skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm sure Whatsapp has access to what encrypted message was sent by who, to whom.

Simple would be to crowdsource reporting a post as "incendiary or fake" in a group and it wont be visible to the rest of the users in the group. or hide the message and show only after informing the reader that the message may be fake, as reported by others in the group.

Twitter does a better job than facebook in this matter. And I thought FB was way ahead with all the buzzwords like AI, ML, Neural Networks. If FB cannot add this simple feature to Whatsapp, or something similar to this, not sure it'll manage to help the lynching situation in India and world over.
I’d say neural networks abstract over successive layers until the answer becomes self evident. That’s not the same as reasoning though.
IDEs? You mean emacs?
Why are you getting a masters degree? Are you doing this while working full time? What is your end goal for a masters degree?

The interview process for software developers is as you write, terribly broken at a lot of companies from the point of view of most developers. I do not see this changing in the foreseeable future and it does not matter what software you have written in the past, you will get the opportunity to prove yourself all over again for the rest of your career.

One possible solution is to work for yourself. This solves some of your issues and introduces a whole different set.
Automation for flight is easier because there is a central authority controlling all (major) flights. Airspace and behavior therein is very tightly regulated, and the automation has a lot of dependencies upon extra-vehicular infrastructure (navigation aids, approach radio beacons, etc). There's also relatively few planes in the air at any given time. Scaling that up would not be trivial.

As for that Kittyhawk prototype - one prop failure at altitude and the pilot is dead. There's a reason they're testing over water at very low altitudes. Quadcopters have a very bad failure mode: they always crash. You want at least six motors, if not more, to avoid a crash every time a single motor fails. But, of course, more motors requires more battery power, which raises the weight, which makes it less maneuverable, and so forth.

From a pure "worst case failure mode" ground traffic is a better first automation target for moving small quantities of people.
Learning Fortran II programming in 1965 on a super-computer at a local university. It had almost a megabyte of memory!

Actually, it was a CDC 6600, which had 131,072 words of 60 bits each, which is kinda the same as nearly a megabyte. I was so impressed that the number 131,072 is still etched in my brain.
I Was the Mob Until the Mob Came for Me
Not able to edit this anymore, but here's the original (&thread) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16357917
Isn't the author already wrong? There are Waymo autonomous cars operating right now on public roads in Chandler, Arizona without safety drivers. Sure, those are very carefully mapped and selected routes, but they are not closed routes, they have to deal with anything that can happen on a public road. As any engineer knows, the last 10% is always harder than expected, but scaling from 0.1% to 90% coverage seems fairly straightforward IMO.
In Sweden I would say the best paid programmers get pretty high salaries. It can vary quite a lot though.
Startup Cities
Free Photos, Templates, Icons and PSD Downloads – Foobrstock
Pixar's Lecture Notes on Physically Based Modelling
In my experience, a web job can net up to 4x salary vs a much more difficult hardware engineering role. I know because I went form hardware to web and the average compensation is much higher. Additionally, web jobs tend to be less stressful.
Very interesting article, despite the silly title.

Does a piano compute the inverse Fourier transform when it plays a sound? Of course, it is exactly what it does, but it is not very informative, put that way.
Common Lisp has a way better OO type system than C#. It has to be queried at run-time, granted, but that doesn't stop something like LINQ from working.
I love Turtl's interface, tagging system, hosting options, multi-OS setup, and privacy stance. Turtl would be my go-to solution if they supported .md import/export. I think they have .json export planned for the next release, which might be tractable with a bit of pandoc manipulation, but not ideal.
The ratio seems pretty good to me. A lot of people just don't want to give out their email address.

1. Many will try again later with a throwaway email account they created just for their new account. You could check by setting a cookie when they try to sign up and correlate with subsequent attempts.

2. You might not be upfront enough about needing to verify email address. Many people assume you will just use the email for marketing and give a bogus email.
How the BBC lost the plot on Brexit
I stay because I love it. Coding is my passion, and I'm grateful every single day to be paid well to do something I enjoy. I'm not entirely convinced that other professions don't suffer from the same negative aspects either (bad management, terrible deadlines, cargo cult-ing, some boring tasks). For me, outside of maybe working in pro audio, I can't imagine doing anything else.

> "For some reason, companies do highly mistrust my skills and degree. Other jobs, equally well paid, do not require this."

I think if other jobs were able to directly test your technical skills in an interview they probably would. I personally hate whiteboard style interviews as well but, having sat on both sides of the interview process over the years, I see a lot of value in seeing people's code. Personally my preference is a take home coding test, but interactive coding is fine too if the problem isn't too tricky. Probably this is because I am self taught and don't have a degree to lean on that colors my opinion so take my words with a grain of salt I guess.
Go Playground as a shell script, closest thing you'll get to a Go REPL
The world might beat a path to your door if you
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Build_a_better_mousetrap,_and_...
Helicopters are complex machines that require lots of maintenance and significant training to fly safely. It's hard to see how you would reduce even the maintenance costs enough to make them practical for universal use.

