skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It won't work, China is perfectly happy to block every external Web site as necessary. They're fine with relying solely on their internal network, they've structured things to that end as it is now. Censorship does work if you're willing to insulate your nation from external media, as they prove time and time again that they are. That's why censorship has worked in North Korea for nearly 70 years. It works if you're willing to pay whatever the consequences involved happen to be.
As important as that is, even if they're completely corrupt you still don't want a secret police watching them.
You have the opposite problem though. Getting a waiter's attention is a PITA and you'll easily wait 15min to get more water or order something else.

This is solved in Japan with the call button in family restaurants, I'd actually want an app to queue requests without needing the waiter to come to the table first.
Again, what problems are being solved?

Real estate, oil and gas exploration/drilling/royalties are all things that have existed without problem for many decades. Saying "real estate, but with blockchain" doesn't actually say what problem you're solving.
I was under the impression that this was the case everywhere - if a server doesn't make minimum wage with tips, the restaurant owner is required to make up the difference.

(Now, whether that actually happens or not...)
The final paycheck has to be given. They can be sued for not giving you money you actually worked for.

And most non-competes are unenforceable as it prevents people from making a living.
Unfortunately, in the past, the SCOTUS tends to side with law enforcement on civil asset forfeiture cases. But since Justice Thomas has spoken against it, I am cautiously optimistic that this might be the time that they rule in favor of the citizen. Civil asset forfeiture has gotten way out of hand. We really need some sort of precedent to start curbing the flagrant abuse we are seeing all over the country.
The 20th century changed the meaning of the word to be more about manipulation, where as the original definition was neutral. [1] The manipulation suggested deceitfulness on the part of the party creating and distributing it.

So it's one of these things where OP can use a politically charged word, and then claim it was used in the neutral voice.

Personally, rather than have an argument about what amounts to "propaganda" in the 21st century, let's just admit that Oliver is not deceitful, yet biased.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda
You're right, I pointed to the solution instead of the problem. I'm still an engineer at heart, it seems!

What should I have said instead? Centralization of data? Unreliability of single-points-of-failure?
Binary rewards (win/loss score at the end of the roll out) scored a "good" 70.

With sparse reward (kills, health, etc), scored a better 80 and learned much faster.

Normally, "reward engineering" uses human knowledge to give more continuous, richer rewards. This was not used here.
Moose are huge and scary. I've heard more stories about smaller animals like badgers attacking the lawnmowers. Or at least making noises at the lawnmowers whenever it approached the lawn boundary where they were hiding.
I'm worried that because this is a case in which the defendant actually did deal drugs, the court will rule in favor of the civil forfeiture laws and the SC case will then be used as a precedent to justify broader use of civil forfeiture. But IANAL, so maybe the danger isn't as big as I fear.
As gus_massa has suggested, the standard path is to get a bachelors degree in physics/maths/engineering and then get a physics phd. Its extremely hard to contribute to modern science with less than this because it takes years of training to just know what people have already done, so you can start doing something new.
Reddit News goes into beta
"If your 20 you have up to 100 years worth of investing horizons to consider. Money put to retirement really is something you can lose while young. Investing in low enough to be zero yield instruments like CD's or savings accounts is terrible advice. As is treating investment savings as actual savings you can spend."

If you need the money in five years, you should not be putting it in the stock market. If the money is truly "put to retirement" then you don't need it in five years, and you're just agreeing with me, pedantically.

