skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
And besides the legal definition, the principle of free speech is about being able to express speech without systematic repurcussions. Censorship by an individual (or corp-as-individual) is tool used by businesses on their platforms and doesn't violate principles of free speech. Systematic censorship that violates this principle is only really wieldable by governments: Making the expression of an idea anywhere have consequences for you, your friends, and your family's ability to go on living (in a threat-of-violence life-or-death sense, not a $ sense).

Free speech zealots tend to slyly try equating systemic censorship with an individual's ability to censor others, thus taking events like this and pretending it is an offense against the principle. It is not, and don't be fooled.
They hanged a nice photo of him eating pizza: https://secure.i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02223/Fr...
Swift is more like the next C++ than the next javascript. But is supposed to be easy enough to use that you could use it for a shell script. And the 'shell interpreter' is just compiling and executing your code.
The first amendment represents an ideal. An ideal the country is walking back from as it discovers a large faction does not share the same morals. The decision to silence instead of engage will lead to disintegration of the country if its not dealt with.
Congrats, you just made Alex Jones cool and officially counter culture cool.

This will not end the way silicon valley thinks.
Yeah, i guess you are right in a perfect market. My hypothesis was that increased buying power leads to more demand. In your case for apples it would allow apple producers to increase prices and raise margins, as long as competitors don't undercut them.

What is the original cause that drives prices in countries like Switzerland or Norway higher? Is this only due to currency trading and a country's credit rating?
2018.32 Squashathon Done – Weekly Changes in and Around Perl 6
What community are you talking about? Whose satisfaction? Are you making up your own definition for the word "tyranny"?
I've done something similar to keep it small with potential to go multi region for one of my new projects using Bitbucket and Google Cloud.

Bitbucket pipelines that create an image of the app, create instance template with a container "gcloud beta compute instance-templates create-with-container", create instance group, create DNS, global load balancer, SSL certs and rolling update of the instance groups with a new version (if applicable).

Using preemptible g1-small to keep costs down but deployed in at least two zones per region.
so, you're basically saying "we're the lowest price, except when we're not because of 'unfair' competition on scale and supply chain, but help us gain these advantages and we'll be competitive"

Are you the lowest price on contacts or not?
This made me smile. I'm actually somewhat skilled as an artist (just compared to the average person) but I can assure you I have never drawn a respectable image of a bicycle. I really liked taking these sketches and making them more realistic. Maybe there is some genius hidden in these seemingly inaccurate sketches?
I resorted to outline.com for this one. Something I usually reserve for autoplay video sites and paywalls.
IBM is not the only company that can deliver a network built using Hyperledger Fabric, or any of the other frameworks. Did you take a look at Sawtooth, or Iroha? Did your devs engage with the actual Hyperledger community, or only through IBM? There are several healthcare companies (Change Healthcare is one, managing insurance claims) who have engaged directly and are in production.
Because the "most obvious" case is often a trap and we frequently get followup studies years later debunking them.

Why are you assuming "sexism" is the most obvious explanation?! It could also simply be a communications style miss-match, or any number of things. The article indicates the skills required for males to better treat "such patients" are transferable; do people who are overtly or subconsciously sexist typically grow out of it?

As well, the biases negatively effecting the doctor/patient relationship and subsequent outcomes could be within the patients themselves.

Absolutely, study the sexist angle. However allow me to disagree that it is the "most obvious" explanation.
While you're thinking of the adults, please also think of the children.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=kids+learn+colo...

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=learn+colors+sy...
Exciting to hear this kind of pragmatic rhetoric from the DoD: "Michelli emphasized that the Defense Department needs to take a new attitude towards risk, one that focuses on understanding and managing it, but still taking some, rather than a bureaucratic effort to eliminate risk all together."

Also, scary.
We do have a way to create links between two documents without editing either document: create a new document that links to both documents. This is a normal, though informal, activity.

And of course simply linking two documents together isn't that useful, you have to say WHY they are linked. I.e., the semantic triple (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_triple) of subject–predicate–object, or maybe more informally you are simply saying X relates to Y because of Z, where Z is akin to the predicate.

Currently in HTML hypertext we're stuffing Z into the link text, which sometimes works nicely and sometimes works very poorly. But in an external document you have all the space you want to explain the relation between the documents.

Obviously there's lots of shortcomings of adding a new document to the web to explain every relation between existing documents. But I think it's a good starting point. We're missing things like:

1. Reliable deep linking to documents. We have ids, YouTube timestamps, etc., but finding these is an ad hoc process and they aren't always available.

2. Widespread transclusion tools. We actually have some now, in the form of link previews or OEmbed. When you post a link in a comment or post on Twitter or Facebook, they effectively transclude the link into the document. Not fully interactive, but it might be a better balance between linking and viewing than traditional/literal transclusion.