To your second point, people with enough money and training do commonly buy them for personal use. (I know this anecdotally from a relative involved in sales of Airbus helicopters.) If you addressed the cost and safety issues no doubt more people would buy them.
I also forgot to mention that under-25 unemployment in Spain is around 35%-40%, with general unemployment rates at 16%.

Other than not being burdened by debt, Spanish STEM majors are comparatively worse off in pretty much any post-graduation dimension you can think of compared to Americans.
Learn CSS with Sliders – CSS Playground
I use Spacemacs in my day job as a Clojure programmer but I prefer Bear Note for note taking because it starts up faster and all actions (pasting, adding images, adding todos, merging notes, exporting mardown) match simpler and I don't need to memorize new hotkeys and do any additional setup/scripting.
If taking notes was my daily job I would probably spend some efforts to learn org-mode.
Oddly enough it was the opposite for me. I think I might have given up on Haskell if I hadn't learned O'Caml first. It's been 15 or so years, so I'm sort of guessing at this point, but I think the combined cognitive effort of going from typical imperative languages to Haskell and the whole algebraic data types+pattern matching thing might have broken me.

I found Haskell much more practical because it makes refactoring truly easy, but I'm very "programmer-centric". I mean 'refactoring' in the strict sense of preserving absolutely all the existing behavior, including side effects. That is extremely difficult if you can have side effects all over the place. (Strictness obviously helps a lot, but it also has downsides.)

Btw, given your experience and if you want to try Lisp seriously I'd probably recommend Racket, Typed Racket and their Turnstile experiment(?).
Your second point contradicts your first. You don’t need credentials to do it but you need to know a lot. People with good word of mouth reputations have much better job security (perhaps spanning multiple firms) than most other fields.

The key question is “Do you like the work?”
Is this similar to the problem of:

Two ships on the ocean of two different civilizations (who don't have shared traffic rules, and they also cannot communicate) are by accident on a head-on collision course towards each other. To avoid collision, they each need to turn a different direction, not the same direction. So each needs to quickly decide which direction to turn.

(Actually, more recognizable: walking on a sidewalk in a different country where people appear to have a different, or no, convention about which side people should cross each other)
It is fair to say it is alive. Is it fair to say it is alive and well?
I feel like modern tech and social media are exposing just how little we respect boundaries, as a culture and a society. This is a huge violation but it happens all the time.

It’s terrifying, and because those whose boundaries are violated quite rightly choose to stay anonymous, you only hear the projection from those who have deluded themselves into thinking they’re doing good, despite the fact it was never asked for.

There are good deeds and then pure sociopathy; ego massaging, narcissism...I have to wonder how much envy was involved in that.

This isn’t about losing privacy in public, it’s respecting the fucking boundaries. People need their space, they don’t need others leeching from it to benefit themselves.
After reading Cracking the Coding Interview... I was more than satisfied about getting a job as a "Software Developer" instead of "Software Engineer"... then going home after job, not thinking about job, big O in the shower etc... whats the point of life, if we don't have the time to investigate "this" thing we call living.
Reunifying Parents and Children – How It Works on the Ground
"subtle difference"

To me, that's hazing. There absolutely are bad questions, but the things that make them bad are rarely subtle.
I completely agree that we should keep rolling out renewables as fast as we can.

But we should also fix the unnecessarily difficult regulatory environment for advanced nuclear, because so far, we don't have a single example of a country running almost entirely on wind/solar/storage, and current storage technology isn't scalable or cheap enough to get large populations through windless nights.

You can say that we'll get there, but that's no less speculative than Terrestrial Energy saying when their reactors will be ready.
No, I am talking specifically about comments or documents that explain the "why" behind parameter choices. For canonical defaults that are shipped with an app, this should be documented in a user guide and in the appropriate parts of the source code, not inside the config file (which most users would never care to read, and which would be worse to read for most developers who might care or change it).

For local config files that are not shipped with the package, they should still be source controlled in a separate repo (yes, even if you personally are the only one using it, like your local Postgres configuration or something), and you should use a good practice to 'deploy' any changes to your config from the repo into the actual location where the application can recognize that config -- meaning that documentation about the "why" of the parameters once again should absolutely not be embedded inside the config file itself.
The believe the original version was the Usenet Oracle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet_Oracle
> In Spain, Germany, France, Italy, etc if you get a degree in STEM it means you put a lot of effort. [...] But the requirements to finish the degree have not changed so drastically as in the US so going to University is quite a good choice.

