skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If its cheaper because you found some way to circumvent labour laws and pit all the Joe average's against each other in a race to the bottom (like most of the "sharing economy" disruption does): Because it does not make the world a better place.

I mean should my window cleaning really be 5 bucks cheaper if that means the guy/gal doing it is not insured if he/she falls of the ladder and can never work again? If you let people choose to take those kinds of risk there will always be some people doing it. Undercutting the people who don't want to take these risk but get forced because they need to be competitive.

That's why we had those kind of labour laws in the first place. Because we thought while being allowed to compete everyone should have certain basic rights which should never be compromised.
Lead by example. By showing this others might imitate, even though the etiquette might be different awareness of that fact should not be assumed.
This a fire dept wanting people outside of taxable area to pay for it's data usage and calling it "Net Neutrality" for news coverage.

Sighs. So much fail.
I would be totally on board with these changes if an alternative way of doing things had been offered.

From the philosophical point of view they are exactly what is needed to allow Elm give as much guarantees as possible.

The sad reality is that very little pragmatism went into this release and now stuff like web-sockets won't work [1].
This is very surprising because web-sockets are an use case where the Elm-architecture really shines.

Things like this reinforces my idea that while Elm is a very nice language I wouldn't want to have it in production, or even in a side project, at least till it reaches 1.0 and becomes more stable.

[1] https://github.com/elm-lang/websocket/issues/27
I would take this advice seriously if Fedora didn't ship a latest kernel that regressed the e1000 driver to the point where my card didn't work.

The latest and LTS kernels are both a tyre fire of routine, often serious regressions.
Is disposal really a concern when we're facing the collapse of entire continent-sized ecosystems?

Compared to runaway global warming, even widespread radiation poisoning seems trivial. And such poisoning is both hypothetical and extremely unlikely to be widespread.
I don't know anything about that report but it is also the same promise people have been hearing over and over for decades. Even if it is something that will actually help, how many people are going to believe it? How many have heard of any details about such a plan and would be able to recognize it's merit over all the bullshit they are usually fed? Im not saying its impossible, but most people do not have the interest level or knowledge to delve in at a deeper level with their own research to back up their political or economic ideas. They expect field experts to distill the information down for them and hear it through news and media.
Why would I jump through all these hoops when I can just find a text based article on the subject?
Restartable Sequences With the Polysemic Null Segment Selector
I'm very disappointed that in France, it's illegal to take things out of a déchetterie (scrapyard). They have fences and video cameras, and report offenders to the police.

The policies are actively hostile to repairing and reusing old products, e.g. computers, printers.
Impossible to listen to. I can’t stand it. Their series on the Supreme Court, More Perfect, is slightly better and just manageable. But I couldn’t finish one episode of their flagship show.

I’m relieved to hear I’m not the only one, to be honest. I thought I was going mad. Or worse: old.
An Illustrated Old English Herbal (2017)
Yeah, and what predictive power that metric has is basically unknown.
Even though wealth has been concentrating in corporate stocks for the past century or so, a lot of things have changed since then so we can't guarantee that this trend will continue. Access to easy money has made corporations extremely innefficient and wasteful. Also people have already started to complain about centralization so already there are social forces that are starting to push back against the corporate trend.
Yes there’s no concept of cell dependency in Jupyter. Often find myself just re-running the entire notebook!
Funny, in the first illustration in the article the Ripper looks like a Bloodborne character... top hat and sword cane.

Now this was an EA project, so it would have been design-by-commitee visceral horror with in app purchases. I don't think we're missing anything here.
I’ve read it had died off in the past and recovered afterwards. This had happened 5 times in the past 30000 years, From that it would logically follow that recovery is possible, just not for these particular specimens. Additionally, it’s hard to tell if the current bleaching is as fatal as everyone here seems to assume. FWIW scientists seem to think the situation is grave, but not as grave and hopeless as the mass media portrays it: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/scientists-pronounce-great.... Of course the more balanced view doesn’t drive the clicks quite as well.
I'd argue that the biggest cons for centralization are:

* lack of ownership

* lack of privacy

* lack of resilience[1]

* lack of self-determination

In my opinion, these are the factors that will make decentralization win out in some niches for the average user.

[1] You might laugh at this given the 99.99etc.% uptime most cloud services advertise—and yet I still can't use my Google Docs when I'm passing through a tunnel.
Isn't that just supporting/opposing the candidate by proxy? If a corporation creates a PAC favoring issue X which airs ad/buys social media exposure supporting the candidate who favors issue X, they have in-effect bought airtime for candidate X without any direct contribution to him/her. In this day and age, that kind of exposure is as good as paying the candidate.
Minor quibble: a lot of businesses go bust unable to pay redundancy and there are very rarely consequences for directors unless reckless trading can be proven. That at least is my experience in Ireland and UK.
Who are Data Scientists' heros?
Seriously.

