skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
-Incontrovertible evidence has been shown to be not quite as incontrovertible as initially believed many a time.

Besides, how can one really prove that someone will not change in the future? It will all come down to conjecture and guesswork.

Life in prison is both cheaper (for the state, or at least that's what I seem to recall - the reason being that the death penalty involves much more judicial toing and froing, as it should!) AND offers the option to find out at a later time that the state has made a mistake.

While I do not believe one can fully compensate anyone for years behind bars, at least one can release them, rather than telling the bereaved that 'Oops, we were wrong - but at least you now know he was innocent, right? Proof our legal system works? Right?'

However, it would seem to this outsider (I've never been a -hm- client of the US penal system, neither am I a citizen) that the US is more focused on punishment than on rehabilitation; I believe a lot can be done about the recidivism rate by shifting the focus more towards using prison as a means to prepare the inmates for return to society, rather than simply as a means of keeping them away from the general public.

(Then again, for that to really happen, the general public's attitudes would need to change, too - I live in Norway, one of the most rehabilitation-focused of countries - while our recidivism rate is among the lowest there is, there's still considerable stigma associated with being an ex-convict.)
>Having incontrovertible evidence and proof that there's no hope of rehabilitation? I think there are obvious cases where someone is beyond help

So? You think Europe doesn't have people that are "beyond help" in prison? Or that their courts are wrong in not murdering them?
See ya!
Well first that need to get it into orbit and outside of the suns gravity well. Then they'd have to get it far enough away that the lead could get up to light speed before hitting it's target, you can't do this in solar system because you can't change trajectory that fast. Finally they have to aim it correctly at earth from that distance.

A big ask for a group of people who's best technical achievement so far is to fly a plane into a building.
Linode upgrade plans to match with DigitalOcean
It's an interesting question, one that has been bothering me as I get "older" (I'm a few years short of turning 30).

The short answer is I'm not sure. There was a set of paths ahead of me in life and I chose one, more or less arbitrarily. I'm not sure how cognizant of it I was. I think most people operate in this manner.

The long answer is that I'm not sure nor am I sure where to start. This is one of the areas where I think religion proves incredibly useful in that it gives followers a set framework and rules for existing in the world. Finding meaning in your own life is a messy and complicated task. I see the appeal of giving that power away to some sort of authority. In return you don't have to think about these challenging questions.
>Also 30 people sharing two bathrooms doesn't sound fun.

First world problems...
Well many of us find it completely normal to spend days on having a good security, setting up HTTPS, encrypting content to protect privacy. I wonder why GDPR seems so different, it's just more of the same, just less technical.
If you sign up you get native mac client (beta)!
Really good piece of software, much more teliable than Tunnelblick
Old plans

https://web.archive.org/web/20180414185804/https://www.linod...
In the past kids, after 10 or so, where considered short adults and treated as such.
I miss those days ;)
6 Emotional Arcs of Storytelling, Why You Should Use Them, Which One Is Best
I might be able to give some perspective on this. I'm 16 years old, and I know about 4 people who are active om FB. People who are a few years older generally do have FB, though, and use it quite intensively. Most of the contact people have with FB are WhatsApp and Instagram, which are both ubiquitous. (For context, I'm Dutch.)
My point is that we disagree with a lot of founders. Now he wrote an article, he either has a point on that article or he doesn't. If we started to shun smart people for something they did or didn't do (he says, I bought the patents and I'm monetizing them in legal ways) a lot would be lost.
Wait, do you mean leaving it on for a minute and then rinsing, or not rinsing at all and just go about your day?
> " I've never heard Yanny neither as a name nor a regular word"

Fortunate soul has been spared from Yanni the musician: https://youtu.be/Xw7HeJ781Do (actually not so bad I guess)
Fair enough, maybe the calls originated from outside California. Either way, I think we can see there are some ways to get around the two-party requirement. But, there's still something fishy about the calls.
> ToU don’t change what PII is or isn’t under the GDPR.

ToU can by prohibiting user from entering any PII. In case of email, ToU would say that only non-identifying email can be used.

For the rest of your comment, I dont see any relevance here. There is no need for consent for non-PII userdata. All PII userdata is behind legal and technical wall and cannot be accessed by the processor/controller of non-PII userdata.
Programming Today’s AI for Tomorrow’s Gender Equality
So that implies that a majority of academics, or at least a portion of them with meaningful power, of academics actually place value on the 'name stamp' that Elsevier and others apply to other researcher's work. They all could just read a PDF from the original researcher's own web page or university's online archive but they choose to prefer the 'Elsevier gated' papers instead. Otherwise people publishing via Elsevier wouldn't "get much" either.

