skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>the "final frontier" of scientific research. Not in a literal sense

Real AI would literally be the final frontier, because at that point, all the scientists could quit their jobs. The AI could replace them.

But real AI is a lot different than what everyone is selling as AI these days, which is essentially a hyper-glorified generalization of linear regression.
I'm sorry you feel that way, but why get so angry?
Cadillac super cruise(GM) is only capable of handling itself on a limited set of highways. Tesla's nearly anywhere. Mercedes is considered subpar compared to GM's system in nearly all independent reviews.
Aggregate ROI is the true story.
Check Out the Global Temperature Time Series Dataset
Hard to say, because the law is new. My guess is that it is legal as long as it is not in a professional/commercial context, or you remove my PII, or you have a clear and legitimate business reason, e.g. forwarding to a colleague within the company who is responsible for the subject matter.

Examples of illegal behavior would be publishing it, forwarding it to a marketer, or eg. for a recruiting agency forwarding to a company fir which I haven’t given permission.
It's also taught me how to handle myself in certain situations as well.
This is like a intro course in deep learning boiled down to a single, easily-followable post. So cool! :)
Personally, I enjoyed the whimsy and the references in GEB. I considered the weak references past the author's knowledge to be a nod and a pointer to go make a bibliographic romp through other material as one wished. It's an inspiration along the discussion of its ideas, but is not complete. That incompleteness may be because it so deeply references itself, hence the book itself being a funny metaphor.

As directly useful reading to get someone more acquainted with a broad discussion of algorithms and logic without textbook depth of individual topics, I'd recommend _The_New_Turing_Omnibus_ by Alexander Dewdney and _The_Advent_of_the_Algorithm_ by David Berlinski. Probably the latter and then the former, actually.

I wouldn't call GEB a bad read. I think because of its high reputation people expect too much from it, like it should be the definitive book of truth about logic and proofs. It's one book, and if one reads it in the light of it being a fun romp through topics that are somehow loosely connected in the vein of James Burke I think it delivers rather well.
Insisting that the only possible fix is perfection is a wonderful excuse for doing nothing at all.

OK, maybe humans will eventually be perfected. In the meantime, we need solutions we can implement with the humans we have now.
In some European coutnries there is Pirate Party in the parliament. They are focused on fighting oppresive intelectual property and copyright laws.
Oh I agree, it's just that in this context it seemed the parent implicitly meant high-brow culture when saying "get culture."
We use an internal scripts repo and a chat webhook so our chat is notified when something is pushed.
I'm not saying it's necessarily the correct view, but I don't see any reason that a logically consistent political view can't be prolife, support capital punishment, and opposed to a larger social safety net.

For example:
A person who believes that the punishment should be calibrated to pay back the damage a crime does and concludes that life is so valuable that the only "payment" that a murderer can make to balance the scales is their own life.

A person views actively taking someone's life in abortion as different from not providing a social safety net that preserves someone's life.
Also adjust the China 996 working hours
https://www.wsj.com/articles/long-days-a-staple-at-chinese-t...
That's an excellent point snarf21, and I don't disagree with you. I know that you're right, really.

Another take on this, though, in terms of our value to Apple though is the concept of "developer mindshare" (as well as power users). A small percentage of customers can have a massive network effect in terms of sales. This whole cycle of history seems to be repeating itself all over again. Right now when I go to developer conferences, I still see MacBooks everywhere, but of course this was't always the case. It only takes a few years for things to flip.

This whole cycle of tech history seems to be repeating itself all over again. Which is a shame, because, on the whole I've benefited greatly from the combination of macos, the hardware and "it just works"; it's allowed me to simply get on with my work, unencumbered by faulty drivers, weird library interactions and whatnot, and to earn a living without unwelcome distractions.

I continue to monitor the Linux options and don't want to use Windows. I like Unix. I've been comfortable here with macos, but I feel Apple are "this close" to blowing it with the hardware.
I come from a considerably poorer background than you based on your other posts, poorer than most, with birth defects that have caused me constant problems and... I could add a bunch of things to this list but it's quite accurate, I'm just past 30 now and by being poor, smart, open, hardworking and going where the energy/money is you end up ticking all of these boxes.

You'll end up more closely identifying with first gen immigrants which puts you in a pretty good place out in SF.

You'll get used a lot in your 20s, people will make a major buck off your skillsets, but if you keep growing them you'll skyrocket a few years after most everyone else plateaus, the joy of working and fear of poverty never leave, but they are rocket fuel later.

