skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The Blockchain Talent Shortage May Be Nearing Its End
My own three things:

1. It's much easier to figure out something by looking at code samples, other people's code than reading documentation.

2. Clever one line code doesn't look very clever 3 to 6 months down the line and often leads to what was i thinking moments.

3. Perfectionism including premature optimisation is the progremer's biggest enemy.

Bonus: programming doesn't make you money, marketing it does.
I would love to get a lab manual to accompany Griffith's book on QM. I actually find it bizarre how little information there is, and I have looked. My gut tells me someone with an M.A. in physics, $5,000, and a lot of time could set up a hobby lab in her or his garage to validate everything through QED...

As for interpetation of QM, I don't think that's the problem since one can just set up an experiment based on prediction from the mathematical models. Sure, you will have make multiple runs to show the predicted distribution of the non-deterministic, umm, stuff, but that isn't a problem.
Since we don't have a way to apply "infinity" or infinitely big n to math equations/problems, isn't it more correct to say that we don't know if any of the equations we have will either fail or prevail?

We know that some functions don't converge but that's only because we can't try n infinite numbers. How are we certain that these non-convergent functions do not converge to some value and that math breaks at big scales (or smaller scales). =much like our universe=
I work with a lot of numerical code. Fortran's not going away any time soon.
In the bottom it says “Deep Space Center”. What would be the definition of deep space, considering we are no where close to doing anything with deep space for my definition besides observing it.
I think there is a ton of consensus on how the equations predict lab results, however, and I would be very happy with that.
It'll take some investment but I'd start by finding someone else that needs a code review and offer it to them first. From there you mention that you'd appreciate if they scratch your back as well.

You can probably find some open source projects where you can offer code reviews to other.
Luckily search engines don’t seem to value the content of mailing list. Or Usenet postings. I’m guessing certain types of content will become less prominent in the future if it’s not easily structured to whatever the current advertising medium.
I lot of software patterns have questionable validity to data science type coding
This is manifestly not the case, and there are a large number of studies showing why this is true (many linked elsewhere in this thread). Most people do not have a good understanding of the risks associated with ongoing medical testing/medical visits.

A hopefully not-too-inaccurate analogy might be if you heard a strange sound while driving your car, and took it into your mechanic, whose shop gets paid more the more tests they do and the more labor they put into fixing your potential non-problem, and they're potentially liable if anything later goes wrong that could be traced to that sound. Think about where the systemic incentives lie.
Side note but what is the music with the video? I liked it
The numbers mentioned (90% specificity) are for 100% sensitivity (not mentioned in post). These numbers are for patients taking ECG under controlled conditions. Continuous monitoring for AF under arbitrary conditions seems indeed problematic to me.
Absolutely, you teach others how to treat you with your actions -- but that applies more to new acquaintances than old friends you made before you were even really a person (i.e. childhood friends.) I'd say I like myself a little too much today, to a point of it nearing complacency. I think that group was just kind of negative and standing on each other, it happens.
Comcast Triumphs Over Rupert Murdoch’s 21st Century Fox in $40B USD Sky Deal
Length of pattern means very little without knowing the significance of each step. As the article shows, something contrived can be built out of a short pattern to look like a long pattern.
Uh, meanwhile in the professional world, this kind of behavior gets you fired. I heard Netflix has a five-seconds rule of eye contact, for crying out loud.
”the next course of action would be a more reliable diagnostic, specifically a proper 12-lead EKG interpreted by a qualified medical professional, perhaps followed by…”

I think you’re missing the argument made (fairly poorly, IMO) in this article: that preventive medicine often isn’t worth the money for society.

For relatively rare diseases, false positives typically outnumber true positives by a wide margin. If that’s the case for this Apple Watch, that means many users will needlessly be stressed thinking “I’ve a heart problem”, something that will cause some loss of QALY’s (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality-adjusted_life_year) and will trigger tests that will take resources that may better be spent elsewhere.

That’s for society, though. Richer I ndividuals may not care about the extra costs, and people doing lots of checkups may be less stressed about false positives.
They can afford to have trucks sitting idle rather than raise pay because the cost of capital is at historic lows. If the cost of capital were higher, the balance between capex and opex would favor labor more.

