skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>The takeaway was that dedicated infrastructure for self-driving cars was too expensive to make happen.

Too expensive compared to what?

Any kinds of transit system requires dedicated infrastructure. Humans in particular need signs, road markings, traffic lights, etc.

Decades of research and optimization went into building that infrastructure so that it would be easy for humans to use safely and effectively.

Why is it surprising that this infrastructure simply doesn't work well for computers to operate in?

We aren't trying to run trains on unmodified streets. We build rails first. We should do the same for self-driving cars.
There are vastly more people with access to $25k in cash than there are people who end up making an impact as large as Gates had. It still takes an enormous amount of work and savvy to pull off what he did.
Customers should pay a premium for the driver to not park a block and a half from them at pickup?
Most engaged yet least attached.
I am saying we all go out into a chaotic world every day and face technology which companies have put into the world for their own profit-seeking motive which is just as likely (if not significantly more-so) to kill us as a self driving car.

Whataboutism is a shitty argument, although it almost pales next to the other fallacies you engage in later in your post. The whole thing is a dishonest deflection of strawman arguments, false dichotomies, and more. Do you have a financial stake in this, or is it just an ideological position?
Some context; as someone who pledged in 2012. I'd hope the OP doesn't come off as dismissive to the "hard unglamorous" stuff, since I see this as a separate issue. For me at least, the problem is largely that in the last 6 years, we've gotten PILES of UX revisions, all of which favor form over function to a laughable degree. This map, while pretty, is fractionally as useful as a flattened stretchy-grid-auto-layouted hairball. It lacks basic features like being able to _zoom out to actually see the whole volume without rotating_, let alone functionality in companion apps to competitor games[0], not to mention that to render the UX my significantly overpowered dev box is chugging away quite hard. Meanwhile, the core gameplay systems have, by many fans perceptions, degraded in quality, and prior deliverable dates have been slipped to levels that would get me fired in my position.

Again, I don't want to sell short the difficulty of the engine work they're trying to do, and frankly I should probably keep separate my grievances about deadline-meeting (although that certainly throws salt on the metaphorical wound). But to my eyes this is in the same vein as the complaints I see about other web products, "you have something good, polish but then don't fix what aint broke", while echoing a trope Star Citizen inflicted on itself from its very first "Iron Man" HUD design.[1] (reviled for being piles of overdesigned spinny widgets, and very little functionality).

[0]http://evemaps.dotlan.net

[1]http://i.imgur.com/4gMaYpu.gif
Beijing Is Holding US Citizens Hostage in China
I recently came across this artice:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overfitting

Although it describes the issue pertaining to statistics + machine learning, this is also exactly what end ups up happening with a large codebase without clear requirements or test cases, and people just making incremental, piecemeal changes over time. You end up with an application that has been trained (overfitted) with historical data and usecases, but breaks easily for slightly new variations that are different from anything that has ever been handled by the system before in some trivial way that better designed, cleaner, more abstract system would be able to deal with.

Given how much poor coding practices resemble machine learning (albeit in slow motion), it's hard to hold too much hope about what happens when you automate the process.
More accurately, addiction to the point it has a severe negative impact on the rest of the patient's life.
I have had the opposite anecdotal experience. Things have stayed the same or gotten better.
They aren’t scaring any legal immigrants except those who have their relatives living with them without authorization.

And that population tends to have used family-based or diversity-based pathways. Very rarely do employment-based immigrants live in mixed-status families.

You don’t seem to be aware of how distinct the different immigrant communities can be.
Before ordering a ride, Uber always shows ~2 mins wait time. After placing an order, it goes up to 6-9 mins. Their GPS is also bad quality. I live in the downtown of a big city. Lyft drivers come right away, consistently. Lately, for the same reason, I have started using them. Whereas, Uber's drivers keep on circling around until I call them and give them directions. Their reason - it's these big buildings. I respond by saying: these big buildings also exist for Lyft.

In a nutshell, this Uber feature is already there for me. I will admit - Uber's prices are mostly lower than Lyft.
Nobody here is calling for a flat ban of all self-driving technology. You are tilting at strawmen.

The blowback here is in reaction to what appears to be objectively bad software. Irresponsibly bad. Maybe even negligently bad.

Look to drug trials & the FDA. We take risk to test possibly life-saving drugs. But, we don't let just any whackjob take his unproven mad science experiment to clinical trial and inject people with mantis DNA.
I'm singularly glad someone did this research. Anecdata: Mindfullness never worked for me, and I suspect even harmed me some. I noticed that I became more nihilist and depressed when I used to meditate. Meditation basically made me start realizing the pointlessness of everything, the little value of emotions, which is great if your goal is to become unemotional and destressed. However, stress and emotions are how humans do great things. It's what motivates us to overcome nihilism, and desire to do something, be someone, etc. I hope more research is done, and we prescribe Mindfullness only contextually and not as a panacea.
If you're in a suburb that should never happen. If you are in the NYC area for example, the GPS just really struggles between all the buildings.

