skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Opinion on the matter:

"The GDPR however does make a small concession to companies in this case: the steps they need to take in this direction are limited to the available technology and the cost of its implementation. Organizations must take reasonable measures to ensure processors are aware of the request, but will not be at fault if the data is not completely erased by third parties."

https://www.endpointprotector.com/blog/gdpr-essentials-the-r...
He was involved with the original Mac, too, and forming Apple itself. But even if he hadn't done a single thing ever again, I think the Apple II alone was enough to earn him his legendary status.
I know this person to be a scholar by their concept of a "Reality," but they still have reading to do if they don't recognize that there may be at least three.
From wikipedia

> The company is headquartered in Bern. Formerly a government institution, since 1999 it has been a special stock corporation with all shares held by the Swiss Confederation or the Swiss cantons.

That certainly sounds like market forces to me.
Best option: inject noise; i.e. create a hundred different copies of yourself, each with different hobbies and lifestyle. Perhaps you could even pay someone to do it.
Correlation isn't causation!

WW2 recruits in 1940s would have been teenagers in the 1930s, a time when eating habits and especially consumption of sugary snacks, was very different from today.

Maybe:

Not poor => Better educated => Higher IQ scores
Not poor => Family can afford sugary snacks => More cavities
Pretty sure almost everyone stopped watching The Walking Dead because of the continuous bad writing and lack of plot, boring interpersonal drama, constant death of interesting characters while the most boring characters get to linger like the stench of a mildew ridden towel.
I didn't really enjoy any of my math courses at University. mostly because it was forced on me and it felt like learning a boring rote process. I didn't see the value in it besides applying it to basic physics and engineering courses I took.

Now, as I program more, I'm starting to appreciate what math has to offer. Especially when I dig through a library or framework and break down what its doing on a step by step process.

I find the people I look up to most, whether its in engineering, programming ,etc - are also great mathmaticians.

Math for me has helped me in the following ways

1. Its helped me write better. Math is like writing. Its all about expressing the most amount of "oompf" in the fewest syntax possible.

2. It has helped me program better. Learning discrete math helps me draw parallels on what an array foundationally is (set theory), and why low level logic works the way it does.

3. It helps me write better notes. I used to use thousands of annotated images for taking notes. Then I realize how poorly that turned out. Over the years I've learned to take better notes by writing more in fewer words. Eventually, this led me to math. Math is the simplest way of expressing complex logic.

4. It has helped my understanding of 3D and 2D processing. Learning linear algebra from 3blue1brown has made it much easier to understand why and how 3D rendering / imaging programs work at the most basic level. How a box is shaded, how a 3D item is modeled when you apply a fillet to it.

I intend to learn ML / AI , so knowing statistics comes in handy, which at its core is still math.

Just learning and knowing math makes everything so much easier to pick up after.
A Deep Dive into Monte Carlo Tree Search
He takes a wonderfully naive approach for someone who's historically knowledgeable. I'm sure he knows why and how territorial claims are made and how countries use and abuse historical data, archives, archeology, myths, narratives and make inflated claims from otherwise trivial facts (e.g. this document which has a stamp of a representative of the King on this trade document exchanging camels for figs shows the kingdom had economic representation in the region which under the cultural norms at the time was viewed as de facto political rule, traced all the way to now means the republic that succeeded the kingdom still has sovereignty here.)

None of these are mistakes, they're political claims.

The Aegean dispute is quite an interesting case study for anyone who wants to dive into how this all works. Due to the many islands in combination with international law (UNCLOS) it ends up screwing over Turkey massively, which unsurprisingly hasn't signed. In the south china sea this isn't as big a deal, but still important due to shipping, rare minerals, fishing rights etc.
No friggin' middle mouse button though. You can't even configure their mice? to behave as if it had a middle button. Go ahead. Try.
So, give them bank accounts without checks. I haven't used a check in... maybe a decade? Despite being a citizen of America, one of the few places where check's are still a (marginal, fading) thing.
https://www.bkb.admin.ch/dam/bkb/de/dokumente/Oeffentliches_...

> This Good Practice Guide provides information on improving urban public transport. It showcases how cities in Sweden, Finland, France and Germany have improved the environmental and social standards in urban public transport through the competitive tendering process or through preparations for competitive tendering.

> Competitive tendering refers to the awarding of an exclusive right to operate a route, or a network of routes, to an operator (or possibly a consortium) following a competitive process. Along with, or instead of an exclusive right, the Authority may also grant subsidises to the successful operator in compensation for the fulfilment of public service requirements.

"... following a competitive process." That certainly sounds like market forces at work to me.
Science avoids the "cesspool of rigid dogma" by experimentation not by a priori argumentation.