The problem is that most of these HODL folks have never lived through a downturn, and will be crapping their pants when they realize that they really were secretly counting on the money being there. I've seen it happen twice now. The forums are filled with people "buying the dips" on 1% drops, but suddenly seeing a 30% short-term correction in their portfolio causes mass hysteria. The smart players have cash
on hand, and are ready to buy -- precisely because they didn't "buy the dips".
Three years in and this hasn't happened. Our dev team also does ops and we've found that Docker has improved things markedly. But feel free to keep spreading your FUD.
Advanced Promise Coordination: Serialization and Concurrency Limiting
This startup wants to kill the CPU and GPU in one go
The OpenAI bots are still very limited. Current set of restrictions:

- Mirror match of Necrophos, Sniper, Viper, Crystal Maiden, and Lich

- No warding

- No Roshan

- No invisibility (consumables and relevant items)

- No summons/illusions

- No Divine Rapier, Bottle, Quelling Blade, Boots of Travel, Tome of Knowledge, Infused Raindrop

- 5 invulnerable couriers, no exploiting them by scouting or tanking

- No Scan
>Once again, it seems like people who read dictionaries missed the boat.

Yes, those darn dictionary readers...

From Black's Law Dictionary[1]:

>A message that is aimed at a specific audience that will try to change their thinking to that of the person releasing such propoganda. It will often contain disinformation to promote a certain view point in politics.

Not sure why they chose to use the word they're defining in the definition, but how precisely is that significantly different? We can debate the level of disinformation in any specific context, but this sounds about the same to me.

[1] https://thelawdictionary.org/propaganda/
This just strikes me as wrong. His chain of logic does not lead to distributed ledgers. Mainframes, PC's, iPhone, distributed ledgers? Before I dive in I must say that the new trend for people to use blockchain as a noun describing the underlying system of Bitcoin and other coins is highly annoying and cringey. None the less, blockchain is not a peice of technology. It's a contract backed up by probablity and the nature of the internet. The contract is a big lumbering thing that has a life of it's own -- for each implementation of this "tech" you are stuck with that beast which, if you are even able to get enough people to feed it, will fluctuate wildly in many capacities before eventually dying. It's not like a new mems accelerometer where once it's out you can now just pump out thousands of units. The nature of Bitcoin (i refuse to use the blockchain noun) lends itself much more to being a global complement to centrally managed monetary systems (or stand on it's own as the world's currency, but I don't think that would be optimal).
I tried to find out more about this game but evidently it is a private game rather than something one can acquire. I wonder if some player leaked a photo of the "rules of play" or whatever. It almost reads like it could be satire but perhaps there are cabals of game developers catering to the whims of the ultra-rich. Just interesting to see how games can be used by those in power not to pretend to have power when they have none but to enjoy gaming out ways to wield it.
PBS still isn’t 100% unbiased like what you said would have to be the case for not technically propaganda. Seems a bit extreme and ridiculous to define propaganda as that.
You must read the courses of Richard Feynman, the best books on physics ever :-)
Bayesian_regression in pymc3 [pdf]
NPR’s bias/neutrality depends a lot on the reporter in question. Some truly attempt to be neutral, others have bias (within the same program/show). So knowing the personalities help suss things out a lot. David Green is pretty neutral, Innskeep not as much, for example.
>Obviously the point is that the difference between the West and China...

Thanks for explaining my comment to the rest of the class.
Totally fair point. It's especially great for the investment world -- especially VC, which only needs one billion-dollar exit to make a return. So this makes sense!
I use a kbp v60 (see manual[1], switches 1,3,6 on), caps lock is remapped to an fn key, then there are arrow keys both on the left and right hand. I haven't had any trouble getting used to it, and its wonderful not having to move my hand half way across the desk to reach the mouse.

[1]: https://www.scribd.com/document/227820785/KBP-V60-User-Manua...
It might be slightly mitigated since the panel has the opportunity to bring back the employee if they have follow-up questions but I'd agree and would want to experiment with the ordering.

The manager isn't present during the employee's presentation either though, and I'd imagine it would devolve into a circus if both parties are present during both presentations and able to interrupt/rebut directly. (Might also not be beneficial to the employee)
This is kind of a no-duh though. If you're the NSA, of course you're going to set up shop at peering facilities, there isn't anywhere else that makes practical sense.
I can't tell if this is parody or not. Does anyone with more familiarity with the New Yorker's regular features know?