What's more frustrating is when you are on the other side of a busy street, you wave to the driver or even call them to let them know you're on the other side of the street, and they just sit there...
Most "groups" of people have behaved horrendously toward other "groups" of people, animals, natural resources, etc. I'm not sure how you can possibly look at any type of human history and think otherwise, the evidence is just too overwhelming. And, this may not just be human nature but the natural progression of higher order mental processing and group dynamics as evidenced by tribes of primates assembling war parties and killing and eating their rival primate tribes.

And which countries outside of the US would you suggest I look for this peaceful utopia? Somewhere in Asia, Africa, or South America? I'm not sure Australia is the best example. And please don't suggest socialist Europe, who have committed some of the worst atrocities known to man in the very recent past.

It is extremely naive to think that the majority of society's aggressive tendancies can be blamed on a handful of ruthless leaders or sociopaths. If that were the case, this would be a simple problem to solve. The much tougher truth is that we each have a piece of this inside of us.
And someone who insists on absolute racial blindness is not making a value judgement? Isn't the issue mostly about which group to feel sorry for, why, and how? And you want a literary or published source for that empathy? Or are you saying that it is not self evident that a group, one that has been enslaved for hundreds of years, is not disproportionately poorer, grow up in single-parent households, or experience incarceration? Is that pattern even possible without a history of systematic, long-term oppression?

The way I see it, one group is arguing from a place of historical hardship, and the other is arguing from a place of privilege. I don't mean someone growing up poor in Appalachia as being privileged simply because s/he is white; to me, that historical background definitely counts towards raising diversity. I'm just trying to put myself in other people's shoes. It's not necessarily about race or ethnicity or recentness of oppression, it's the compounded interest of those oppressions and inability to rise out of that enforced debt. Our institutions have to factor that historical indebtedness.

Unless you really put yourself in another person's shoes, I honestly don't think this discussion will go anywhere. I mean, imagine growing up poor in a single household family, going to lowly ranked high schools, being disproportionately more likely to be stopped over and imprisoned for minor offenses, and getting questioned about academic abilities constantly.
A bit of well poisoning, don’t you think? That one can’t call shenanigans without supposedly being affected?
makes sense, mindfulness meditation changes the perceived value of rewards. Maybe someone stops ranking social status as high on their list and will not be motivated to do tasks that are only rewarded with social points.

I don't think motivation decreases for tasks that are meaningful to the individual, it can be good if the workplace goals are aligned with those of the individual, or bad if they are disconnected.
The activity which is addictive varies, but the underlying physiological mechanism seems to be essentially identical from cocaine abuse to gambling. Defining the disorder by the pathology rather than an obtuse collection of symptoms which have a tendency to overlap and merge might be too much for psychology, but it’s the scientific thing.
Is it really the tool that's unethical or the argument here just about depriving governments they don't like tools in general?

"Twenty shareholders from Ford demand they stop selling cars to local law enforcement."
A rather large percentage also failed on the first attempt.

Which is a more honest representation. Humans might have hit someone crossing the street there say 1:100 or 1:10,000 times, but both of those are still possible. So, it's more a question of relative rates where a person or Uber car would avoid hitting the pedestrian in a similar situation.
Very very cool. One of the most neatest use of javascript/browsers I've seen, but then again I'm a huge sucker for sci-fi space stuff. :)
What you might not realise is that the author of a commit is not related to the (authenticated) user who pushes.

You couldn’t merge changes from multiple people otherwise.

Signed commits do fix this although you have to be careful about your threat model. Lots of software (e.g. gitlab) will prevent alice from pretending to be bob but will not protect you against server compromise (because public key directory and signing enforcement are done on the server).

Working at an org which does signed commits, it doesn’t buy us quite as much as we would like.

Also, if you enforce signing you can’t mash a server-side “merge” button anymore because that commit would need to be signed...

This complicates the pr/mr workflow for teams and increases resistance from those who don’t see the value in signing.
Eat Popcorn with Chopsticks: Psychological Tricks to Make Life More Enjoyable
Yes. I have a systemd-based embedded system that uses initramfs so that I can execute some things out of RAM when I need to erase the root filesystem. The old mechanism was initrd which was an ext2 filesystem that was baked into the kernel. The new system, initramfs uses a CPIO archive instead. But it's basically the same idea.
Assuming you don't know something to be definitely false, and you really really hope it works, is that the same as lying? I'm seriously asking in the context of your comment. People raise investor money all the time on the promise of hope. Does that make these people criminals? (Obviously if you 100% know it to be false, it's a lie, but the context of your comment is not definitely knowing it's false, but instead really really hoping it works)
Thanks for posting this - I've been very anxious today about some stuff I havent implemented and this is making me feel better
Ahh, the little man again. The little man has been giving Elon and Tesla problems for a long time.

