skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> A tweet is not an SEC filing and it can never be one. It’s 140 characters typed on your phone. It is not reviewed by corporate counsel. It is not reviewed at all.

Right, but this is exactly the downside of disclosing things via Twitter. If Elon uses tweets and SEC filings interchangeably (that is what he's doing here -- this would ordinarily be disclosed in an 8-K), the rules are going to apply to both. It's not that I'm unsympathetic to his intentions, but the SEC can't carve out exceptions for impulsive behavior just because it happened on social media -- traders are acting on this information in real time and need to be able to trust it.

(I agree the calls for imprisonment are beyond insane; I focus on the Twitter vs 8-K part of the story because I find it more interesting, and I'd like to see more CEOs speak directly to followers as Elon does but with a bit less impulsivity).
Here's a counterargument: if you're good at what you do, it is better to let the inevitable development of X be done by someone less competent.

If the first mover does have an advantage, then making the first mover slow and buggy gives society more time to argue against it. To pick on Bitcoin (not taking on a position on whether it actually is unethical, but assume for the purpose of argument it is): if someone less thoughtful than Nakamoto had thought up the idea of using HashCash to prevent double-spend attacks, they may have used MD5 as the hash. Or they may have built the initial software with accidental integer overflows. Or they may have tuned it poorly so that the storage requirements got intractable after a few years. Then it would be more possible to shake Bitcoin with a second mover that didn't involve mining (or were actually anonymous, or whatever fix you'd want to make).

If the first mover doesn't have an advantage—if the technology is so clonable that someone can make an evil variant quickly—then there isn't any virtue in shipping the good variant first. Let them discover it on their own, it's not any worse, and spend your time working on either defenses or on unrelated, ethical things.

And it could be better: I seem to recall that there were several countries during World War II who did not focus wholeheartedly on developing the atomic bomb because they had no idea it was even possible. The Soviet nuclear weapons program, for instance, became much more of a priority only once they saw the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
> Even something as simple as moving a group to a new foraging spot is tough, Shultz pointed out to Ars.

It doesn't have to be. What makes it difficult is our rational minds. If we turn them off, finding agreement on things is automatic. It's literally how herd animals operate.

One thing I take notice of when we go out on team lunches is how the decisions of which way to cross the street or exactly when to cross are made. One person takes a tentative step, then the whole group moves, on automatic instinct. Nobody really cares about when and how to move, so any random impetus gets picked up on. We all kind of notice it and sometimes it bubbles up to a conversation where we rib each other, in good fun of course, on those random impulses that then drive the whole group.

The decision for where to go for lunch is also similarly painless, pain is introduced when too much thought is given to the decision. We collect ideas from everyone who has a feeling, then come to a group consensus on where people want to go. It's only when you forget that there's a instinctual way to handle group consensus, when you engage your cognitive mind, when you think about what to do, that it becomes difficult.
The Atlas of Remote Islands
Inspired by Judith Schalansky's award-winning book of the same name. I built it using React, Redux, and Styled Components.
No?

How much cheaper is electricity because meters report back and you don't have to come and read them one by one. How many times has the garbage truck passed by my street only to see no trash container out to be collected? IoT means making everything intelligent so that we can better coordinate our resource usage. A traffic light that knows when the tram is coming ahead or behind schedule, how many people are on it, how many cars are to queue on the red lights can make a better decision on which one should be prioritized, possibly saving a fair amount of electricity in the process.

Or, perhaps, a carpet that knows it's clean (let's say the kids are off to summer camp) can tell the Roomba it doesn't need to do its thing today.

We don't need it like we didn't need cellphones, smartphones, smart watches, electric cars. For most of my childhood we didn't even need personal computers.
I'd love if my charger would tell me it wants to go into the backpack before I board the plane without it.
Their work isn't valuable. A logo, while prominent, rarely contributes anything of actual value to a company.
This is a good point. Not even tech but being one of few fluent programmers is a good position.
not voting machines but all the other things needed to run society. from applying for licenses for planning permission (or second children) to water rights and more.

We are digitising society. how we do that matters as much as the society we have when we start.

i am just frustrated by inability to get oss into government at the basic levels

see http://www.oss4gov.org/manifesto
Same guy as before but from different account. Disclaimer: I am an ethicist, although my original AoS was philosophy of language.

First of all, there is a whole bunch of contemporary ethicists who would deny that unrealistic scenarios can give us any ethical insight, but let's not enter this debate.

There are good and convincing arguments against this view, but let's assume for the sake of the argument that using the nerve gas in your scenario would be the right thing to do. That means that you have shown that there is one hypothetical scenario in which the use of that technology could be considered better than not using it, although its use would still be very bad and horrific.

