skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Indeed. I see two options here.

First is to analyze the other signal features of the commercials (eg. increased volume), although it may be tricky.

The other option is a crowd-sourced solution - pretty much as for the browser adblock - where users can mark samples recognized as ads. Since the publishers often buy campaigns for many stations in the same country or state, it may be a shared database.

On the other hand, the described project only scratches my own itch. I wouldn't try to productise an app that takes away the main source of income for the radio stations.
Relationship between IQ and creativity: New support for the threshold hypothesis
Will this still allow modular builds or it will require buying a single board with everything soldered to it?
That exaggerated accent came from somewhere. It wasn't just invented by racist people for fun, though I'm sure it's changed over time.
Step 1: Be Feynman
Yes, but even accounting for those fees, retailers still pay brands to stock their products.

Meanwhile on Amazon, brands pay Amazon to feature their products. Then they pay Amazon to stock/fulfill their products (FBO). Then they pay Amazon to feature their products (promotions).

Amazon is in a heads-I-win, tails-you-lose position vis-a-vis brands.
Laughable. Washington gave all control to Von Braun after the Sputnik desaster, and Von Braun delivered dramatically. They only cut his budget, because Von Braun wanted to fly humans to Mars, and Washington wanted intercontinental rockets with nuclear payloads only.
LBJ did the first dramatic cuts by favoring the Californian solid rocket development and moved control away from Alabama to the new Houston site. And then Nixon killed it completely and went with the Shuttle program, out of Von Braun hands.
> Probably because you're asking people to Google stuff for you? It's all public.

The burden of proof is on the commenter posting the claims.

The article linked in the parent merely is a description of Assange's own statement, his side of the story, which certainly has no more credibility than the alleged victim and the legal authority. For example, regarding Assange's claims about text messages, the article makes a point of saying, "The ABC has not seen the text messages."

> the women both created documentary evidence they were lying and one even attempted to destroy it.

Again, any credible evidence? Surely this story would be in the NY Times and other major publications.

> False reports of rape are extremely common. Most credible studies I've seen peg it at 50% or higher.

I don't agree and I've never heard of such a study. We also are not talking about 'reports' by alleged victims, but an indictment by legal authorities after they examined the evidence. Again, perhaps the parent can provide some the evidence they say they've seen supporting this extraordinary claim about rape accusations, because false claims on the Internet are certainly even more common.
'I can't believe I'm driving in Saudi Arabia'
> and be productive members of society.

I personally doubt whether one wants to be a productive member of a society that put one into jail.
Ahh! The centraaal station! :)

I'd love to have a service like this with wavenet-quality TTS. These are a bit jarring. Although, like low quality audio files, I guess you get used to it pretty quick?
Yeah, not in this specific example, but under certain (somewhat artificial) circumstances, it could be.

Imagine that your car doesn't start and you have it towed to a 100% trustworthy mechanic. He says that he knows what is wrong and it will cost you $500. You need the car, and $500 is far less than what it would cost you to replace the car. You authorize the mechanic to fix what he thinks is wrong for $500.

He calls you the next day to say he did the $500 worth of work but, just as he was finishing, he found something else wrong. The car won't work at all without this new work. It also costs $500. Because it is still worth more $500 to you to have a working car, you authorize this work as well.

This can continue indefinitely, even far past the point where you could have just bought a new car with the money you spent fixing this one. At every point along the way, the most prudent-, rational-seeming thing to do was to spend the $500, but this ultimately leads you to ruin: no working car, and your savings totally depleted.

This outcome is similar to that in the (also artificial) circumstances of a dollar auction (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollar_auction).

Still, many things is real life approximate this dynamic, if not exactly, then in part. It's valuable to recognize the pattern so that you can recognize and short-circuit it in situations where you would otherwise "rational" yourself into a corner. In a dollar auction, you can pick the optimal move, which is not to play at all. In certain real-life circumstances, that isn't really an option.
My experience of redundant embedded controller systems is that whilst they may not be WindowsTM software, they are usually based on an RTOS such as vxWorks, QNX etc.

I don't suppose they are any harder to "hack" than Windows. In fact, it is possible that they may be easier depending on the security mentality of the manufacturer, and given the number of eyeballs on WindowsTM.

I can only imagine this will get worse as these controllers become more and more sophisticated.

The only way, in my opinion, to safeguard against this, is have a fully disconnected system, with no USB access. However USB is easy.
> The "never fight" relationships (not just marriage, but also friendships) are either "we do things as separately as possible" or one of the two ceased to talk about his or her issues.