3. Discovery of these annotations or commentary. There's a hard CS problem here, to maintain privacy while also trying to find serendipitous results. Maybe it involves pre-loading lists of documents from the locations you want to "discover" from. Maybe it requires some understanding of privacy levels, or whether content is personalized or public. Or we use the technique we have now: lead with commentary, with no attempt to discover it after the fact. I.e., I know there are comments on https://www.reinterpretcast.com/open-hypermedia at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17690865 because I found the document on https://news.ycombinator.com/news – is serendipity even a thing in a place as large as the web?

4. Maybe publishing tools... do I want to post a Tweet to describe every relation I see? But maybe I do, because even if organic discovery is possible I probably also want to publish a feed of my own annotations, and I want to be part of a community of people doing this, and Twitter is a reasonable example of this.

5. Some sort of representation of these links when they've been found. Even without fancy discovery this is necessary. Right now if I click on a link from a post like: "OMG this is the stupidest argument ever: http://example.com/some-stupid-document" it will look like any other page I've opened. Only if I remember well why I clicked on the link will I understand that I've been offered something with derision. The browser has to do something here, all it has currently is the back button to understand why you've gotten somewhere (and that doesn't even work consistently in these cases).
enlighten me, they are what then?
> I'm not saying that this should be weighted into the main analysis. I'm saying they should test their hypothesis with this.
One of the most interesting takeaways from the post game interview for me was that the AI can be very stupid if you just blindly throw it in a self-play setting but with clever use of randomization (modifying power levels) and action restrictions (for example, only allowing the agent to spend an anti-invis item when a nearby enemy goes out of sight) it is possible to provide better learning opportunities for the AI.
Facebook has also tried to get its hands on hospital data [1]. Add this to that and these are clearly the actions of a bad actor.

Its difficult to believe there are groups of people working on these kind of programs who do not see anything wrong.

At this point shaming will not work, people know what they are doing and can't claim ignorance. Perhaps there must be a wider acknowledgement of the ethical vacuum in technology, and we do not deserve the public's trust and are actively building the very dystopia some of us postured so heavily about.

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/05/facebook-building-8-explored...
Fizz buzz worth reading about.
You're US-only, then?

Here in Europe I can buy any contact lens I'd like, but I'm still short on information as to which ones might be better, or why.
the title of this post is literally "Lowest Prices on Contact Lenses"

it's reasonable for someone to interpret that as "cheapest price for the contact lenses I wear".
Having worked as a researcher at Dynamicland, I think this is one of the most important bits from the end of the article:

> A lot of what's new about Dynamicland is that it's a programming system!

We've had projection mapping, physical UIs, gestures, etc for years, but this is the first system that puts them together in a user-programmable editing environment.

An analogy might be Xerox PARC in the 70s and early 80s. Alan Kay and his team saw hardware shrinking and becoming cheaper, saw powerful UIs demo'd in research settings, and had the spark of creativity to combine these elements synergistically into Smalltalk, a programming system to support a brand new expressive medium.

Similarly, the research vision of Dynamicland / Realtalk is to make a more humane and accessible dynamic medium. This is only the first version, with (hopefully, depending on funding) many more versions to come.

For a bit more information about the vision see my own demo made in the precursor to Dynamicland, a sweaty game called Laser Socks: http://glench.com/LaserSocks/
> The article explicitly says he's banned because of TOS violations. The article is not clear about what those are, but I assume they fall under hate speech and harassment.

Not at all a fan of Mr Jones (the little I've seen makes him seem like a garden variety nutcase peddling inane conspiracy theories), but aren't we just a little bit concerned when someone is banned on the same day by all the major internet content shops due to some unspecified "TOS violations"?

Did he violate all these various different TOS agreements on the same day? If so, how is it not extremely obvious which term he broke?

I think this demonstrates the power of the internet's big content vendors. They can block anyone, at any time, for any reason. They're not accountable nor required to uphold any freedom of speech, yet it's how we all get our information now.

There is still freedom of speech in physical public spaces, but a large and increasing share of our lives is spent on the privatized spaces of the internet, where corporations are the absolute arbitrators of our rights to express and consume speech.

Jones is not a generally sympathetic figure, and few of us will be genuinely sorry to see him go. But what about the next guy marked for deletion?