TLDR: As a Spaniard, I strongly disagree. Neither our universities as institutions nor our teachers as individuals have much incentive to (fairly) fail students, whereas they have many incentives to (unfairly) pass them. As a result, the level has dropped significantly in the latest decades.

The requirements in our degrees have plummeted since 20-30 years ago. Seriously, check exams from 20 years ago for ANY subject that was taught back then, and compare them to last year's. The difference is staggering.

There are several reasons for this:

First, because the level in high-school has been dropping similarly. Students get to the university with a lower base level, and hence they cannot be taught at the same level than before.

Second, because more and more people go to uni as time passes. This also drags down the average level of the average class (with respect to when the uni population was composed mainly of good and MOTIVATED students).

Third, because -contrary to what's been said here- our universities gain significantly from passing students. For one, each degree taught by a school is evaluated regarding the percentage of students that finish the degree in a set time, percentage of students that quit, and percentage of course passes [1]. This is the main evaluation of "quality" of a degree, and not hitting the set goals will lead to the degree being dropped.

Also, teachers gain nothing from failing students. Most will just accept it (because most know they really don't deserve to pass). However, some will complain. Very loudly. And handling such complaints is a huge time-sink not just for the involved teacher, but also for the department and the School itself. The easy way out is to just pass people. Many teachers openly admit that they pass lots of students who they don't think have achieved the goals of their subjects. And many students themselves admit it too.

[1] https://www.boe.es/buscar/pdf/2007/BOE-A-2007-18770-consolid... , Article 8
Thanks for the softball: the practice of heavy trucks delivering directly to stores is a scourge on our cities, a practice that needs to be banned as quickly as possible.

Here in Berlin, two children were killed by these monsters on one day last month, with the children doing nothing wrong.
This work does not engage with Searle’s Chinese Room argument, as far as I can tell, nor do the authors use any shockingly novel network architecture or advances in approach beyond normal DL approaches.

My position, then, is that the system they describe cannot be said to be reasoning at all.
> This quibbling semantics

No, it's quibbling pedagogy.

> Yes, the wording around "file" is a bit ambiguous

Exactly. And this can be a real problem when people are first learning about unix.

In fact, it can be a real problem even after that. Just the other day (true story) I was trying to debug some server latency issues and I asked one of our sysadmins for help. He suggested that I run lsof to help debug the problem. I told him I was pretty sure that wouldn't help because all the evidence indicated that the problem was with a rogue process, not a file, and he said, "This is unix. Everything is a file."
"Toxic" is an assessment of behavior, that covers a lot of different possible actions. The set of actions that are obviously toxic or obviously not won't be the topic of much discussion, but as we all already know interesting conversations happen at the boundaries where assessments conflict.

So, when "toxic" is used to the exclusion of actually describing what happened you have to ask yourself: why isn't the speaker communicating more clearly? Maybe they're bad at stating their point, maybe it's a loose informal conversation, or maybe they benefit from the information asymmetry.
I think they’re an excellent solution where renewables aren’t feasible (the arctic circle, for example).
Also see Dr. Racket.
Countries are meeting their renewables targets years ahead of schedule, and the cost of wind, solar, and batteries will continue to decline. I don’t see any way we’re still using fossil fuels for electricity by 2030. It’s not optimism, just curve fitting.
Please explain this better.

Is this:
a) the ratio that complete the form and don't confirm email b) those that view the signup page but don't submit the signup form?
I think that neural networks of the current design will have trouble with abstract symbolic logic because they do not have any structures to support that type of reasoning.

That said, they are great at recognition/prediction and it is likely that you can solve some simple symbolic logic problems by recognition/prediction but only up to a degree.

Neural networks currently are very much like the sensory processing areas in the brain and sometimes they are mapped directly to actions for control of video games.

But symbolic logic as human explicitly do it, and what we consider as thinking (planning, imagining, evaluating, deciding) is not done just in the sensory areas of the brain but involves mediation by executive control centers and self-stimulation of the sensor areas in sort of a loop.

I am not sure that trying to deal with abstract reasoning in just the current sensory NN designs that we have is going to be super effective. But I guess measuring abstract reasoning will allow us to realize the current limitations and then push forward with better structures that enable it.

(Although even if the NN do not have structures to support symbolic reasoning in the way that humans do it, I guess DeepMind will just write custom code around the NN do enable NN do help with symbolic logic? Sort of how they combined NN with other search structures to create AlphaGo?