This point seems to be lost on a bunch of physicists these days who wallow in their derivations and forget that the fundamental revolution in modern science was the empirical method. The silly philosophers who got overthrown never knew it.
A lot of this sounds reasonably applicable to applied math, but it sounds very out-of-place for describing pure math.

The point of a proof (at least one that isn't a terribly contrived homework problem) is that there is no "correct tool" to solve it. You're developing the theory that creates (or demonstrates the validity of) the "correct tool." It's a very good training for a research mindset (research is similarly notorious for causing frustration, among many other similarities) and that's evidenced by the premium that great school admissions programs put on students with a track record of pure math success.
> "argues against the TONE of the communication! during a fairly ordinary technical discussion of language implementation.

The LWN piece says "Guido van Rossum, who loudly objected to Shapiro's tone, which was condescending, he said".

That sounds appropriate.

In your experience, do most people presenting an 'ordinary technical discussion' use a condescending tone? If so, I'm glad I don't work in your organization.

Otherwise, when should people complain when speaker is disparaging most of the people in the audience, even if accidentally?
The person you responded explicitly said “fairness in statistics”.
Some product placement can be cheesy no matter what situation it's in but I'd take a few moments of cheesy product insertion over the typical pattern of a US serial: 2 seconds of blackness (or 3 minutes of commercials) every 12 minutes or so, 20 minutes of story time traded for adverts, and dialog you would never encounter in a more continuous story because it assumes the audience is intelligent enough to figure it out or start from the beginning. It's mind-numbing in the extreme.

Bringing up a pack of Oreos and waving it around the screen so everybody can really see it's a pack of Oreos is one thing, but the endless trudge of scenes like this is something else:

X: "So you got the brief from the NSA?"

Y: "The National Security Agency, they monitor all the communications in the US to prevent terrorism... yes I got the brief. You bring in Mr Snucklebum for questioning?"

X: "Snucklebum, the man under suspicion for trading classified secrets? Yeah he's in interrogation, right through here."

- alarm bells, ad break -

Y: "Snucklebum's escaped! Lockdown!"

X: "Snucklebum, the guy under suspicion for trading classified secrets to the NSA?"

Y: "The national security agency. Yeah"
The US does not own or control US companies.
And you realize that the US is even less prepared for any major epidemics that might occur in the world and here in the US due to the Trump administration's relentless dismantling and defunding of both research and global disease research.
As a European exchange student, I took a sociology class as a senior in a US high school. Our teacher ran an experiment with "money", where those with lots of "money" were allowed to change the rules for each round, creating an unfair playing ground favoring the rich.

I objected to the game and the rules, and did not want to play. After the game, in class, he commented that "Exchange students always object that the rules are unfair, while local students always accept that the rich get to set them."

Without even knowing where people are from, I sense a similar trend in this discussion: Europeans are more willing (trained and socialized) to sacrifice individual preferences in favor of the "greater good".

(Your mileage will vary. Not exact science. Not science at all. Just a feeling.)

(Edit: Spelling)
This is a quite interesting story. Yet the piece one forgot to mention is that the government of Republic of China was founded in 1912, after the intense and long warfare. Meaning at most, the author's evidence could prove that during the times somewhat around 1912-1927. It wasn't on the government's official records, while they're trying to define its territory.

It does not affect evidence dated back before.

On the other hand, similar arguments could effectively be found for other countries who also land the claims. As their claims were only made more recently, as well as their governments, all after a long time of western colonization.

Different claims made by different countries must all be examined. Put one in the spotlight without examining others could only raise suspicions.
Didn’t work for me. I will try SMS route next.
A few days ago I told my wife that Instagram was owned by Facebook and she was shocked. She had no idea. There are clues scattered around, mostly related to trying to get you to add your Facebook friends on Instagram or trying to get you to use Instagram more but not much else. I couldn't even find the word Facebook on Instagram's site just now (not even on their About Us page). It's probably on there somewhere but it seems to be pretty deliberately disassociated with Facebook.

I wonder if Facebook is treating Instagram like a second earth. If they ruin the first they still have a backup.
So, after working on this for some time and reading a lot, i realized that this example is more of a practical analysis for day today js code writing that we do. so the result is more kind of related to it and what should be the choice from those 3.

However, you are right about the performance benchmarking factor. Good news, I have done analysis on the inline cache, warm cache and working on how to get GC in place and hidden classes to get better results.
Sounds like you were confused. For example, I know people like stuff like the 3blue1brown movies, but my intro linear algebra textbook from undergrad covers literally all the materials and movations he did if you bothered to read it.
Ye, and as someone from the UK, I can confirm they're terrible, and don't work effectively, because your god of market forces doesn't work in transport
Board the 1840 Euston to Manchester ('peak time'), you'll find it about 30-50% full

Board the 1900 or 1920 ('off peak') and it's standing room only.