You missed one more option: "we can discuss a problem without involving emotions or clinging to our opinions too much".
Cryptocurrency and oil prices
Better perspective:

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/04/five-measures-of-grow... (note that World Economic Forum is far from some radical hippy organization)

Another perspective: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/apr/12/doughn...

There are simple places where growth necessarily means we're beyond some limit and causing more problems the more we grow. Growth is not the goal, the goal is well-being and health. Growth is only the goal when we're under the level that maximizes well-being and have room to grow before problems start getting exacerbated.
Ask HN: How to recognize a “bad” VC?
Pardon my english. Sorry If this question has been asked before.

I'm seeking an advice and a good discussions about .. [title].

I have a target VC that I would like to submit my pitch-deck, but I tend to wait because I'm not quite sure about them, and this is a reason why I ask this question, and I need some insight.

First, on their website they write a lot of a good things, it's a psychological way of thinking, and me especially incline to think the opposite because there's no a good things when the money involved.

Second, I don't know which person, but based on my research, they have an account in the caymand island.

Third, they promoted their VC through bloomberg and few other news agency, but I tried to tracked the article and I couldn't find it on those site because the article has gone. I don't know how it could be possible.

Above of that, you might raise a question, why I might still want to choose them.

fourth, their investor had an investment in paypal and space-x.

fifth, the VC also announce that they will limit the startup they want to invest. at the moment they have 4 startup they've funded so far. three in my country one in abroad.

Sixth, They offer more money than any other VC.

Should I avoid this VC and find another VC? or I still submit my pitch-deck to them?

or It is possible to ask straighforward to them from email, like Hey, I would like to submit my pitch-deck to you but I'm not quite sure because.. bla bla bla? should I do this?

Thanks
Did you build the IoT devices yourself or used an off the shelf solution?
A good way to learn is to become a TA. A few years ago I took an MIT chemistry class on edX. I had done zero chemistry since highschool, and even then I only learned for the tests - I knew I'd study CS so I was not particularly interested in learning any more chemistry then I already knew.

Whenever I was done with all the week's problems I scoured the (very active) forum for questions of other students. I tried to solve as many as I could, doing a lot (really a lot) of "Google-research", so I got to read lots of sources other than just the course. Then I presented the answer with as many sources as possible, and as well explained as I could. After three weeks I was made a TA, and I remained the only one to the end of that course. The only difference between me and any other student was that I tried solving problems, and using the ones other students had was the "cheapest" way to get enough of them, and also helps to stay on topic and not get distracted by doing too much too far outside of the current course.

I used that same method in a few other courses (and was offered the TA role a few more times but declined). I hope that makes up for my failure as a TA/teacher back at university, where I got to lead a "CS work group" (not sure how to translate the original German word) at a local high-school - and saw my class dwindle from ~30 to 2 kids before I quit... teaching is hard!
I figured those where made much like their APUs of previous years, meaning that it was all on a single die.
In my experience the reverse engineering type jobs tend to involve targeted malware and related forensics or code review of software the client doesn't own but is forced to depend on for some reason or another. And of course there's research but that's not something most security firms generate revenue from directly.

You are absolutely right about the massive waste of resources that holding back info causes. It's way better to give consultants complete control of a working test system with the full build environment. And they might as well just let you do it remotely. But many companies don't do that. Instead they would rather eat your travel and accommodation costs, and then when you show up you're being paid to sit around for a week because they don't even have things ready, so you sit around reading bullshit documentation so you look busy and your contact doesn't look bad. And when you finally do get something you spend lots of billable hours figuring out how to get it up and running, which provides absolutely no value to them and wasted valuable time you could have been finding bugs. But that's just how it goes.
> All we need to do is have a class for Users (or products or whatever) and put all queries in that class.

Yes, and this is very close to doing what orms do.
There is a crowdfunding going on. It already reached its goal. But there is a second goal at 45K. 11 days to go. Please help!

https://www.kisskissbankbank.com/en/projects/peertube-a-free...
The last comment on that page suggests we should all have a good knowledge of pedagogy. Seems like an interesting idea.
"they ARE standard credit card transaction fees"

Creditcards are robbery, they are not very populair and cost retailers money. Why does everyone want to make money from transactions? We are talking about a basic service that costs less than a cent.
Derivation of the 22 Srutis
My gripe with GTK3 are tiny, auto-hiding scroll bars.