It seems insane they would be arrogant and indiscreet enough to have this produced.
It would be great to see the Supreme Court take up one of the more egregious cases involving huge cash seizures from people with no criminal record, and where there is no evidence that a crime took place. Unfortunately, most of those are eventually settled by the government.

In this case there is little doubt that the target was dealing drugs, prompting one judge to write that "one who deals heroin, and there is no doubt from the record we are talking about a dealer, must and should suffer the legal consequences to which he exposes himself." The only issue is whether the seizure was excessive, and there will always be judges who think that no punishment is too great for a proven heroin dealer.
The fact that this monstrosity of justice has continued, even under presidents such as Obama, make me so angry and upset. It's exactly what happens when you let the police do whatever they want, without someone to curtail their behavior. Unfettered power equals unfettered corruption, and the fact this keeps occurring in 2018 is astounding and upsetting.
He could have seen the light. Some sort of light. God. Landmark. Qigong. Some Hawaiian spiritual practice.
Decades of redlining have conditioned people to associate minorities moving into a neighborhood with the decline of property values. Black and brown people appearing on sidewalks is a signal to sell and move to a nicer neighborhood. If you don’t, your other white neighbors will and you’ll be the sucker left with a house you can’t sell as its value plummets. It’s called “white flight”.

That’s what this this issue is really about. Poor people = minorities. NIMBYs want to keep the minorities out of their neighborhood because they’ll trigger white flight.
i love the article's general quotation about disruption:

... what makes disruption so devastating is the fact that, absent a crisis, it is almost impossible to avoid. Managers are paid to leverage their advantages, not destroy them ...

as other firms innovate, those advantages become obsolete practices so leveraging them means taking on more risk, not less risk.
Your Pavlovially conditioned denigration of quite believable assumption that some entities have huge amount of influence on the economy is even more impressive. Never tired of employing good old "it's a conspiracy theory" conversation stopper, do you?
Having a hard time doing what? Not following the OTB style?

I think there should be some concern for a person's mental health. And sometimes I think people should be allowed to take a day off just because they can't mentally cope at work.

I don't think that every claim of such is valid. If someone comes up to me and says the government radio signals are causing his brain to fill up with wrongthink, he may be under "obvious stress", but it's a problem solely on his end. He doesn't need a mental health day, he needs a psychologist.

And that's an extreme example.

I mean, look at the guy, he took a two week furlough and found a way to make that stress him out. Everything stresses him out. You can't not stress him out.
Why is that unfortunate? If a company lack financial incentive to build something, means not many people want it, or the little that do don't want it enough
Audi postpones electric SUV launch in wake of CEO arrest
A PIP is an explicit statement of the problems with an employee's current performance and what they need to improve to not be fired. A manager's complaints may be dubious but no more so than they would be if they were outright allowed to fire the person.

I've never heard of a PIP actually succeeding (an employee improving to the satisfaction of their manager) so it delays the inevitable, perhaps allowing the employee to quit and find another job before their fired. It's definitely meant to avoid a wrongful dismissal lawsuit but I think that almost never works; either the employee is going to sue or they're not, "being given a chance to improve" isn't going to change that.
"Well, everybody knows the important part is the hardware. There's a Mr Gates from a company called Microsoft that can sell us the software"
In my mind, this is more a risk with smaller courts and SCOTUS exists on a higher plane. In my mind.
If you're asked to be on the jury for a random other employee at the company you'd rather just get fired?
No - california waiters get minimum wage plus tips. Some of them make six figures. Their cultural negotiation of the standard trip from 15% to 20% was a genius bit of persuasion relying on the American discomfort with service workers. Nobody’s talking about how “hard work” bathroom cleaning is and tipping their office janitor, despite the fact that their office janitor is working much harder for much lower wages.
You'd have to be in a position to sue anybody. Which working-class folks definitely are not. No suit is worthwhile for a few hundred bucks anyway - but that much money matters a lot to an individual working paycheck to paycheck.