You get used to deprivation, develop a non-fragile sense of self, and learn to let most things go too, you'll get used to sweating in secret and it'll give you a great pokerface, it's great training for doing the hard things once life gets easier financially in your 30s and temptation to coast lays most other people low.
Maybe because their safety bar is a bit higher than Tesla?
Show HN: Software to give insurance advice like an agent would
Chris, Dan, and the team at Goodcover here. Goodcover is building a new home and renters insurance co that tries to fix the insurance incentives by returning any unclaimed premium back to customers, keeping a fee instead. Goodcover was YC S17, but off the record due to discussions with the CA government. And we’re still “pre-launch” - starting a new insurance co is hard as it turns out!

Part of the technical challenge we deal with is, how do we build software that can scale what an agent does? Although we can’t offer a full insurance experience yet, we thought we’d roll out an advice app (https://app.goodcover.com/advice) that makes a stab at giving advice like an agent might, but using software. By analyzing your current insurance docs, we can:

- Benchmark the coverage you have against what is “normal”.

- Provide advice about some specific things that you can fix or at least consider fixing.

- Arm you with information on things you can push back on with your insurer.

Technically, the way it works is we’ve generalized some gotchas, manually looked over a bunch of Home/Renters policies, and built a workflow for us to select where we think you are in the homeowners/renters spectrum. So it’s really just workflow automation, however, it requires obviously being able to translate insurance constructs to user things, but most of it is pretty simple from an automation standpoint. Most of our time is generally spent on building out insurance functions, but it’s been a great experiment in information hierarchy to try and reduce complex concepts and insurance-speak down to actionable pieces of information for customers.

No obligation, and feel free to take our advice back to your current provider and get stuff fixed. Goodcover Insurance Solutions LLC is licensed in California (0M20813) so if you are not in CA we can still have a look, but you should definitely review our advice with a pro in your state.
This is what happens decades after something that WAS status signalling at one point, no longer is status signalling.
That might just mean those companies are never created at all. A huge number of sv "companies" have no business plan beyond acquisition.
But the thing is most safety features can be applied to a regular car and we'd see a significant decrease in accidents. Adaptive cruise control and pre-collision breaking haves existed as premium packages. The biggest added safety feature I can think of self driving cars is sleeping at the wheel, CDC estimates up to 6000 fatal crashes a year but I wonder how much modern safety features would reduce it if it was required on all cars.
While Clojure has failed to become mainstream so far, it certainly hasn't failed to be influential. Whatever programmers use in a generation, it may have a lot of ideas from Clojure in it!
Nigerian immigrants to the US seem to do even better than Asians!
These things sometimes evolve in unexpected ways, and sometimes it just takes a while for people to figure out how to really use something.

Use cases I think are especially compelling:

- Industry leaders who get asked the same questions a lot

- Professors and notable intellectuals who already give their email archives to a university when they die, and would like some of the accessible on the web.

- Politicians. Their emails are already published under FOIA, but I think it would be super useful to folks campaigning also.

- YouTubers, bloggers, Twitch folks, etc.

And then there are dozens of business use cases also for sharing stuff internally.

I’m sure there are lots of other uses beyond these though!
Any chance you also benchmarked WA version against native code? What are results in your case?
> Browser vendors can reach out to us and obtain a more permissive license key so that the benchmark can run on different machines and even on their continuous integration servers.

Sounds like a great idea for encouraging performance improvements and avoiding regressions!
Fixed. Thank you! It indeed might be fitting in some cases :D
> Do any people actually associate the ads they see with the content next to them on any platforms hosting user generated content?

I doubt it, but it's complicated. Advertisers think that people do. People know that advertisers think that they do, so they use that to their advantage. If they disagree with something, they know there's nothing they can do... but... they can feign outrage ("I'm boycotting Crest toothpaste because they support X") and since advertisers think they're being genuine, they act. Thus, even though they know the advertisement has nothing to do with the social networking user they dislike, they can have action taken against the person they don't like.

No advertiser is bold enough to say "I think you're lying," and thus, the problem persists. Advertisers get to be the ad-hoc censors of the platforms they advertise on.
Golden Krone Hotel – Postmortem
Then they just come back to Europe when they want those perqs
I think reducing lambdas to callbacks is reductive. They provide a lot more utility and often have returned values (which callbacks do not).

The fact that the python community is proposing and approving PEPs like this is evidence they have a desire for multi expression lambda functionality. They've just made a decision they refused to go back on because of over a decade of pride. They end up rebuilding every use case as an ad hoc piece of syntax.
So essentially:

You're trying to argue that forcing the entire population to pay for college education for everyone is justifiable even when the people going to college may study subjects or intend to enter fields that have very poor financial prospects or lack productive value for the society as a whole.

As opposed to....

A system in which people have the freedom to decide for themselves how to allocate their own financial resources based on their career goals and not use other people's money to fund 4 years of useless study (if they study a useless subject)?

You have a very skewed understanding of what is fair and justifiable.