Transport is not 'primarilly for commuters'. There are very few commuters traveling from Warrington to London.

You're taking your corner case (local commuting on a metro style service) and applying it to the network as a whole. This is a failing. However you still have a choice. I used to commute from Leighton Buzzard to London. I could either

1) Take the London Midland service into Euston and tube on (most frequent, least comfortable, slightly faster)
2) Take the Southern service to Shepherds Bush and walk (less frequent, more comfortable, slightly slower)
3) Take the commuter bus (slower, far cheaper, less frequent)
4) Drive (slower, cheaper than the train, more hassle)

When we were both doing 5 days a week we took the train, as it was less hastle. When we dropped to 3 days a week we drove, as it was far cheaper.

Commuter tickets are already massively subsidized (35% discount for being a commuter traveling from Guildford to London for example vs a one off trip), I hope those are got rid of when they get rid of break of journey. That will allow large scale price cuts across the network.
The Monsters, Inc. Argument for Unconditional Basic Income
What does "fairness in statistics" even mean? Perhaps there is a very obvious definition that I don't know about? Would you please define it for me, and (if this is non-obvious) explain how it relates to the school choice problem?
I've read wikipedia since, it seems cities are ramping up. Paris is also making offers for a 1000 e-bus fleet around 2025.

Also there are capabuses, China tested them, ultracapacitor based for 3km trips between recharge. Funny.
Surely the Netherlands has private schools?

I don't think the rich are sacrificing anything by this lottery. Some middle-class kids might have to go to a worse school to allow some poor kids to go to a better school but the rich are unaffected.
The credit union I am a member of (starone) charges $5 for non-members to cash checks from members.
Among others, USAA doesn't require a brokerage account to bank with them. I don't think it's really a comparable situation.

In their competitor comparison[1], you'll note they don't list USAA or any credit unions, because it would look basically the same as the Schwab account. Low or no fees, low or no minimum balance, decent interest rates, etc.

There's no reason for you to switch, either, but not everyone needs or wants a Schwab brokerage account too.

[1]: https://www.schwab.com/public/schwab/banking_lending/checkin...
Nope. That is not a free speech issue. It is an irresponsible business issue.

Also, no one who actually does this stuff for a living uses the term "webmaster".
Yeah, they dropped the ball a bit on SWTOR. I'd have loved to see a single-player KOTOR 3. Ah well, Bioware's slowly dying, so it's up to new companies to innovate on the stories.
The result is the best, most competitive market in television shows in American history.

I don't know about that, 90% of netflix's content is pretty bad IMO.
Huh. I had exactly the opposite experience, simple was mostly fine when I used it but the web experience of chase these days is also fine. A clear, simple UI for seeing statements and setting up credit card auto-pay, deposit checks in the app. Plus, having branches if you absolutely need to use them is nice, and finding atms in most us cities for a big bank is much more straightforward than finding the partner atm brands that work with simple, or whatever you have to do there.

When simple goes wrong though, the leaky abstraction of being a thin wrapper around another bank makes it much more painful. I forget the details now, but some fairly straightforward things broke for me a couple of times. And as friendly as their support might be, they were completely useless for fixing the problem because it was due to the underlying bank they built on top of. Canceling my account was also somewhat opaque.

So I can’t really relate to this article or most of these comments at all.

The underlying money transfer infrastructure in the US (between banks and merchants or banks and other banks) on the other hand really needs an upgrade from the arcane ACH system, that’s the last thing that sucks about consumer banking as far as I can see.
Above all else, Dynamic Programming is useful for making yourself feel like a superior programmer and writing blog posts about it. In 10+ years of working in this industry, I can't recall using it once outside of interviews.
This is a fascinating article. Footnote 8 is an especially fascinating insight;

> One puzzling feature of the shift register is that there is no wiring between the stages!
> How do bits get from one stage to the next? Did the chip have another layer of wiring that wasn't in
> the photos? Was there some sort of hidden connection? Eventually I noticed that there wasn't an isolation
> ring between the stages—a silicon barrier that separated most I2L circuits. Without this isolation ring,
> an "invisible" PNP transistor exists between the stages, apparently allowing one stage to flip the next
> stage to the right value. Each shift-register stage is constructed from two NAND-gate latches. When the
> clock is low, the first latch is forced into an indeterminate state. When the clock goes high, the latch
> ends up as 0 or 1 based on the bias it receives from the previous stage through the "invisible" PNP
> transistors. Thus, the latch becomes edge-sensitive since it will change right on the clock's rising edge.
> I found a paper ("Injection-Coupled Synchronous Logic", 1978) that describes a similar technique for an I2L
> shift register9, so I think this is the right explanation, even though the circuit seems a bit sketchy.
A version of attr-lookup caching is already added in 3.7. Thus Guido objected to the tone of, "I'm the first person to notice this!"