In AI, it's Hinton, Le Cun, Bengio.

In systems, it's D Richie, J Dean, Berners-Lee, Torvalds.

In distributed systems, it's Lampord, Chandy, J Dean.

In programming languages, it's D Richie, Gosling, Dijkstra, Knuth, Milner, etc.

Who are data scientists' heros or role models?
Stats would be nice... It's easy to remember a few top executives being prosecuted over 50 years, and hard to remember historical cases from the past 10 years.. because they are not historical yet.
The title is a lie.

Those who borrowed did so hoping eventually everyone will be bailed out by the government.

Those who lent did so because they too know they would be bailed out.

And education institutions encouraged it because it keeps the bubble going.
went from AZERTY to QWERTY, and took me about 2 weeks to get entirely used to it
In theory, its just that all data should be treated equally, but in practice its whatever you want it to mean (as long you’re talking about ISPs).

Like this case.
Tutanotas encrypted email app is now on F-Droid
Exactly. Supermarket have added a lot of plastic packaging supposedly for our 'convenience', like adding separator sheets between slices of cheese, or strawberries in a plastic container instead of the cardboard they used to be packaged with (so you can judge the quality better?).

Or the convenience of the cashier, so they can see you packed the right vegetables in the sack.

And probably they use plastics instead of paper because its cheaper, and they can scrape a penny off the price.

A lot of the power on what packaging is used is still in the consumer's hands, though. Just don't buy those cookies that are individually wrapped.
The article seems to want to reduce the root cause of the phenomenon to economic incentives.

I believe that's only a part of the equation: a number of students are starting to realize that the quality of what is being taught in US college humanities department is so bad and so politicized to the left that they're better off picking other subjects.

In other words, it's not just about bad economic value, it's about bad value overall.
I don't feel guilty. But I wouldn't feel happy.
> We can't make that discrimination legal

> an ultimately racial intent.

I reject your assertion that by studying data, data scientists or analysts are somehow complicit in discrimination or any -ism. Their job is to make business decisions based on data, WITHOUT relying on "gut feel" or other human biases. I also reject the expectation that data scientists have an obligation (or the ability) to "fix" whatever biases may be revealed by the data.

> p-hacking

Again, you are making assumptions that data scientists are somehow evil, engaging in shady or illegal tactics to promote discrimination rather than simply doing their job in a straightforward manner. P-hacking is often done by individual researchers looking to get a study published in a scholarly journal (as opposed to months/years or research failing to reach a statistically-valid conclusion), rarely by companies who are looking to make profitable decisions based on what the data is indicating.
Isn't it unrealistic to assume that 150 years of emissions can be reverted? At this point it's more about slowing down the global warming rather than reverting it.
> I got to live in Iowa in the summer of 2007 [...] One bonus of that was getting to go to all the rallies.

Unrelated to Mr McCain, but living in California during the Clinton/Trump election, this struck me as extremely odd.

With California being essentially pre-decided due to the majority vote system, I saw zero campaign ads. Except for the news papers, the election simply didn't happen in California.
What a weird system, where huge parts of the population get no representation.
I spoke for me. I never told anybody else is a crook. But, "invest in the stock market and pretend to be happy" doesn't work for me
> I have a lot of money and none of what you mention afflicts me.

Sure. Some people are afraid of public speaking. But some people on the other hand, can't wait to get in front of people. But I think it wouldn't be too off to say people are generally afraid of public speaking.

So generally, the more you have to lose, the more you will worry. Simple. If you want to refute that, argue logically why it might not be the case, instead of just "I am rich, and you are wrong". Please.
You also have this laws in part because there was a USSR. Average Joe could turn into communist if his life was too miserable.
Yes, Thorium is not much better in terms of resistance to proliferation, but I think the reality is that threat of commercial reactors being used for for weapons making is pretty small. That's not how nations made their weapons arsenals.

One point, that is often ignored, about Uranium 232 is that it is super easy to find. Meaning its incredibly easy for the IAEA to say that something containing Uranium 232 was used anywhere or to validate that it did not leave the reactor site.

That said, a lesser known program after the Molten Salt Breeder Experiment at Oak Ridge National Laboratory was the Denatured Molten Salt Reactor, that was specifically designed to be more proliferation resistant (they hope proliferation resistant research would keep their program alive, and it did for a little bit).

This work actually lives on and the company furthers ahead in building a Molten Salt Reactor (Uranium) is the Canada based Terrestrial Energy. They are building the Integrated Molten Salt Reactor.

In both designs you avoid some of these problems you have if you do separation, but rather you just switch to a burner design and burn it all in one big reactor, no piping, no chemical plants and so on.