The question is whether that pays off in the end. That is, do Elsevier and others' papers have the bar high enough that it's absolutely not worth browsing and reading papers outside the commercial publication, or if it's just laziness and convenience acting up by placing trust in these academic publishers. The academics should be aware of the money and power game involved in commercial publishing, so they should be in a position to judge whether there is value to be trusted in it.
What stops you from fronting the legacy or insecure-by-design software with authenticated HTTPS? You just run nginx/Apache on the same host and block direct access with a port filter on host's firewall. Setup automated updates to keep the HTTPS front secure. You could even front the app with 2FA, but that's usually an overkill. I don't see how this is any less secure than VPN.
I can't hear "Yanny" at all. It's more like "Yaewwy".
The Best Electric Wine Opener
Something I've never understood: Why is our known solar-system on a flat plane? Why don't the planets all have different orbital axis? Is there a body (or bodies) out there exerting a force on the planets to keep them all in the same plane?
Alarm Clock Pro 11.0 Mac Crack Free Download
Steve Jobs pranked a cafe live at the iphone launch, 2007. https://youtube.com/watch?v=1p4j0CODBX8#

Google played a recording of a fake assistant fake-calling a fake business. I thought it was too good to be true - but imagine doing that live!

Adding to this article's suspicion, the AI assistant didn't cancel the booking or admit it was fake - or did google really send someone out to keep each appointment?
And Russia considers itself to be a democracy. There's a big gray zone between good government and a self-admitted dictatorship. Smart modern authoritarians know that they need to maintain the pretense of democracy (for reasons like the one you note), and they do a passable job--look at something like Cambodia. That's what makes tools to exert personal power while still complying with the law as written so important.

Why do you think the GDPR needs to give the government that much power? For a simple example: Why is 20M EUR the right statutory maximum? If the regulators would never enforce it, then why does it need to be so high?
Instagram now lets you share posts in Stories
Maybe great for surveys but not a single HIT research project would be feasible if folks were required to pay minimum wage to their turkers.
You have been spied upon. Our bad, we will ignore legit citizens at home.arpa
I think it's a weak argument to suggest that crash reports are not "what the application is about" it contributes to the ongoing development and stability of an application which you use.

That said I do think there should be an expectation that your participation in crash reporting would be voluntary and explicit.
That's the UK's interpretation of GDPR. What about France or Poland, or any of the other countries?

I suppose it depends where in Europe he would like to visit
Tesla has data on how much time their cars spend on autopilot. If Tesla wants to promote their crash rate, they need to disclose the raw data.

Total vehicle miles for vehicles with a system that only works right on freeways is guessing. The accident rate of interest is autopilot miles on freeways vs all vehicles miles on freeways. Here's the US data summary for all vehicles.[1] See table 35, which breaks out divided highway data.

The focus on fatal collisions is misplaced. There are far more non-fatal collisions, which provides much more information. Evaluating Tesla's "autopilot" is about measuring driving error, not crash survivability.

[1] https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/Publication/8123...
Write to a congressman, explain you are going to track his cellphone like you could any other american, for science, and say that if he/she is not ok just reply your email in 48h (or whatever is the SLA they mention for a response). Done, approval granted.

:)
I appreciate the effort put by you, but I still find tutorials lacking in some aspects:

1. Data loading mechanism. tf.Data can be used here.

2. Saving models as SavedModel so that it can be used later.
Could you provide more resources that demonstrate the science, such a studies or journal articles? I was interested and didn't find anything.

Additionally I found this that seems to suggest skepticism:
https://www.nature.com/articles/sj.bdj.2014.711
That would be awesome to verify.

And would further prove malice on the telco part.
Presumably so you can see the output in the embedded JSFiddles.

FYI, if you're embedding a JSFiddle you could also just drop this in the HTML section then use console.log:

<script>console.log = function(str) { document.write(str, "<br/>") }</script>
I have one small question about the article:

It says "If researchers are evaluated on the quality of their research instead of the journal it was published in, that would remove their need to pay whatever amount of public money a publisher asks of them just to obtain career credentials."

But at least in my field, most of high impact-f journals don't charge any money for publishing there. So the researchers don't really use any significant money on the publishing part.