If people make poor financial and educational decisions, that's on them. Don't punish the rest of society by forcing it to foot the bill for someone else's foolishness.

The sad thing is, Europeans will be the indentured servants for the rest of their lives because of the depressed wages they'll have to endure and the high taxes they'll have to pay.
Building start-ups in China is great, if you're primarily interested in the China market. Chinese tech companies are overwhelmingly domestic capture entities, they can't get outside the country very easily.

The state now very openly controls all companies in China, directly or indirectly. They dictate what you can do, what you can build, what you can say, what you can sell, where you can sell, what you can do outside of the domestic market, how much capital you can move internationally, when you can move it, who can own your business, how much of your business foreigners can own, etc. You're not allowed to cross their edicts under any circumstances. If you fall out of favor for any reason, at any time, they will destroy you personally.

SV start-ups get the entire rest of the planet as a playground, almost entirely unencumbered by the type of highly restrictive state policies that Chinese tech companies constantly deal with. That's why Baidu was never able to go global and challenge Google. It's why China can never fully go global with most of their social products. They can never compete properly on the international stage with Google, Facebook, Instagram, Amazon, Reddit, Github, Snapchat, Twitter, Salesforce, Workday, Oracle, Windows, iOS, Android, MacOS and countless other types of companies and product categories. It's why WhatsApp & FB captured the world, and WeChat primarily owns China, but does not - and will never - own the rest of the world: aggressive state censorship sucks.

If I want to say that Xi looks like Winnie the Pooh, I can do that on WhatsApp. If I want to make jokes the Communist Party dislikes, I can do that on WhatsApp. If I want to mock Mao, I can do that on WhatsApp (or Reddit, or Twitter, etc). You can't do that in any ecosystem controlled by China (note, those are intentionally non-serious, illustrative examples, China's restrictions are far more smothering and comprehensive).

SV can't get into China. China mostly can't get outside of China. SV wins.
Yes, the bitwise operator stuff.
Why would I share technological innovations with another company?

Because nobody has a real market until some of these problems are solved significantly better than current state-of-the-art?

Having some baseline collaboration on common components and safety systems could plausibly move the entire industry towards viability much faster, both on a safety and tech trajectory and for regulatory oversight. It's not a crazy idea.
I’m more open to advice from ordinarily successful people rather than the most successful people in the world.
I'm still pretty blown away by the probe landing on Titan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNiO1b0ewy0 - what an amazing and wonderful endeavor.

It's so frustrating that we can't dedicate more resources to stuff like this than garbage like "the wall".
First, I've read over and over that the single largest cost in transportation is human labor (the driver). Low-skilled and low-paid they might be, but if you can replace them with a low-paid person behind a monitor that can handle 8-10 trips at once, you've saved a substantial portion of the labor cost.

Yes, that cost will be offset by the cost of the extra hardware, but that can be amortized over tens (possibly hundreds) of thousands of miles. Likewise, the investment in software (programmers) will eat into profits, but once again, you can spread that cost out over hundreds of thousands or millions of cars. Besides, an awful lot of the latter is a sunk cost at this point.
A lot of past knowledge is also very available and mostly ignored. Even the most popular books about programming are read only by a tiny minority of programmers. Listening to our elders is simply not part of the current programming culture.
Illegal Marijuana Market Still Thrives in Los Angeles
Okay, I see. Just use his hosts file to extend Pi-hole. Not so hard.
> In 2006, there were a bunch of college students who thought Facebook was a pretty big deal. Most 50 year olds in 2006 probably would have disagreed and didn't see why it would be important to post pictures of your friends drinking online. The older people were wrong.

This example falls apart for lots of reasons. First, the assertion that someone wouldn't find value in Facebook simply because of their age is demonstrably false. There are millions of 50 year olds who use Facebook today and because Facebook is 14 years old, that adoption happened very quickly. 50 year olds in 2006 wouldn't have found Facebook useful at that time and for a very good reason- it wasn't a community for them, it was a community specifically for college students. I doubt Mark Zuckerberg envisioned Facebook/Whatsapp/Instagram when he first created the site in his dorm room. The use case (and usefulness) expanded over time.

> It's not a value judgement. They weren't bad people because they were wrong about a technology trend. But they were still wrong.

Wrong about what? This seems like a straw man to me. Nobody other than college students at very elite colleges were able to use Facebook in its early days. Did that mean that students at community colleges didn't understand the value of sharing photos with their friends or was it just old people? I think it's a mistake to try and explain the complicated in such simple terms.
So, funny story. I was in YVR waiting for a flight when I decided to get my shoes shined.

The shoe shine had been reading a manga take on the bible. Just a regular guy that in another life could be a computer programmer if the circumstances were different.