"First they came for the kooks..."
Where I said above that people need to do research, it wasn't necessarily directed at you. Perhaps you have, though even the above statements suggest you've not looking at this the same way many others do, so we can likely just punt with we are trying to solve different problems. And at the very least, have different definitions of decentralized.
To Discourage Rodents from Eating Seeds, Scientists Are Getting Spicy
I always wondered about the stake through the heart for vampires. Like, "why specify 'for vampire'? Fairly certainly that kills anything."
"free speech entitles you to saying what you want, not to a microphone"
I played semi-professionally at one point in my life. A 20ms difference could be the difference between a head-shot and a miss. I used to work at an ISP and when I had matches or practice I would haul my computer to work and hook right up to our backbone to get that extra 20ms-40ms advantage.

One thing people who never played at this level don't realize is it's not just what you see. Your brain is always running heuristics and your body has muscle memory. You brain is also predicting where things will be and what you need to do next. The crisper and more responsive the game is, the more these things will line up and a quick flick of your wrist will put you in the right location before your eyes can even verify that this has happened.

To say you can't see more than 30fps or feel 20ms of latency underestimates how our brains and bodies work.

It depends on the game, of course, but in some games it really does matter. It's very hard to simplify things down to a pithy metric. That's the real problem, it's not pseudoscience, it's just very complicated.
Interesting article, however this line is obnoxious:

>What matters is that mathematicians had never before conceived of the scutoid, much less given it a name.

Of course this shape has been conceived of before; it's just an example of a polyhedron. Specifically, scutoids seem to be nothing more than truncated prisms[1]! But "truncated prism" doesn't have the same ring to it, does it?

It's like saying that mathematicians didn't "discover" a pair of pants[2] before topology was invented.

What happened is that the researches realized that one can model the shapes of the cells with just a few polyhedral classes - and one of the classes didn't have a special name yet because we didn't know what's interesting or special about it. Chop some vertices off a prism, so what? The special part comes from the optimization constraints inspired by biology.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truncation_(geometry)

[2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pair_of_pants_(mathematics)
Discussions of UBI need to bring back the basic principle -- Dismantling the bureaucracy that distributes current welfare state handouts and instead evenly applying the budgeted amounts would lead to better outcomes than having a bureaucratic mess siphoning off value w/o providing sufficient ROExpense.

As someone who is currently paying for a welfare state, and is likely to end up shouldering the cost of paying for everyone else to get a free lunch, I am on the verge of deciding I'd rather just be poorish with all my time back than to continue to work extremely hard only to have the "rules" consistently changed such that an increasing amount of my labor is claimed by those who had no part in the efforts.
The Mastodon devs don't seem interested in blessing particular instances, and even if they did, that doesn't necessarily solve trust relationship dynamics.

Most instances today advertise an interest in a topic, which is fine, but it doesn't answer a lot of questions. When the average person is looking for a trust relationship, they often aren't topic oriented, but reliability/stability-oriented. They want indicators of reliability: what's the governance model? How long is this instance expected to last/be stable? Etc.

Businesses in the real world already have a lot of that bootstrapping accomplished (because they are required so by governments, tax bodies, trading platforms, etc), so I made the suggestion that that's one way to make instance declarations towards governance models/stability/etc.

In that way, too, businesses as a model are still mostly decentralized in the way that users expect ("can take their business elsewhere"). Even if they are prone to monopolistic intents (when a profit model) and tend to accidentally centralize things.

A business model isn't the only approach of course, just one easy answer to how do you square the circle and solve the "which instance do I choose?" bootstrapping problem for a larger number of people more quickly. Even if formal businesses aren't the preferred option (though maybe they should be), the means of business government should still apply: what is the instance's constitution/bylaws/governing documents? Who holds the instance responsible in disputes? What is the cash flow and who holds that accountable?

A lot of these same business rules apply to so many organizations in one's life (your home owners' association, for one example) for good reasons of responsibility/accountability/stability.

Yes, almost all of these concerns are entirely orthogonal to the software itself and can't just be solved in software, as much as we might wish that to be the case as software developers. Running a community of almost any sort has these same needs. Brokering those community trust relationships is tough, but a deeper focus on that for Mastodon would help with adoption problems.
Once upon a time, mortality rate of the pregnant women were higher at the male doctor than the traditional female midwife.

Some people try to explain that statistics with a hypothesis that the presence of male doctor stress the pregnant women.

The real reason was, male doctor at that time treat pregnant woman immediately after they perform the dissection WITHOUT washing their hands! Killing pregnant women by infection.
> for example, only allowing anti-invis items when an enemy goes out of sight

These are the kind of actions you specifically don't want to code in because you're throwing in human knowledge. You want the AI to learn by itself that using anti-invis when everyone is visible is a low-value move.

The purist in me was even mad that they had a hand-crafted evaluation function. (e.g. prefer gold, prefer taking towers, each given some arbitrary value)
In California and Washington state, they have a lot of initiatives. I think an initiative might be a better way to get pro-consumer changes. We did already pass a net neutrality bill in Washington.
Categorifying cardinal arithmetic [pdf]
> Make no mistake, they're still as boring as dirt.