I don't know how exactly they get their profit (other than the obvious subscription fee they charged the school), but I don't think researcher themselves are paying that (unless of course, by "researchers" you mean universities as the organizations, but then again "find ways to promote your academic work that are independent of the journal it’s published in" will not be relevant since you still need to pay to read other people's publications).
PayPal is buying iZettle
> As far back as 2011 the industry has been inventing ways to make "open access" as profitable as the current system

If that's what they were doing, nothing could better demonstrate that they missed the point entirely and misunderstand the word 'open'.
Not so smart then.
Reputation is misleading. The Special Theory of Relativity is not good because Einstein wrote it. It stands on its own.

We could even argue that a purely meritocratic system of publishing will accelerate good quality research as opposed to a reputation based system.

Funding and career advance should be ortogonal to knowledge distribution.
The NYT has a very soft paywall. If you want to read it without subscribing you certainly can.
Ask HN: How does your team handle onboarding new employees?
Show HN: Tweet about your product to the followers of your competitor
It’s not perfectly flat, but somewhat close to it, because all of our solar system’s planets formed from the same accretion disk, during which time there was opportunity for exchange of angular momentum.
It's also very natural to act in this exaggerated way. Real resentment, subconscious bias and humorous exaggeration are influenced by the same mental model of us v. them.

I naturally joked that I would leave my SO since we're not hearing the same thing, and therefore can't possibly communicate well together; it was only in jest but I could feel this shape of segregation comes all too naturally and appeals to a deeper brain.
One I called 911 to report someone driving on the wrong side of a freeway. I was half sleep in the passenger seat and didn't notice we were on another interstate already. When i said "on highway A" the operator corrected me "don't you mean highway B?" and she was right. I did not get any GPS alert on my phone or confirmation, which given the service I was calling I think it was fine.

It is definitely based entirely on inferred data from cell tower usage. No gps involved whatsoever.
I don't know about this. I mean, to me, the letters 'l' and 'y', and 'r' and 'n' have a very obvious difference. There is another such audio illusion where the word 'oil' sounds the same forwards and backwards, both ways effectively sounding 'oyo'. This is due to the position of the letter 'l' and the sort of elision that happens. However with the laurel thing, I can't imagine it sounding yanny. I could mistake it for wallow but it takes a lot of adjustment to hear yanny. May be I just belong to that 45% or so that always hear laurel.
That one won't be up long, I mean all it takes is a link to that site to an onion site with some child porn or whatever.
> I do not have the resources to meet the letter of the law for compliance especially with respect to retention and processing these tokens.

Harsh words but I feel they're warranted: If you don't want to treat my private data with the due diligence you should, then we're better off not using your service.
Also, needing to have a DPO is not difficult since he already has one employee, himself. It's not ISO2700x, you don't need to fiddle around with rights in small businesses to make sure it fits the narrow perspective of a standardization and exclusiveness.
Cassandra is used for some things, Postgres for the rest. Unless they went full Cassandra recently, which is possible. But for many years we ran both.
You shouldn't conflate the negative nature of for-profit scholarly publishing with the use of paper as a medium.

In my own field, virtually all of our journals are produced by non-profit learned societies instead of companies like Elsevier or Springer. But thank goodness that these journals are still published on paper and collected in my library alongside the production of PDFs. Any work I write requires having several publications open in front of me at any given time, and that is a lot easier with paper journals instead of PDFs. Plus, printed journals in library holdings allow one to spend hours browsing through research without any of the distractions that electronics bring.

I definitely appreciate having PDFs of articles, but paper still has its place.
We’ve been running Postgres on i3 instances with their attached SSDs. Performance is solid and it’s cheaper too. Having up to date replicas becomes crucial, along with incremental backups (we use wal-e for that).

As you mentioned, it is limited by instance size, but for a DB that fits it works great and has fewer moving parts. Knowing that your entire database is essentially ephemeral raises the stakes too and forces you to take replication, backups and restore testing seriously.
I agree with everything he has to say but there's an important caveat missing: In his example, the code he starts with is trivial to understand. I can read through it linearly. I can see how the variables are used to achieve the layout. The functions draw_title() and draw_big_text_button() have obvious meanings, partly because I can see x and y coords being passed in.

Comparatively, the code he ends up with is hard to understand. If I was new to the code, I'd be wondering what layout.window_title(title) does. I'd have to lookup the definitions of Panel_Layout data structure and window_title() function. Instead of reading linearly, I now have a tree traversal to do. That is harder.

However, he's not wrong. The changes he made allow more things to be added to the UI panel without the code becoming an incomprehensible mess.

Let's call the original code the linear one. I think the reason his refactoring is good is because the linear function would otherwise have passed a threshold where it was too complex to fit into the working memory of the programmer. The tree traversal exercise he is forcing the next programmer to do serves a purpose. Each function and data structure he introduced is small enough to fit in the programmer's working memory. After looking up those definitions, their (simple) behaviour should be able to be parked in the programmer's medium term memory. Once that investment is made, use of working memory is reduced, freeing up the possibility of adding more stuff to the UI panel function without it passing the threshold.