That's not enough to show that the technology is ethical or that its development should be encouraged. I'd argue for the opposite. Your scenario also does not provide any argument against my claim that the person who develops the technology is at least indirectly responsible for its later use. Some technologies should and maybe even need to be suppressed world-wide.

This is an important topic if you take into account the pace of technological development. It's entirely thinkable that in the near future - let's say, in a 100 years or so - just about anyone could in theory genetically modify bacteria and viruses to his likings in a basement and for example develop an extremely powerful biological weapon capable of wiping out 90% of mankind. It is obvious that such a technology has to be suppressed and should probably not be developed in this easy-to-use form.

I believe what you really want to say is that nation states should develop all those nefarious technologies in order to control their spreading, because someone ("the opponent") will invent and spread them anyway. That's indeed the traditional rationale for MAD and the development of nerve gas, biological weapons, and hydrogen bombs. The problem with this argument is that anybody can use it, the argument appears just as sound to North Korea than to the US, and is leading to a world-wide stockpiling of dangerous technologies. So there must be something wrong with that argument, don't you think so?
> Yes, the car you drive matters when you're playing at that level.

Do you really think that status conscious people are playing at a higher level than others? Personally I go out of my way to avoid people who poster for attention in these ways. And people who only seem interested in me because my way of life signals status to them for that matter.
It reminded me of your article [1] (English has been my pain for 15 years). As a non-English speaker, sometimes I wonder if my readers (& clients) do not understand the context or my English.

[1] http://antirez.com/news/61
I am sorry but that gave me a chuckle. So you code for five hours and socialize for three?
Of course here is a counterpoint from Jonathan Katz , a professor of physics, about doing graduate school.

http://katz.fastmail.us/scientist.html

TL;DR. Don't do it!
Happy Birthday, Galileo's Telescope
Machine learning-in terms of Linear Algebra, Probability and Calculus
[Clean Code] Wash your hands, brush your teeth, clean your code
Doesn't work on Safari. The author missed Socotra, Galapagos and Escudo. Basically, the best ones.
That's where your location comes into play. Different parts of a city have different vibes. The status signals still exist, but are different in your part.

Yesterday at lunch a guy walked past with an extremely 'regal' air. Literally the whole team turned and watched him walk, then we had a conversation about what he was representing, the consensus being that of a plantation gentleman. Seersucker suit, short tweed hat. And it was clean. He didn't look like a homeless person, he looked like he stepped out of a 1800s storybook.

That's status. Paying that much attention to the message you're sending through your actions and bearing. It's non-verbal communication that you absolutely can learn and master, you can even take classes in it, they're called acting classes.

It's what separates Emperor Norton from a random homeless guy.
> But they should require just a few lines of configuration in GraphQL vs more lines custom boilerplate code in your controller in a traditional MVC framework, which is a nice win for GraphQL.

If it's a few lines of configuration in GraphQL, it's going to be a few lines of configuration or code in the "traditional MVC framework".

If it's a lot of code in the "traditional MVC framework", then it's going to be a lot of code in GraphQL as well.

The issue with using terms like "traditional MVC framework" is that you will have a hard time making statements that apply to all.

> That's a slippery slope leading towards a culture where nothing ever gets done because all the senior engineers default to saying "no" to everything

They can just say no to GraphQL then. You shouldn't be mixing culture/politics and technology arguments in one context.
> but it's just so much damn typing.

Expression blend saves a lot of typing. Also if you provide design-time data, saves time because WYSIWYG gives faster feedback than change-build-test cycle.

When I work on XAML-based GUI, I open the project in both VS and Blend, and use them alternately.
I think it's pretty standard in many corporate coding jobs, at least here in Europe. Often, if you include meetings in the "socialize" coulmn, the numbers are even switched.
> This really is only one small segment of the programming population. I really hate superficial shit like this that paints tech workers in a bad light bc most have ordinary jobs and live ordinary lives and aren’t social recluses.

I don't think anyone here seriously thinks this is the norm for working in tech, although I can entirely understand that the author might have a warped perspective on it as a result of his experience.

With that said, this "superficial shit" does happen, particularly in startup culture. And even if this is out on the margins of the experience, one can imagine milder versions that are still a very long way from ideal for a lot of people. For example, I find the thought of living with people I also work with utterly horrifying even if we were living in a decent house with our own rooms, a good amount of space, and what have you. I've worked with people over the years who have house-shared with others at the same company and I've never understood how they could do it. That's no disrespect to my team, or to anyone one I've worked with previously: for the most part they've been great people, but you just HAVE to unplug from it and get some social interaction from outside of your professional milieu[1].

[1] Also, I did house sharing for 10 years and, even 12 years later, I am absolutely over it. Perhaps even more-so with the passage of time.
> Python was designed for scripting.