Early on Musk thought Henry Fisker, who led the design on the Model S then left to start his own EV company was the little man, so he launched a lawsuit against him, but it turned out Henry wasn't the little man, and the lawsuit was meritless.

The little man talked Musk into building falcon wing doors into the Model X, and it wasn't until production had been delayed by many months fussing with those stupid doors that Musk realized he had been tricked by the little man.

Who put the little man up to this? Was it the Koch Brothers? No one knows for sure.

The little man talked Elon into putting expensive autonomous driving hardware into every new Tesla, even though the software hadn't been made yet, and most Tesla buyers weren't willing to pay for it. Don't worry, said the little man, Tesla's will be driving autonomously coast to coast by christmas 2017, and Tesla will be the greatest most futuristic company ever. But Christmas 2017 came and went and Autopilot still sucked. Damn that little man!

The little Man must be Sterling Anderson, the director of Autopilot left the company right after launching HW2, and cofounded Aurora Innovation. Musk was sure Sterling was the little man, so he launched a lawsuit against Aurora, but alas, it turned out the Little man was not Sterling Anderson, and the lawsuit was meritless.

And then there was the time the little man tricked Elon into spending $2.6 billion worth of money Tesla didn't really have on a failing, debt ridden solar panel company. Oh you little man!

The little man one night snuck into the hot tub with Elon and filled his head with visions of a highly automated production line, that the little man dubbed 'The Alien Dreadnought'. The Robots will move so fast you won't even be able to see them, said the little man. Model 3s will shoot off the assembly line like bullets out of gatling gun. Buy Grohman Engineering, said the little man. So Elon did. And many hundreds of millions of dollar later when the Alien dreadnought failed miserably, Musk realized once again he had been tricked by the little man, and all the robots had to be ripped out. Musk is determined, though. Now he has parts of the Model 3 assembly line set up in a tent in the parking lot. Elon will make it happen, even if he has to live on the factory floor. You shall not defeat me, little man!

But it bothers him every night, that little man, who put him up to this? Is it the Tesla shorts? are they the ones who put the little man up to this? Was it May Mcormack? The little man has been out there, corralling the NTSB, the NLRB, the Media, financial analysts, Moody's and the UAW all to conspire against Tesla. Now the little man is setting the paint shop on fire and changing code. I'll get you if it's the last thing I do, little man!
The article states:

> it is hard to distinguish among the CEO who promises the impossible because she is committing fraud, the CEO who promises the impossible because she is deluded, and the CEO who promises the impossible and then goes and does it.

It seems you're suggesting otherwise, except I disagree with you and agree with the article, at least to the extent that it applies to VCs and other high-risk investors: they don't have the ability to have enough technical depth to detech technical fraud, so they have no choice but to price in that risk.

> This environment is either a virtuous circle that'll lift all boats (to mix metaphors), or the opposite

Just the wording makes me think this is a false dichotomy. Why can't it be neither? The environment is complex, and it's conceivable that it would lift/sink only some boats or that it's not circular.
Gave up after about 2 minutes of loading screen.
There is a basic pattern (bubble/pop/settle) but for any advantage you have to know better than someone else. There's been a number of images showing graphs scaled and overlaid over other graphs. There's quite possibly good reasons for the correlation in shapes, but it is also quite useless for investment. You might know something will probably happen but you don't know when or at what speed.

Once you go past the patterns that everyone can plainly see, you are looking for patterns in what appears to be noise to everyone else. Accurate future predictions is really the only way to tell if it is anything other than staring at tea leaves.
Uber is great in the suburbs (sydney, AU), and I'd be fine waiting 5-10 mins more and being put on a low priority so I can get it cheap. It'd also be pretty good during peak periods.
The longer the rider is willing to wait, the more the service can optimize the allocation of drivers. (Less distance driven without a passenger, more distance driven with multiple passengers in a car pool, more direct carpools.) This is a real elimination of waste whose value can be split between the service and the passenger, although it's not clear whether the size of that value is really at the 10-20% level.
No, neither are required. initrd is obsolete and has been replaced by initramfs.
Tweets are limited in content, unlike other forms of communication their perminance is at the leisure of one American tech company.
my rule is, "find a job. then find a better job".
> Fast forward 20 years...

> Being passionate about anything is a thing of the past. Everyone works a corporate job at 1 of 5 companies in the world

And they play videogames to relax. And think life is good this way. Maybe today is the right time to avoid your dystopia.
Yep, see edit on my post.
> What would it mean for Portugal if Spain decided to change its name to Iberia?