He asked me what I do: mobile apps. And he went on and on about how his favourite iPhone app downloaded all of Wikipedia but it didn't work on the latest version of iOS anymore.

That app was Patrick Collison's Encyclopedia app:

http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/07/oscon-preview-how-patrick-c...
‘China’s Google’ releases its first AI chip
Unfortunately that comes with a bootstrapping problem: what if the first time you hit the link is when you aren't connected? If everything is embedded in the data URI and the link is in fact the data itself then it doesn't matter.
For geometry heavy stuff, web workers (possibly in addition to wasm) be super helpful in preventing the browser from blocking while number crunching.
Classic HN. Layman comments to tell us why a trained professional knows less than them.
API+messaging is a spam nightmare. Client integrity is a very powerful antispam technique, I used to use it to great effect. Given the near zero value and popularity of legit bots I'd have made the same decision in their shoes
Did you read this article or the OECD report it is based on? Probably some clues in there if you are interested in finding your answer.
Pulley Logic Gates (2014) [video]
The good thing is that their public transportation does work. Not like bayarea ...
This is not true. In fact, most of the startups are avoiding government interested related projects because China government can easily shutdown or take control of your startups for FREE.

That's why there is no SpaceX or anything that can used in weapon area.
Our current solution is to use a "toolchain" git repository that helps to automate installation of 3rd-party software (so that we're using similar versions of things like Docker, Python, etc.), but also creates a company-specific directory with installed scripts that can be added to the individual's PATH.
> One one side you have plentiful cheap low skilled labor. On the other you have lasers, fast computers, graphics cards, cameras, and the associated programming inspection and maintenance costs.
Why do we think the latter side is going to be cheaper in anything remotely like the near term?

Because, other than inspection and maintenance costs, everything on your list has been getting much cheaper really quickly for a long time.
India's best ice gola
Chris Lotz, cofounder of Goodcover here. The team and I are around and happy to answer any questions.

Would love to hear any feedback too! Particularly around the user flow, and whether our instructions make sense.

Thanks!
How Cheap Smartphones Siphon User Data in Developing Countries
> Europa looks good but it is bombarded by direct radiation from Jupiter.

A few dozen meters below surface the radiation levels ought to be nil. And the surface is not interesting anyway.
Projectors are also getting smart features, at least the ones targeted at home users. 4K projectors also still represent a significant price premium over TVs, which has gotten a lot better in the past year or so, but still. Projectors also inherently have a shorter lifetime because of all the heat generated by the lamp.

That said, if you have a good space for one a projector is awesome. I bought an Optoma projector a while back and have worked it to death. TV, movies and games on a gigantic projector screen are just awesome.
Yes, that is a possibility, but is the percentage of people who don't connect their smart TV going to be high enough to warrant that? I imagine the vast majority of people let their TVs connect, because they want to use Netflix and the other streaming services.
I'm not sure the analogy extends that far. Sure, Google auto-vaporizes accounts and that's terrible, but they'd do that too if they didn't have Content ID. It's not very related to copyright anymore, just to The Google Suck.
There are very good reasons as to why Waymo and all the other major players are focused on robotaxis.

A truck still needs to be able to drive in cities, and if you figure out how to automate all the other thing a trucker does you can replace 3 million of them. Big whoop. Robotaxis stand to challenge the economics of personal vehicle ownership, the potential market is many orders of magnitude larger.
Scenic (http://motomappers.com) is pretty good at finding out-of-the-way routes.
So are there proposals to change or fix the process?
I think it shows the hypocracy on the left. On the one hand it may be a fair question to ask, scientifically [comparing people to any non human species], but imagine someone on the right used that sentence for someone on the left, even if honestly seeking scientific inquiry. They’d be lambasted for being insentive at the least.
People don’t like to admit that it is a signal though.
> Of course having solved one problem (discoverability and organisation of scripts) you now have another one: Jenkins.

I called this phase 2. Discovery, documentation and ongoing maintenance going to be the problem. We need to another jenkins to CI/CD the main tooling Jenkins.

My other though is that there is significant market for this kind of back office tooling clean up and ongoing maintenance. If we could come with a process to clean up and package it. we could sell it. I would definitely buy it cause it gives lot of time saving for day to day toils especially in operational space.
The metric that connects data centers is not Euclidean. There are some names of that metric but for that story the name "railroad metric" might fit best.
As someone who worked at a ridesharing co, I'm also really curious about the ops side of things, like how will passengers behave when there's no driver in the car? Will people try to have sex, do drugs, make a mess? What happens when someone vomits in the car or is very drunk (actually a very common problem in ridesharing)?
Classic HN: this is "pop sci, and not a scientific article" in one comment, and "written by a trained professional" in another.
Removing dual side risk from influencer transactions
I'm intrigued by this. Maybe jenkins does more than I previously thought.