And the abandoning of menus, which I guess is mostly encouraged by the GNOME HIG:

Menu bars increase the vertical footprint of an application’s user interface, introduce a large number of disclosure points, and function as a fixed set of inflexible options. For these reasons, header bars and header bar menus are generally recommended over menu bars, along with other design patterns for exposing controls on demand, such as selection mode, action bars, and popovers.

So, now that we have giant 4k screens, we are going to abandon menus. And I am not even a menu user, but they are great for discovering keyboard shortcuts and the the functionality provided by applications. Instead, we have header bar and hamburger menus that can only host a small subset of the items that normal menus could host. Shortcuts become hard to find and some applications provide some shortcut overlay, while in other applications you have to figure it out yourself.

If vertical footprint is a problem, offer the user to put the menu in the system tray macOS style.

Fun fact: the Xerox Star apparently had hamburger menus, application pull-down menus, and later the global menu are an evolution of the hamburger menu. It seems that we are going backwards again, without any clear rationale. Even if hamburger menus were more ergonomic, generations have been trained with the WIMP paradigm.

[1] https://medium.com/@probonopd/make-it-simple-linux-desktop-u...
Coal is a problem, end-to-end. The buildup of nuclear waste (at least in the U.S.) is a problem. Sufficient freshwater supplies are a problem. Wildfires are a problem. Pollution (particularly plastics) is a problem. Concentrated overpopulation (too many people crammed into too small a space) is a problem. "Refugeeism" is a problem (note that I didn't say "refugees".) The threat of nuclear war (or at least the threat of rogue nations and such) is still a potential problem. And so on.

But what really disturbs me on a longterm basis is the fact that we have so much of our population and infrastructure located along coastlines. We've built permanent infrastructure on largely impermanent land, which is often perpetually at risk. And I'm not just talking about sea level rise, but rather subsidence (the land is often sinking faster than the sea is rising), constant erosion, hurricanes (common and often devastating), tsunamis (less common but often even more devastating), and so on. As to sea level rise itself, the seas have been rising pretty incessantly ever since the start of the last interglacial period (if I'm using the right terminology here), and AFAIK there is nothing to indicate that this has ever stopped. It has apparently proceeded in fits and starts, though, and by my math it's still occurring at something like half the rate of the historical average. So when some mentions sea level rise in relation to climate change my reaction is more like "So what? Sea level rise is nothing new, but it's less of aa overall global issue now than it was in the past. As for any anthropogenic influences, that's more a matter of rate than anything. But unless the natural part of sea level rise comes to a complete stop, then all of that coastal infrastructure is pretty much doomed in the long run anyway, and it's probably not even particularly safe even if it does stop."
I believe there’s a faster drop-off rate to dead on rechargeables, so they aren’t ideal for things like smoke alarms or even smart-locks.
Rails and Conditional Validations in Models
The main issue AMD seems to be solving here is the yields at 7nm and lower processes.

Smaller chips means that you get more yield in the presence of errors. Intel builds relatively large 600mm^2 chips (like the XCC aka the 28-core Xeon), but AMD thinks the future is to build networks of ~200mm^2 chips, like what they've done with Zen / Threadripper / EPYC.

The advantage for AMD is that they've built a single design: the Zeppelin die. RyZen is simply one Zeppelin. Threadripper is two Zeppelins. And EPYC is four Zeppelins.

That's it. One singular chip design, mass produced over and over again, to handle AMD's entire consumer and high-end line. Keep this one design small to help yields and maybe AMD can get a process advantage over Intel's larger designs.

AMD's "mobile" or "APU" line is Raven Ridge (a 2nd design at 193mm^2) that doesn't use this.

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

The above is the current status quo. This "active interposer" that AMD is developing in the article would go above and beyond in terms of integration.

Note that HBM2 (next-generation high-bandwidth RAM) requires the interposer. PCB is not good enough for HBM's protocol. Ditto with Hybrid-Memory Cube (a competing standard). So it seems like the future of computer parts will be the interposer.

The interposer isn't necessary for AMD's CPU strategy however. So the roadmap for this network won't come till 2020+ or later (CPUs). Unless AMD might be building this network for their GPU line?? (But that roadmap is also past 2020). I bet this is all research-and-development, and may never come out as a commercial product.
David Brin was pretty on the mark with "Transparent Society" as well. Brin had more optimism than what came to be, but he nailed the "cameras everywhere" status quo where people whip out smart phones to capture footage of an event now. It's just that he also nailed the Orwellian side of it, too.
Yes as a demonstration of a good expository post I rate this as 100% of what I looking for.
> In fact, this latter concern of manipulation begs the question of what people really need computers for, and brings into question Ted Nelson's presumed answer to it: i.e., that people have an inherent need to use computers to facilitate their own creativity. But what about the possibility that the majority of people prefer to be passive consumers? Neil Postman warned that we would become a trivial society, rife with distraction, like in Huxley's Brave New World.