> Mark Shannon said that Python 3.7 has added a feature that should provide a similar boost as the method-lookup caching used in the experiment.

As I understand it, class-attribute dicts now carry a version number which increments on every mutation. The first method lookup gets cached and subsequent lookups check the version number to decide whether to invalidate the cache.
It's a way to take interventions, for example what would happen if we can cigarettes, and model it with observational data. The do-calculus is just a couple of rules which say when we can do this. It essentially boils down to a couple of substitution rules.
Speak for yourself. In my opinion, this is a massive win for storytelling. And I'm saying this as a lifelong Star Trek fan who has watched every single series end-to-end except for TOS.

As much as I love it, Star Trek feels old. And this is the #1 reason why. With relatively small exceptions, every episode is complete disconnected from every other. The beginning of the episode sets up some sort of problem or danger. By the end of the episode, this danger is dealt with, gone. Character development is either non-existent, or happens at such a painfully slow pace that it's difficult to feel connected to what's going on. Instead what we see (if anything) are "snapshots" into the character's mental state. This is simply not how you tell a good story! So it's not surprising to me that Star Trek went fallow for a long time.

The point about character development applies to the universe too. People like to say that the Federation feels old. But what they really mean, in my opinion, is that the Federation should be viewed as a character. And if you think about it that way, it becomes obvious that as a character, the Federation is completely missing character development. So it's no wonder people get tired of it! Would you want to read a novel about a character who doesn't change at all during the course of the story? Would you come back for more after a half dozen of these?

The problem with saving the world perfectly every time is that over the long term, this means there is no change. Every individual episode might be a great story, but at the end of the day, did any of it matter? If there are no permanent consequences, it's hard to see how. This becomes especially obvious if you binge-watch the shows. Everything is always the same. Nothing changes.

What I want to see in a show (Star Trek or otherwise) is change. Permanent, irrevocable change. You dropped a glass, and it shattered, and no amount of wishing otherwise will put it back together again. That doesn't mean you can't do something about it! But certainly, you're not just going to put things back into exactly the same state they were before.

P.S.

You might be tempted to say, "oh, but what about DS9?" But even there, the format was largely unchanged. Go and count the episodes. The ones that actually dealt with any sort of ongoing story are a minority. Most of the shows follow the same framework as previous series. Except for one 10-episode sequence at the very end, you can basically forget that the war exists between the episodes that they mention it.
So how hard is it now to open a bank with $20 million?
For the record I'm referring to the scenarios described here.
https://material-ui.com/guides/typescript/#usage-of-withstyl...

And this TS issue: https://github.com/Microsoft/TypeScript/issues/4881

The guide just comes off as a bunch of subpar workarounds.
> It doesn't have enough passengers to be profitable, but most of the passengers would be unemployed if that route didn't exist.

I highly doubt that. People carpool. NYC has dollar vans which serve underserved communities at lower cost than the state.

Providing subsidized bus routes to work is basically subsidizing employers who employ these people.
I don't believe that he origin and provenance of the system matter as much as the effect. What does matter is that two people who would each prefer the others' place, where that swap wouldn't affect others, should be allowed to swap positions. The rest of the article is a clear attempt to justify the intentional spreading of misery.

For example, "we can’t make every student entirely happy with a lottery system. But we can try to spread the unhappiness as equally as possible."

In my opinion schools should be for teaching, even if only a few students are able to learn. Schools should be about having the same limits on all. That comes from the false metric of wanting all to leave the system with the same qualifications instead of the best qualities that each can individually have.
I'm currently reading a book that talks a lot about the history of particle physics from 1950 to 2000. It amazes me how diverse the scientist's philosophical outlooks were, the only thing they agreed on in the end was empiricism. Given their success, I think that's a strong testament to the idea that philosophy doesn't "power" science the way math does.

Here's a philosophy-free formulation of science: (i.e. one where scientists don't have to know any philosophy)

- People set up symbol games with rules, that produce symbols.

- They also set up physical machines that produce symbols.

- When they match, they're happy.

I think that does a good job of capturing why physics was able to progress so well without concurrent progress in philosophy. At the end of a day, a physicist will have a number on their scratch paper and a number on the meter and the goal is to get them to match. Mainly the role of philosophy is to guard them from any distractions that would confuse them away from doing that, and perhaps to bend their brains into coming up with good symbol games.
Nobody is arguing that products shouldn't have features. But there is a real cost to each feature that you add, and so you have to weigh the tradeoffs before blindly building everything anyone asks for. Selecting all columns but one seems like it would bring much less value than JSONB.