Boring enough that there are still cases where the police have to go out and summon residents to the meeting to secure a quorum.
Amazon Alexa will now let you know when it’s learned answers to old questions
I think one very likely cause for telecoms being vehemently against privacy legislation is that both AT&T and Verizon are trying very hard to enter the adtech market. They are hoping that first party customer data combined with more traditional third party cookie data will give them a competitive edge, but it'll only happen if they are allowed to use all of that data in the first place.

I used to work in ad tech, and this kind of stuff was responsible for my steady disillusionment with advertising as an industry. While the argument could be made that marketing/advertising can be benign, it's quite obvious (once you know where to look) that it creates all sorts of perverse societal incentives that work against individual citizens' interests.
“Spurious signals sometimes come up [in research], so this should be replicated”

As the replication crisis becomes more apparent, if you are looking to fill your mind with true facts in sociology, psychology or health, replication should be the bare minimum before even spending time to decide if a study's conclusions are likely to be true.
Or a large number of Americans think they personally could afford to pay a carbon tax and are happy to place the burden on poor people who cannot.
Free speech does not guarantee a platform for your speech, nor does it guarantee that you are able to say the things you want to. Even setting aside "private vs government", it doesn't even guarantee that the government won't censor you. It guarantees that you will not be arrested (by the government providing you with this right) for things that you do say. Even this has a few exceptions, e.g. incitements to violence etc.

Perhaps you feel that it should guarantee more than it does, and perhaps you may be right, but as it stands it does not.
I was rooting for "Pumpkin Pie", a nice alliterative two-word name. And not trademarked! :)
Show HN: Inko – A safe and concurrent object-oriented programming language
There's very little to no correlation between "difficulty to get adoption/sales" and "time to market". This very article is about displacing Amazon (founded in 1994) in the ecommerce space and the very top comment is about OpenBazaar (started in 2016). You can develop your business in golang or rust or f#, but if the business idea is irrelevant or unviable then your developer economic productivity is exactly zero.
Years of experience isn't the only way to measure skill. There are software engineers with 20 years experience that aren't as good as one with 2 years experience. I'd like to see the skill levels of the doctors normalized by something else, like whether they can somehow be identified as part of a group that specializes in high risk cases.
The key word in your argument is 'morally'. What's moral is fluid and varies from person to person. I think it's perfectly legitimate to suppress free speech locally when you protect it globally - for example, in the case of hate speech that demands free speech of certain groups to be globally suppressed.
> The best thing to do is just silence their voices, no ifs, ands or buts.

> Remember, these people are against the idea of democracy.

Oh, the irony of following the one sentence with the other.
Great summary.

I'll add:

- The coordination between AI bots are clearly beyond human level. Or at least as demonstrated from similar performance from the humans on similar style of heros.

(It might not appear too different from the show match, but based on my 2-3k hours watching pro games, the coordinations are noticebaly better than the best team in history, aka Wings gaming 2016 TI champion).

I am not sure how such coordinations are modeled in dnn, which itself seems the most valuable from this research.

- In general I think with this show match, it pretty much sealed the doom of human players in dota2.

As it shows that the general approach is scalable and capable to handle the problem itself. As from laning to team fight, and item building, the AI did not show weakness at all.

I was worrying about AIs general inefficiency in deriving the winning strategy, laning stage, and team fight coordinations, which turns out to be obviously superior to human players.

Drafting probably will be even more favorable to AIs. The challenge would be can they train faster by observing the change log, I.e. finding winning strategy without training from scratch each time after a patch release.

I seem no reason AIs lose to vp/liquid/lgd (the top 3 going into ti8). The idea that split pushing hero can deal with the team fights seems underestimate the AIs discipline, which is clearly superior to the best humans.

- Last is how much computing resources are used in the training and playing. Hopefully value can team with open ai to release a benchmark bot team for calibration and a different ladder systrm of playing different AI strength level
EDIT: dlp211 made the more succint point https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17702276

---

Donald Trump is a woman. By your definition this statement is not enough to make me a loon. Therefore...

----

> So how much of the proof we got that Donald Trump IS actually a man? His look? Many transgander look much more male than he does. Same sex marriage? Could be? Have you seen his birth certificate (original, NOT the copy) that you can genuinely say he is a male? Yes I know he has the kids... okay so let me see his DNA test that actually they belong to Donald. as a parent. Exactly; you have none.

---

Are you suggesting that the above information should be provided to debunk me? (I mean, after all this is the President I am talking about rather than the First lady which means the fact he is secretly a woman is much more important!)