It's far more than scripting, and for much bigger programs than 10k LOC... My company's Python codebase is 35m LOC/500k modules, with 25k commits per week and contributions from 2.5k developers per month.

To my mind, Python has the opposite problem. I've been a Python programmer since 2000. Every few years, I think I should devote more time to other languages (first Java, then R, then Haskell, then JS, ...). But the Python ecosystem just keeps getting stronger. My current focus is data science and machine learning. In these domains, there are no good reasons to drop Python.
Bullish, Targets Further Upside Pressure
The best thing we can do is to have a realistic expectation about what is going to happen if technology 'X' is introduced.

Saying that "oh we just have to be wary" is like an a priori version of "we were just following orders".
Hey. On which bit in particular?
Discussed 3 days ago:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17821253
Well, if you hate paid work with passion (as many people do), gaining freedom and starting your life at 30 still sounds pretty good.
> I don't get the people here saying don't use Jupyter notebooks, or they are bad software engineering.

I have a python window open on my desk right now. But the model of programming here contrasts sharply, in my mind, with the one discussed yesterday, from HtDP https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17826959 .

I absolutely use the REPL, for instance to determine where to put what arguments into a library function. But I have also in the past had it happen that I found a routine of mine that missed an edge case and there were a good number of projects that subsequently used that routine, that now could be wrong. Some of those could have led to a publication, so there could in that sense be a permanance to that error. Oops.

Those of us who have gotten bit, or who teach and routinely see students develop habits we know will lead to them getting bit, worry about systems that are not developed so much as pasted together.
> “They didn’t meet that often, but when they met they seemed to not have prejudices against each other and mixed freely,” he said.

That seems like a pretty big assumption. Considering what I know about humans, I would have guessed some chance meetings could result in violence.
AVX-512 throttling: heavy instructions are maybe not so dangerous
>which I can’t figure out how the economics works for London-based employees.

They don't. Much like SF it appeals to people though so they flock to it anyway
> My solution is to try to condense the useful code built up across different cells into a reusable block, most often a function. Do that while the 'state' is still fresh in your mind and you remember the order of execution.

Right, that's the sort of thing I was talking about in terms of "using it right." It makes sense and is really a good idea, it just starts eating into the advantages you get from using Jupyter in the first place.

I'm still trying to figure out how best to integrate it in my workflow. So far I've mostly settled on using it to get some rough ideas about the data and libraries I'm using, and then just reworking from scratch in a more stable setting. As needed I'll go back and try things out there, possibly in a new notebook entirely and just do my best to copy/paste the setup over. In getting it working the setup stuff at least gets consolidated. It's... well awful but eh, I haven't really found a better way.
Sure, but why would you assume it is? Also, you'd need a lot of this stuff to do any damage even if it was that much of a pollutant.
> I can’t figure out how the economics works for London-based employees.

Well, they don't have the privilege of being able to work in the US, so basically it is what it is.
See JWT. You can make stateless apps easier without worrying about a trip to the database to grab session info

https://12factor.net/disposability

If you want disposability with the ID method you need some sort of datastore or cache to contain session info
> Put it on the cloud where the GDPR [EU’s General Data Protection Regulation] is in force ...

... so that any government with enough technical means can (illegally) access the data at their leasure and in such a way that you won't even know it was accessed....
> "Hackathons are technological Woodstock"

This sentence embodies what repulses me about current Silicon Valley culture: The self-satisfied claim to San Francisco 60's heritage, only, you know, with peace and love being replaced by greed and egotism.
Thanks for the heads-up... I admittedly have only tested it in Chrome and Firefox so far, and since it's just a non-commercial side-project of mine I'm not too worried about it working in every browser.

You're right about Galapagos though, and 'Socotra' and 'Escudo' have given me two more things to google! :)
That is a great idea. On macOS, Preview can be left open on the generated file so quick edits/view graph work flow should be easy. A little off topic, but org-mode has changed the way I handle notes at work and also at home for my own stuff.
From other comments, it sounds like something called Cocalc might be of interest to you. I haven't even looked at it yet but it sounds like it does at least some of those things.
IOT in the nutshell is simply about mapping and tracking physical objects. Air or water quality, building, road and bridge condition, street lights, traffic, and countless more applications. All of those that are currently done manually, imprecisely, or infrequently. Just because it's low profile, not available in store, or not yet achievable using current technology, doesn't mean it does not or will not happen.
In the end, the work you do reflects on who you are and to some extent changes who you are. Your spidey sense is going off. You can use this as an opportunity to grow and be more valuable to businesses that employ you.

Try writing something up about the business risks of the situation, outlining possible scenarios and how they would affect the bottom line. Explaining from a tech point of view is probably not going to get you anywhere. Focus on the business.