As usual, there's a system in place and lofty rules about 'right to work' but it functions only for the well-off. The entitled if you will.
I think I understand the logic of civil forfeiture, but what is the justification for seizing a $40,000 vehicle when the state has only proven (according to the article) that he sold about $225 worth of drugs? It says he plead guilty to one charge - was the other for a significantly larger amount, that he was perhaps convicted of? Based on the info presented in the article it would seem difficult to argue that he acquired the Land Rover with ill-gotten funds.
Will it blend? Or how to run Google Chrome in AWS Lambda
I found this to be very interesting. FWIW the author Eric Budish is one of the top economic theorists. Whether or not that means you should trust his analysis is left as an exercise to the reader.
More and more traditional money will flow into Crypto, not because Crypto is the answer for everything, but people just want to bet on the something that might in some form change everything in the future.

I really get surprised by the boolean arguments whether blockchain is of any use arguments on HN. I mean there's so much activity, money, talent in Crypto since last year. Goldman Sachs CEO said actually in the nicest way that Crypto is not gonna be the future [0]. I wonder why we can't have arguments like this instead of behaving like a know-it-all.

[0]- https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2018-06-19/goldman-s-b...
> Oliver is biased and he has never pretended to be a journalist. He presents stories he cares about from a specific viewpoint. The definition of propaganda is:

>> information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.

I think the key word there is misleading. Having a genuinely-held viewpoint and expressing it through media isn't propaganda, it's opinion and commentary. Things get into propaganda territory when there's an element of deliberate dishonesty or misdirection or when it occurs in the context of coercive censorship of other viewpoints.

Oliver's segment was not misleading and it was not dishonest, therefore it was not propaganda. In fact, it is an example of the kind of free exchange of ideas that's required for an open society to operate. Examined on certain axes, it's actually the opposite of propaganda.
Oliver's content reaches dramatically more than 10x the number of people that VOA does.

You think John Oliver reaches 'dramatically more than 10x' people than VOA? Take a look at:

https://www.insidevoa.com/a/a-record-for-voice-of-americas-g...

You're saying John Oliver is reaching a couple of billion people weekly. This strikes me as somewhat unlikely.

As to the other thing, having a viewpoint is not 'propaganda directed at other countries'. 'Propaganda' is not shorthand for 'a thing I disagree with'.
Anyone interested in the subject matter would probably enjoy Omega Tau Podcast.
http://omegataupodcast.net/tag/fusion/
Maybe I'm too stupid, but you sound like a salesman trying to pull a fast one using fancy language... "incentivize domain experts"? Come on!

Let's see, a 3rd party can benefit from SaaS by offering interesting add-ons, for example a web-based photo editor that works with Google's cloud storage of your photos. A domain expert could offer add-ons to enhance your SaaS-hosted business data, but the blockchain needs to be there because... why exactly?
Mixed feelings here. Yes, I definitely prefer wait staff with less of the "I want to be your friend!" attitude. But at the same time, I'm not going to stand in line 30 minutes for the privilege of ordering my food and then wait again for a table to open up in a tiny overcrowded dining area, which has become the normal mode at trendy restaurants in every American city -- not just SF.

I'd still rather pay a little more for wait service than be one of the cattle.
> there are no takebacksies if somebody say, publishes illegal content.

Or when privacy is breached (examples: right to forget, GDPR).
How much could you pay?
It provides distributed trust for the class of problems wherein you have multiple competitive parties trying to achieve consensus on a sequence of transactions (or contracts, if you will).

I believe a massive number of social and societal problems are solved by distributed trust models in the same ways free market economies generally lead to more equality and democracy leads to more freedoms.
This also happens with me. I'm definitely capable (and have a couple of times in the past) of losing weight long-term (longer than a few years) by continuing to eat less healthy food, but less. I've eaten those foods all my life, in fact, and never been at all overweight. You can achieve significant, sustainable weight loss on a less healthy diet.