Fairly sure they'd laugh at them, and then get on with their lives.
I actually tried that and got a name of a song, and it wasn't a takedown but an agreement to monetise (i.e. add ads, which I didn't have much of a problem), except that it was the completely wrong song. Naturally, that song was also available to listen to in a few other YouTube videos, and the only thing that they had in common with mine was a generic-sounding section of 120bpm bass drum. The melody, the duration, everything else was different.

I disputed, explicitly pointing to the other ones which I assume was identified correctly and how they had basically nothing in common with my video, even explaining that I'd be perfectly fine with it being monetised if it was actually the right one, and was... (not) surprisingly denied. I have a feeling that either no humans were involved at all, or if one were, it did not listen or have any common sense. In the end, I just deleted the video.

Now that I think about it, perhaps reuploading with the (wrongly) detected name, letting it monetise, and show up in search results might be a better idea --- at least that will make it more likely for others to stumble across it, listen, and possibly leave comments like "this isn't X, it's Y"...
I think this is why like most things in life, meditation is yet another thing that should be done in moderation.
This is the perfect word to call them.

dis·or·der

noun
- a disruption of normal physical or mental functions; a disease or abnormal condition.

verb
- disrupt the systematic functioning or neat arrangement of.
- disrupt the healthy or normal functioning of.
Governments are just people, led by politicians.

It would be far better if efforts were spent on recognizing and electing qualified and capable people to run the government as wanted instead of this silly run-around with commercial companies.
No, this term was proposed as an "emerging new paradigm" in 1992 (!!) focusing on "the examination of evidence from clinical research" as our most reliable source of information.

"Western standard medicine" was still largely based on intuition and woo less than 30 years ago.

Source: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/40095...
Gates seemed to be the only one who understood the value of DOS initially. Not you, not I, not Gary Kildall, not IBM, not Tim Paterson.
How much things have changed depends on what level you look at the boot process at. For example, before 2.3.41 introduced the pivot_root system call, the starting process in the initial ramdisk wasn't run as PID 1 (as far as I remember and can tell from the remaining kernel code for this). The kernel also used to be far more willing to do things itself, such as assemble software RAID devices; modern Linux pushes all of that into the initial ramdisk user level code, or even later in boot.

At the broad level, though, yes absolutely. Unixes with System V init have been drawing a distinction between 'single user' boot activities like fsck'ing the filesystems and 'multi-user' ones like starting daemons for a long time, so that's a two stage boot. Linux booting became three stage once it added initial ramdisks so that the core kernel didn't have to have to build in all of the pieces necessary to get the root filesystem.

(I'm the author of the linked-to entry.)
Thankfully— at least in this case— Neil offering the album as a free lossless download on his website means countless archival-quality copies are saved on PCs the world over!
Bitcoin's a deflating currency; there's a fixed number that will ever be mined, and a number are lost to forgotten private keys etc, and so the supply will only ever go downwards.

Meanwhile, if its boosters can actually keep it in the news, build things with it, and use it as a currency, demand for it in the long run will continue going up. This is the other unspoken assumption of HODLing, unspoken because most people don't want it explicitly known that they're hyping & propagandizing, but pretty apparent in their actions. This is also not true in the short run; hype cycles like what we saw in Dec 2017 are impossible to sustain forever, which is why the price today is significantly lower than it was then, which is why HODLing only works on long (5-10 year) timespans rather than short ones.

Reduced supply + increased demand = higher price.
And we absolutely need to get rid of them right away. We don't need "American dominance in space". We need denuclearization now, and no further escalation.
> On the Dreamcast where it launched, you could pick plays on your controller's LCD display, making sure your opponent never saw what play you picked.

If you played as Bill Belichick, could you cheat? /s
Yeah, this. I've noticed some people in my family / social circle have starting using Evite for event invitations in the past year or so, presumably because they know a lot of people don't check facebook regularly anymore. Functionally though it's neither the same nor as good of a product as FB events. A protocol-based and/or federated solution would be great... but then again people are trying to do this for all the other functions of social media with little success so far. The incentives of capitalism are hard to overcome.
What I learned from side projects and jobs
Asians evidently are too smart to want to get involved in politics. Gotta respect that. (not joking)
I wish the public transit in the Bay Area were better, but given that it does suck, I'm glad the buses exist.

Remember NYC has the advantage of being a unified city - the fractured Bay Area cities have way more infighting when trying to build anything.
Hacking possibilities increase if even simple devices turn out to be Turing Complete. "Help, my flashlight emptied my bank account!"
As I was going up the stair

I met a man who wasn't there!

He wasn't there again today,

Oh how I wish he'd go away!

When I came home last night at three,

The man was waiting there for me

But when I looked around the hall,

I couldn't see him there at all!

Go away, go away, don't you come back any more!

Go away, go away, and please don't slam the door...

Last night I saw upon the stair,

A little man who wasn't there,

He wasn't there again today

Oh, how I wish he'd go away...