As part of this, document the current baseline and how it relates to these risks.

Create a plan to mitigate these risks, which may involve getting in consultants who understand the regulatory environment.

Get your management to sign off on it.

Make sure there is a paper trail for all directed changes to the baseline.

If your current business won't sign off, it's time to start looking for another job. But, you will have learned more about how to put together a business case and you will have thoughtfully advised your employer.
Getting a Ph.D. for career reasons is like taking up drug addiction for creative writing reasons.
Source: I have a Ph.D.
Our version control uses a monorepo, with non-branching workflows, development against the head version, and frequent commits/pushes to production.

For Jupyter notebooks, cell results get emptied before saving, unless declared public. That is to ensure data confidentiality, not really to help version control.

Of course, standard diff gets confused with ipynbs. You need a tool like nbdime (notebook diff and merge).
Thanks, I appreciate the offer for help. If I get stuck again, you might hear from me =D

I think a lot of the problem probably depends on the work you're doing. I'm an engineer, usually I just want a GUI that shows me the information I need, I don't care much for design aesthetics beyond making sure it's not hideously ugly. Winforms was good for this, but it definitely looks dated and needed to be replaced or massively overhauled.

I can absolutely see how somebody doing more attractive design work would like WPF. It just makes me grouchy. Somebody else mentioned mixing blend into their workflow, maybe I'll take a look at that.
It's a false dichotomy and your constraint of "The constraint is that X is inevitable" I reject outright.

Invention/engineering/development... whatever you want to call it is in the end an act or series of acts.

You have the responsibility to act ethically. Abstracting or abdicating away your responsibility to act ethically is still unethical, no matter how may layers of "invention" or after the fact ethics you try and layer on top.

An easier example is the invention of nuclear weapons. The the grep bullshit is theoretical and hard to reason about.
It's still the hypervisor (Hyper-V in that case) that has to do the work to mitigate the vulnerability, not the browser. The browser just uses whatever APIs the hypervisor exposes to create a virtual machine.
This is great, but can this really be followed by companies that have shareholders and investors?
Funny, the first thing I remember doing in 1991 when I got on the internet on an actual z-19 terminal hooked up to an Ultrix machine ... arguing with holocaust revisionists and young earth creationists on Usenet.

I'd say the internet population in those days was higher IQ as it required literacy rather than instagram accounts, but it was if anything significantly less 'liberal' than it is now. More libertarian, really. It was also not run by authoritarian nincompoops at Google and Facebook.
Privilege isn't a sin, but it's a responsibility and a debt to be repaid
So, where is the evidence then? Like, actual evidence.

Not propaganda, which is what your links are really.

Real evidence. Something tangible, which leads to the conclusions being promoted by the propaganda. I'm yet to see any. Like, there is literally ZERO evidence preferred, every single time.
Not OP, but I can recommend the handy https://github.com/kynan/nbstripout which acts as a git filter which makes version control ignore cell outputs.

With that approach, though notebooks are clean they're still fairly poor for easily evaluating diffs between versions. If code review / diffs are more important than preserving the notebook, then you could use a post save hook to convert notebook input to a .py file and output to .html:

https://towardsdatascience.com/version-control-for-jupyter-n...
DUP https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17839329
For background on the quote: https://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/12/09/safe-harbor/
The Mill is far ahead of everybody else, and even vectorizes regular for loops. A most beautiful architecture, what it needs is an implementation, and get out of their bubble. Intel and the Mill are destined for each other, but they don't seem to know how to join forces.
I think you are missing the mark a bit. Ethics isn't first and foremost about deciding what should happen, it is about accounting for effects of your actions.

Emerging technology sometimes develops faster than accountability for said technology. That is true of Bitcoin, but also thing like oil and pesticides.

Nuclear is a pretty good example. Imagine if nuclear technology wouldn't have the history it has and instead we spent the time since it was invented solving its issues. Energy would probably cost far less than today, which means everything would. The result might be that our standard of living would have been double what it is today (which is hard to quantify, but this is a thought experiment).

So it might be alluring to be first, but in the grand scheme of things you are always paying the price in the end. The reason ethics is part of engineering isn't because it is fun, but because you get the best results.
Fortnite Installer downloads are vulnerable to hijacking
This is a narrative that you will believe in that can be analyzed and rejected purely on the internal logic of it.

You're 'othering' the police and the social system. If you get to know these people, listen to their stories, what they have to say about society's problems, as the people whose literal careers are to deal with them, the explanation of systemic failure rings more and more hollow.

But you have to actually go to these people and listen to their stories in order to understand. That takes work, but it's work made easier with Quora. But you don't need to, you can just look at the statements you're making and see that they're the products of narrative belief.