Personally I think it would be easier to combine NN with existing symbolic reasoning tools to get a better result rather than just sticking with NNs. Use NNs to recognize and evaluate patterns and feed that to the symbolic logic tools to get reasoning solutions. Much more efficient I would think and tractable. And for extra credit run NNs on the symbolic logic reasoning tools to see if you can make some "intuitive" jumps sometimes instead of pure reason.)
Like EE, the exposure to various Fields is potentially huge. It was my favorite thing about software, after software itself.

With my BSCS, I worked in aerospace, telecommunications, finance focused MoM (we are dated by our buzzwords), manufacturing supply chains, indigent health insurance, auto sales, dark pool trading, and medical device manufacturing.

I'm now out of software because I was a B player, and my freshness date expired.

Now I'm a long distance semi truck driver, and I'm currently sitting in my Kenworth T680 as I write this. It's the ultimate experience if you're a loner.

I miss the money, and the software writing itself, but I've never had a meeting since I started truck driving. I don't miss the development practices churn, or what I call work about work.

I do still automate some parts of my personal administrivia, mostly with python and Bash.
You don't answer the parent.

Parent: "[...] but if LFTRs can provide a better and safer nuclear? Then it's about time environmentalists started pulling their heads from their asses and reconsider nuclear before we irreversibly fuck up our entire planet and ecosystem."

Your article: Nuclear isn't economically/politically likely.

Well, if the safest and greenest form of electricity was also the cheapest and most politically friendly alternative then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

If the environment was prioritized enough then neither would pose any obstacle, what remains is the debate of whether nuclear really is the greenest and safest form of energy.
I'm sure that United would have appreciated that kind of regulation when they had that guy drug off one of their planes.
If such parasitic behaviour (on part of finance team in this example) is tolerated by the upper management it is better for productive developer to update his resume and spend time on networking and seeking the new opportunities. The nachos are just signs of things to come.
Defining Component APIs in React
> My problem with Haskell is that it is not pragmatic and the reason I stopped using it.

I find it extremely pragmatic, but perhaps not in the way most people use the word. It's pragmatic about the abilities of programmers to get every single detail right all of the time, i.e. it discards that notion entirely. We will not get things right enough of the time and so the language must support and help you. This goes all the way from simple static typing to enforcing Purity of Essence, I mean, Functions.

If you don't care about managing side effects you can always just write everything in IO and slap a "pure" here or there. Haskell's actually also a pretty good imperative programming language, IME.
Let me know how that goes, if you decide for it :)
Respectfully, you're describing workflows that very few people use today. Patches over email or chat? I've only seen that use at any scale with Linux kernel development. Tricky tasks on remote servers, editing files on remote servers? Most places prefer immutable servers, which run peer reviewed remedial scripts via Ansible/Puppet/Chef/Salt.

Org mode is one of the few unique bits of software available only on Emacs, but you can get 80% (if not more) of its functionality with markdown notes and regular email/calendaring software for 20% (if not less) of the learning curve.

EDIT: And I'm not ignoring Spacemacs and its kin. Yes, they are more user friendly, but they still do not follow many of the common OS UI models, and you still are interacting with a single-purpose programming language for any customization. The abstraction falls apart quickly when you try do do something more powerful (like opening the package manager).

Not to mention, the last three times I tried to do Go development in Spacemacs it would freeze in an infinite busy loop. It's unfortunate that a broken mode can completely hose the entire editor in this day.
To me this looks like 'write-once and forget' code similar to a complex regexp. Why is everyone raving about the incomprehensible syntax?

I admit that this is the first time I see APL code.
Uyi
uij
It’s selective outrage to score brownie points with followers and to one up your other virtue signaling wrestlers.

Anyone in any major industry is donating to multiple parties and candidates. Who are they going to bug from now, Ford? Oh, noes! They donate to Republican too.

Meanwhile he donated 20x to the Sierra Club and for some reason that’s totally ignored.
From the purely practical, pragmatic point of view both GM and OSM are very far from perfect. Similar services offered by local service providers can be much better in some cases. For example Seznam's Mapy.cz is feel much much better than Google Maps when it's about the Czech Republic. I don't work for them, that's my purely pragmatic user experience.
The "proven" technology was proven not to be reliable enough, to be too expensive for use, and to create some large problems down the line.

Besides, if you change the size, it's not "proven" anymore.
Oh... right. Work done is force * distance so distance varies linearly with speed.
You are right that it's not an easy problem to solve but I think you would also agree the economic incentives are there and you don't necessarily have to have people in the vehicles to see improvements on the problems I cited above.

Amazon's scheme for drone delivery seemed kind of crazy at first glance but it does have some sound economics behind it. Here's a reference that seems to have a reasonably balanced view: http://thedronegirl.com/2017/05/07/drone-delivery-economics-...