We're in a novel time to be introspective about the use of computers because in a very real sense, accessible information systems that treat all information equally have brought about an information overload apocalypse. With accessibility and creativity everywhere, we're starting to see what happens when any group of people can assemble social campaigns (bot networks spreading lies in social media frameworks) and achieve parity with the former "information priesthood" of centralized media.

It's so easy to make and share information that people are inundated with the material of ethos (with the lies it cherishes and truths followers cling to), language, and creed. While other culture shock events have occurred in history, there is a fundamental difference in the recent decade has been the lack of any central actor for legacy power systems to coerce or stomp out. And because of this, we're having to find ways to cope at the individual level with an excess of information, even unwanted information that we don't even realize we're consuming.

I'm not sure Nelson or even Huxley truly foresaw this. To someone who has not grown up in a sea of information with algorithms helpfully (and even desperately) shoving information into our faces to try and satisfy our needs before we realize we have them, it's difficult to describe the idea of struggling not to be manipulated by subtle bias. Prior to the information saturation we enjoy now, such attempts to totally control information tended to look a lot more like North Korea's press. Aspects of this even exist in less centralized media, such as when and where western press decides to "tell both sides of the story" as opposed to simply informing a position as fact.

Counter to Huxley's rather puritan vision of us medicating and fornicating into irrelevance (which we've always done, let's be real), the idea that a minority view point (e.g., "America should be racially motivated literal monarchy") can be given the optics of having parity with ideas actually held by tens of millions of people seems to have energized people. Folks see a venue for increased social importance and control, and they're seizing it.
A Power Grab of Sorts, Buried in a Supreme Court Decision
Seems to be the opposite.

With HBM2 being used in AMD's (and NVidia's) high-end products, it seems like the DRAM Channels are going to require an expensive interposer.

But "what else" can benefit from an interposer? If your RAM requires it, are there cheaper or more efficient designs that are built out of a network of chiplets on an interposer, as opposed to building out huge chips all the time?

AMD is already forced to build an interposer for Vega64. Might as well research other uses of it.
I don't understand how papers like this end up on the homepage of HN. The abstract makes very broad claims, but the paper itself only runs toy experiments on tiny datasets with tiny neural networks.

No good ML practitioner believes that tiny, shallow, fully-connected neural networks are the best algorithm for every problem (just look at Kaggle results if you don't believe me). Especially for small, easy datasets like the ones analyzed in this paper, NNs are often not the best choice. However, for large scale image classification, density modeling, sequence modeling, etc. (none of which are tested in the paper), NNs are SOTA.

Hilariously, the paper only compares polynomial regression to tiny neural networks. I bet if they had thrown in results from XGBoost or other classical ML techniques, polynomial regression would be blown out of the water.

There's also some heuristics you can use to tell when a paper like this isn't necessarily representative of the field of ML:

- Missing citations (e.g. "It is well-known that NNs are prone to overfitting [Chollet and Allaire(2018)], which has been the subject of much study, e.g. [?].").

- Inconsistent formatting (e.g. the tables on page 7)

- Sentences like "Much more empirical work is needed to explore these issues." following something that sounds like an easy experiment to try.
You must live in the Midwest? Or somewhere else where seasons change on a daily basis.
The neural nets they compare to are remarkably shallow and thin (2 layers of 12 units each, written as "KF/DN, layers 12,12") to be described as "deep learning".

The surprising resurgence of deep learning since 2012 is not the observation that neural network models can learn at all -- neural nets with a handful of hidden layers were known to work fairly well since the 90s -- but that deep nets with dozens of hidden layers (enabled by GPUs) broke records and achieved state-of-the-art results on remarkably challenging tasks (famously, ImageNet 2014) in multiple important machine learning subfields (has revolutionized NLP, also AlphaGo).

This paper fails to recognize why people care about deep learning as a tool for machine learning in our modern day, and by making meaningless comparisons they restrict themselves to making meaningless observations.
They used computers during WW II for rangekeeping [1]. They were complicated and heavy electromechanical beasts.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_I_Fire_Control_Computer