There's a trade-off. In some ways he made the code worse. But it was necessary. We should always be asking ourselves if the abstractions we are introducing are necessary. Understanding the constraints of programmer's brains is vital to being able to make that judgement.
Regarding the bytecode - it was always considered an internal implementation detail subject to change (unlike the JVM bytecode) and in 3.6 they have in fact made a fairly major change[1]:

"The Python interpreter now uses a 16-bit wordcode instead of bytecode which made a number of opcode optimizations possible."

They haven't been shy about changing it in the past either, since there's no guarantee of stability, so it's likely to continue to change in incompatible ways.

[1] https://docs.python.org/3/whatsnew/3.6.html#optimizations
Voice Enabled Business Analytics – Roosboard.com
I lost it at <?php
Oroborus proof of stake is kind of proven on paper https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/889.pdf

And bitcoin proof of work isn't that perfect. Over 50% of the hash power is with a few guys in China so they could hack the system if they wanted to.
The way this tends to work is not rational, it's reactionary and often punitive. It doesn't matter if product X also was partially funded by US Army, if regulators don't like Uber, this is yet another thing to create that argument with.
There is a brief explanation here:

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/about-us/57-our-solar-syste...
I always heard Laurel, only at 1 notch away from Yanny I hear Yanny and even then it sounds like a robot speaking.
It's hard to detect dark, cold things that are far away.
Planet Nine is very cold, likely to be quite dark and also very far away (anywhere between 200 AU and 1200 AU depending on where it currently is in its orbit). Its estimated apparent magnitude is greater than 22.5. That means you'll need a large telescope (I guess around 5m), a dark sky and sensitive cameras to be able to see it.

Stars are neither dark nor cold, however brown dwarves that are pretty cold are much harder to detect.

If you look at the list¹ of the sixty nearest stars to our sun, you'll notice that many close brown dwarves have only been found fairly recently (e.g. Luhman 16a/b, 6.5ly away were found in 2013).

¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nearest_stars_and_brow...
Embedded Search Driven Analytics – Roosboard.com
Twitter has a new policy that states if you're blocked by a small number of people in a short space of time then your account will be shadow-banned (you can tweet but it won't show up in people's timelines). This is probably a quick and easy way to get caught out by that.
The inspector displays the listeners of the elements.
The fact that they put the 'name stamp' is due, essentially, to the referees that allow that paper to be published. Refereeing is also part of the CV of a researcher. So, unless you find another way to do the refereeing process, there is no alternative to the 'name stamp'.

Just uploading to the arxiv will not guarantee that your paper has been reviewed.
2+2=4 is not just trivially true: Typically the symbol "4" is defined to be 3+1. (Actually it's defined as the successor of 3, but "successor" is essentially the same as "+1"). So 2+2=4 is exactly equivalent to 2+2=3+1. This is slightly different to your identity of 2+2=1+3, because 3+1=1+3 is also non trivial.

More information: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peano_axioms
I'd go as far as saying that if you responsibly handled data before GDPR, what you have to do to be GDPR compliant is document the process and make it possible to delete data upon request.
You can't receive any actual money (only amazon money, which is much less useful) as a worker outside of the US as far as I know.
As is calling them out for it (e.g. if they are not based in fact), which is all jacquesm does. That's also a "fundamental human right"
> You do not need to comply with any country’s laws except the one you reside in.

Unless you want to business with another country, in which case you need to follow the laws of that country when you conduct that business. Which is what I've been saying the whole time.

> Just think of what China would do to the Internet if it could.

If you want to provide a service to China you need to follow Chinese laws or they will block you using their firewall. China is a (not very nice) example of how a country has the right to decide who it does business with -- if you won't help them conduct surveillance of their citizens then they won't do business with you and will block you from doing business with their people. You might not agree with their laws or how they act, but it is their right as a sovereign nation to create their own laws.

I never said you need to follow the laws of every country in the world, and I really don't understand how so many people are reading that out of what I said (and keep saying). If you want to do business with a country you will have to obey the laws of that country. That's the way international trade has always worked.
Please fix misleading title, it should be: Reinvented _Survey_ Research.

> thirty to forty minute survey ... paid $1.10

What sort of results do you expect from this "research"? Do you really expect people to read the questions and answer truthfully?

You can prove pretty much anything, by reordering fields or manipulating the questions.