The problem is once you go to a burner, the primary reason why Thorium is an interesting fuel cycle (>2 neutron fission rate) is lost in a burner. That means the extra work to prove that Thorium is safe is just more work that you have to prove safe to the regulator. Pretty much all Molten Salt companies, even when they have met at a Thorium conference (as Terrestrial Energy did), switch to Uranium because of this issue.

For those interested, here are some of the presentations about the current companies working on Molten Salt Reactors:

- Stable Molten Salt Reactor (https://youtu.be/TvXcoSdXYlk?t=2m40s)

- Integrated Molten Salt Reactor (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgTgV3Kq49U)

- Longer term Liquid fluoride thorium reactor (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3lcIvS7cO0)
Tiny spacecraft are breaking out of Earth’s orbit – Science – AAAS
That's why you should buy a fund/ETF tracking the All Country World Index.
Self-driving cars face a long road to becoming transportation’s future
I think I listened to a reasonably recent one when the Furby source code was released recently. Podcasts are one of my favorite ways to relax and I still found it jarring.
The difference is most large corporations that are perceived as the largest problem all have their own legal teams, the average citizen does not and most couldn't afford a decent lawyer if they wanted. The cops win half the time just because they have a legal team and the other side doesn't and can't afford to hire one. If the average person had their own legal council then I don't think civil forfeiture would even be a problem, nobody would dare use it except in ironclad circumstances.

Big business will have no problems shrugging off any legal fuckery mainly because the other side knows how much harder any conviction would be.
TSK'dan Malazgirt ve Zafer Bayramı'na özel klip
I never said investors are crooks. I said that I wouldn't be satisfied by just doing stock market investing, even though that leads to more money. I want to do something that has a minimum of meaning. And i'd probably take a basic but meaningful job (plumber?) If it brought me enough money.
Ask HN: Best food to try in Tokyo
After reading the recent thread about ramen, I'm curious if there are any other must try recommendations?
This tool appears to download everything needed for your board as well.
> The fixed nature of a centralized system is also a huge limitation. Projects like SETI@Home and Folding@Home illustrate that thousands of lower powered distributed nodes are better for computation than a single centrally managed super computer. While the computation power of super computers grows rapidly over time so too does the computation power of your average home computer.

There's very few problems that are embarrassingly parallel like this which is why the examples you gave are almost 20 years old. Most of the time you're bottlenecked on sharing state.

> There is also an economic qualifier for distribution too. Computational resources cost money in both hardware and electricity. When computational tasks are distributed so too are the expenses of computation.

Compute is already pretty cheap and getting cheaper.

> There is also a security/availability benefit to distributed systems. Centralized systems are a single point of failure. Distributed systems, at least in the public space, are diverse in their hardware and software which allows the system immunization from many forms of attacks. A centralized system can be isolated from the world by a DDOS attack, but it is substantially hard to attack a distributed system in this way.

I would say the diversity of hardware and software creates more surface area for attacks, not less.

I would also argue that distributed systems are way harder to design for privacy and security. For example, it's basically impossible to revoke access to something after it's granted in a distributed system unless you want users to run their own nodes 24/7 (which introduces availability problems).
The biggest errors I've seen is where people buy COTS for their core business. Which is usually a mistake is IT is a main driver for your business in some special circumstance.

Also if you do go COTS and don't do the business change to fit the product. Trying to make COTS work your way is always so so so bad.
"Skim reading is the new normal" says the 10k word article.

"screen reading is the problem" says the internet article.
I would use for anything I put on a RPi: a DNS server, a MQTT backend, some light backends for a web app (I need to connect to some light services and prices their output into a JSON), a monitoring service,...
80% of time is spent on getting and cleaning the data, 20% of time is spent preparing and delivering reports and presentations.

The super-cool ML stuff that attracts people to the field in the first place, accounts for little more than a rounding error in how the time is really spent
Generally because of much wider device driver support
Shit Son, that was real.

I have always thought that recycling is a scam. That it really only makes sense for things like glass and some metals. But everyone is caught up in the feel goodness and if you don't you're some kind of animal.

I say put everything in the landfill, we will one day harvest it and all that resource will be in one place!
It depends on the phase your business is in. For the beginning using standardized stuff that you buy ready made can be a real time saver, and time is usually in short supply. Once you achieve a certain scale and you can afford to do it you can usually save substantially and scale up further by doing something more customized.

Starting off with a complete custom set-up for your core is another opportunity for premature optimization to creep in.
We have the cycles to burn, which causes waste to approximately eat up all excess cycles. This has been observed since the 80's, so there is not much new here. Computer programs tend to fill up all available memory, use all available cycles and eat up all available storage no matter how far Moore's law has helped us come.
You could have asked the same question in 1700: What will the state do with its inhabitants when they no longer work the fields or make wool? The answer is “something else”. The economy adapts, and unimaginable professions and social structures appear. I would be amazed if anyone in 1700 thought that programmer could be a profession.

