic IO :)

Can we implement `<&>` with threads and `>>` with locks? Sure; but we can also think about these things in a "more Haskelly" way, with combinators, equational laws, etc.
>How would this possibly increase the already-complete surveillance of everything you do? They already know who you are, where you live, every cent you spend and where, every site you visit, every email/call/sms you do, and it's all tied back to you.

This is simply false. I choose not to carry a smartphone, I pay with cash for virtually everything, no "social media", I often use a VPN. There are many people who voluntarily give away all of their personal data to corporations - and there are many (though far fewer) of us who don't.
And, ironically, static typed languages like C++ are moving to more "dynamic" (actually, inferred) type systems via 'auto'
Yeah big data can be very useful. The reality just doesn't match the hype.
About how much can a relatively skilled developer get on upwork or similar? My feeling when bidding for projects there was that I needed to go incredibly low to compete with businesses in India or Pakistan. Or does it get better as you get more clients?
Working remote only with a mix of direct customers and customers through TopTal. To have TopTal as a backup is great. Land a new gig in a week perhaps two if you're picky (and your reputation is good).
All images of the Facebook ads Russians purchased during the election
Equal in the eyes of the law - possessing the same legal rights and civil liberties. This is literally the opposite of a state seeking "equal outcomes".
Article: https://techcrunch.com/2018/05/10/rip-klout/

>A Lithium spokesperson told TechCrunch that “the upcoming deadline for GDPR implementation simply expedited our plans to sunset Klout,” though the primary reason is said to be a new focus on messaging-based services.
Dynamo Founders Camp
I'm sorry but this comment is just at odds with the current literature in deep learning.
A few very prominent researchers have been trying to use information theoretic concepts to explain generalization for a while now-see
the somewhat controversial branch Naftali Tishby developed...However many other papers apply 'actual information theory'....

https://arxiv.org/search/?query=deep+learning+information+th...
Link without https works: http://www.eecs189.org/
"One man army" to Founder.
> Vive and Oculus have incentives to cooperate… for now. But there’s constant pressure for a betrayal when a player gets desperate or decides the market has matured and it’s time to break for the finish line

OpenXR seems to be moving forward. This will hopefully solve this VR lock-in mess.
Adafruit does. They put their YouTube videos behind a click if you send a “Do Not Track” header.
"Annoyances" type adblock lists work too.
China’s Voice Tech AI Startup Unisound Raises US$100M to Boost IoT Services
Lately, facebook has lots of NIH.
There's papers posted to arXiv every day using information theory to analyze deep learning...
I bought the first NeTV back in ~2011, via Adafruit. I am not saying that any promises were breached, but I did feel that the platform was abandondoned pretty soon after the boards were made available for sale.

So, I guess what I'm saying is: don't buy this board for thinking they'll continue to develop the software after you buy it. If you buy it, make sure it is for what the software is today.
True. Like the other commenter noted, perhaps we could use a special key-combination (or perhaps a new key even) to enter a secure mode. Pressing that key-combination could trigger the area above the line-of-death to increase in size. Then it could show more security-related information, and perhaps even password entry fields. Just brainstorming here.