The trick that gets people, I imagine, is that you really can't eat very much of it all, especially as I've gotten older. You have to be willing to eat rather small portions, and rather infrequently.
BlockedIn

Especially if it works.

More seriously, it's cool that keybase solved the identity problem. It's traditionally been a very hard thing to know for a fact that you're speaking with a certain individual, unless they were compromised.

They also have an encrypted github now, which functions very well. And one of the only realtime chat messaging systems where you can open private chats with whoever you want, if you know their name.

Point: I think Keybase might increasingly take over the role that github currently fills. It's hard to imagine now, but people underestimate the effect of 10 years. And keybase seems to suddenly have a lot of assets that are very appealing, especially from a crypto standpoint.

If I were trying to topple governments with code, most of my work would be encrypted on keybase, and my comms (what little there would be) would be via signal. But my identities would be proven via keybase.

One smart move for gitlab might be to create some kind of realtime messaging system for programmers, similar to the niche that slack communities currently fill. Slack never seemed to embrace the community model -- you have to use hacks just to host a slack community, and then you don't get search for more than 10k messages, which vanish quickly. Discord has been eating Slack's lunch from a technical and user count standpoint (though perhaps not profit). Gitlab could compete by rolling out what slack should have been: an open community-oriented comms service with tools programmers love, plus a place to host your code. Discord doesn't have that, and keybase doesn't have very good support for teams yet.
ErgoDone(chinese clone of ergodox) is also cheaper and easier to build can be found on aliexpress
> "Distributed Trust" isn't a problem, its a trait

I like how you phrased it. It tickled the Rustacean in me.
"Japan would like to have a word with you."

Indeed. But more prosaically, many of these HODL types are discounting how much they'll actually freak out at a market correction. They've never seen a 30% drop, or lived through a five-year correction (let alone an extreme situation, like Japan). Even if you have the stomach to handle the drop, things happen on a five-year horizon that people don't consider: extended unemployment (which tends to happen during recessions), children, houses, etc.

I made that comment thinking it would be a completely uncontroversial statement of fact. It's amazing to me that I'm getting downvoted, as if I've expressed an opinion of some kind.
I believe the comparison was between pirating from Australia vs pirating from China.

The answer is yes, it's more difficult.
The only one I've seen that might go somewhere is filecoin.

However, I think people are underestimating how the market for ""enterprise private blockchain"" will play out. The same organisations that spent money on X509 PKI non-solutions will pay millions for blockchain. At this level, nobody likes talking about the problem solved. It's solutions all the way, especially enterprise solutions.
Pretty much. I define life as any self-sustaining structured low entropy process that dissipates energy faster than diffusion. The low entropy part basically means that such a configuration is vanishingly improbable under _equilibrium_ statistical mechanics.

Under this definition convection rolls, viruses and eukaryotes are all alive.
Was that true of AMD/Global Foundries, when they split?
As someone in the field, what do you think about the idea of a fully automated "doctor"?

Are we close to it being technically feasible , leaving aside regulation and interpersonal qualities doctors bring to the table ?
Have there been any attempts to use blockchain in combating a Tragedy of the Commons?
Not at all. IP tables is used to route traffic between containers, yes, but the isolation is done by network namespaces.
As we currently stand the tradeoffs for Blockchain based companies make no sense in the business world. The author's conceit is that Blockchain based businesses trade scalability for "trust" and that new business opportunities will be unlocked due to this capability. The problem with this idea is that trust is currently not a limiting factor for most businesses. Centralized services are trustworthy enough for the majority of consumers and are far cheaper to run at scale.

Every single blockchain based business idea I've heard of would be better suited as a centralized service. It is my strong belief that a16z will lose their shirt on this fund.
Has the New America Foundation Lost Its Way?
Global Warming and Prevalence of Violent Behavior – APS (2017)