And maybe we don't need as many as 6 billion people on earth, maybe one billion will do (the slow population growth in industrialized countries indicates that depopulation is possible). But the need for them won't disappear overnight; we are nowhere near artificial general intelligence, no matter what Ray Kurzweil tells you.
Ask HN: How do you put machine learning “models” into production
TL;DR :

Compute the gradient of the error on the user's device and ship that to a server-side centralized model to update its weights.

It's a very cool idea that has a lot of interesting applications (among which: learning large statistical user behaviors without "spying" on them).

However, there is an unspoken claim that the gradient update doesn't carry enough information about the user data to reconstruct any of it server-side.

I'm still waiting to see a formal proof of that, and my gut says, if the servers sees enough gradient updates from a given user, it's likely possible to rebuild the original data.
It's not about spite.

It's about whether rules matter. If people think the rules will be enforced, then we can all make plans based on the rules. If they don't, then all courses of action are on the table. Whatever gets the job done. That's back to rule of the strong.

See: how we treat big banks.

(Not to say we shouldn't have a debt jubilee, but that's what we risk)
> according to the standard zero hour contract, both employer and employee can decline work offered/accepted, but who do you think has power in this relationship?

In my particular case, I was still eligible to unemployment subsidy, if my monthly earnings were lower than that of unemployment benefit, but it came with a condition. Even though I was allowed to decline offered work, I would forfeit my unemployment subsidy for three months each time I declined it. This of course was a condition of the unemployment office, not the company, but the company knew about it, so yes, the company indeed had power over those who needed at least the minimum living allowance.

We actually had a homeless guy working there for a while, until they found out he was homeless.
BEAKL – Theory and observations to find the optimal keyboard layout (2017)
Izh based on Moskvich 412. Which is derivative of Opel Kadett B.
We focused on behavioral data. We realized that a solid plan for the the money and how is it lay out, does correlate with a low default rate. We think this is a good way to avoid (or at least minimize) those kinds of proxies you mention.
I hate OVH (despite my patriotic conscience which yells "achetez français" :)) for what they did with the bandwidth to hubic services. It was close to zero, completely unusable.

Their customer service completely sucks, to the point they told me that they do need me.

I kepy this in mind when signing up for a huge cloud contract where I told them straight that the way they treat their customers shows. They could have told me many things but not "fuck off, go somewhere else". This cost them a lot of money but they did not learn anything when I recontacted them again from my personal account and the customer service was still the same (of course I could have used the contacts I had there but I wanted to see if the situation impoved).
Sebastian Thrun: ‘The costs of the air taxi system could be less than an Uber’
It daunts me too, and reminds me of the early-days of commercial flight. I hope we'll have a similar "we cannot continue like this moment".

However, I don't think shaming is what this is about though. To me it seems the objective is to learn from mistakes, and for that we need to be honest about what happened, and it is going to be pretty hard to be honest if we tip-toe around who did what and why.

I also agree that complexity is a problem. But I don't think acknowledging this gives us any path forwards. I don't think going back to the 'good old days' is going to be a solution. I therefore see this leaning process as helping us figure out how to move forwards, and to provide a motivation to the industry as a whole. It is this industry-wide motivation that will be needed to address some of the systematic complexity issues.

I don't think this would be enough on its own (and implementation is a whole other question), but I think it could be a step in the right direction.
Anything that is limited in observability. Either because the available sample size is too small, the time or ability to observe something is limited.

A bit of a stretch, but I'm also skeptical of the ability of the scientific method to be able to understand/prove anything with (hidden) state/memory.

For a lot of 'skeptics' unproven means wrong and unmeasurable means wrong.
There's something remarkably tone-deaf about ret-conning real murders of actual women (even to the extent of using their actual fucking names) as Pretty Awesome because they are actually vampires. I'm surprised that this concept got as far as it did.

"Many didn’t see an issue with using the real names of the murder victims, however. The agreement within the team was that if they could not develop an experience that was respectful of the history and the victims involved, then they wouldn’t do it."

Yes, I'm sure that turning a sexually-oriented thrill killing spree of powerless women into an interactive entertainment product was right on the verge of being "respectful". Maybe the scenes where you rip out the uteruses (uterii?) of the victims could be done in tasteful period-appropriate sepia?
"Eating out in Japan is generally a nightmare"

My experience has been the exact opposite. Japan is (with Singapore) one of the best place on the planet to eat out.

You might want to mention what kind of dietary restrictions you're subjecting yourself to before making such broad claims.