Much of the middle class hollowing effect could be helped by rather small changes in capital costs.
Bullshit, a contract is binding. The problem is that language is ambiguous. Code is rather not, although you need to run it to find out. Judges serve as interpreters.

The common moniker to9 not take a contract verbatim is not codified in law as such, I guess. And if it were, it would be ironically self defeating. I don't know US Law precisely, but Germany has BGB § 242 Leistung nach Treu und Glauben - liability by trust and obligation (with respect to the customs of trade).

Translating this title shows how deep the connection runs. "The spirit of the law" as you imply strikes me as something coined at least in roman times if not koine or older. The law is actually very strongly exploiting misunderstandings. The ruling theme is still that vulgar language is wrong, the obligation to interpret code is on the subjects and it is satisfied by the availability and ability of lawyers. The exploitation is giving the judicial branch an advantage that is unfair to the point that lawyers are likened to devils. The downside is that it gives lawyers (including judges) a hard time as well.

The problem with smart contracts remains the same, that limit on expressiveness extends to computer code, that cannot express questions of morality any better.
“Why does the site think it’s the year 19118?”
> Ever gone to the cinema and stayed to the end of a film you actually loathed 10 minutes in?

I think the author is assuming that what preceded will therefore follow. Hate the first 10min? The rest of the movie will be bad. Lose $100 gambling? You'll keep losing.

I think people evaluate more based on percentages and alternatives. What's else an I going to do if I leave the movie early? What are the odds of me enjoying that activity versus the chance the movie night turn around or the value I'll get from being able to knowledgeably talk about the film with friends.

Or, did I lose the money gambling from making bad bets or is it just the natural up and down? For example, if you sell a stock every time it goes down in value, you'll be pretty broke.

I think people choose to carry on with diminishing or unlikely returns if the likelihood and magnitude of the turnaround is sufficiently more attractive than stopping. That reasoning makes perfect sense as long as you're evaluating your options accurately.

I was always taught not to consider sunk costs in your decisions, just know where you stand in the present and think about what you want in the future. What happened in the past can't be undone.
Thanks for that recommendation, it sounds great! I just ordered it on Amazon, and also signed up for the MicroConf [1] mailing list.

[1] https://www.microconf.com
I can't help but notice that Greg Egan is commenting on the post!
You could call them illegal aliens.
You're absolutely right. We take people from other countries and put them in a facility on Cuba and deny them their rights. We treat our own citizens better, and enforce these same standards on China because we must Make America Great Again.

Here's Last Week Tonight's recent episode focusing on forced confessions in the US: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ET_b78GSBUs

HBO's miniseries "The Night Of" is a great look into the inner workings of the US justice system, and how it's designed to get people to take plea deals (aka forced confession): https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/tv/2016/07/10/the-night-...

The fact that you bring up these essentially sovereign nation internal issues as if they are fundamental transgressions against human rights (which maybe they are) while ignoring rights violations under your own nose, shows that your perspective on these issues is highly underdeveloped.

China has many problems, and I'm sure forced confessions are probably a larger problem over there than in the US, but for the most part their citizens don't need armchair observers to fight for their rights. They don't need proselytizers, evangelists, or colonists either.
I agree. I was immediately suspicious when the author identified himself as a "heart doctor". The correct term is cardiologist, as everyone knows. He should be communicating directly with the FDA, not blogging about his concerns to raise alarms.
Bad title. Title should be "Apple Mail GPG Tools ..." because this concerns Apple Mail's tools, not GPG itself.
Obvious what?
> not a lot of value is in the UI (except for ads of course)

Almost all the value is in the UI. For the user, it's the place where they interact with the system, and in software tools, UI design can make orders of magnitude of difference in value delivered to the user[0]. For the vendor, the UI is where they shove ads at people, track them, and lock them into the product.

The problem is that Internet companies today no longer operate under "earn money by delivering value" model. They operate under "extract as much value as possible from the customer", which means any value delivered is incidental. Examples of those two models in action:

- "earn money by delivering value" - customizable interface with power-user features, and/or good API allowing users to interact with the product from third-party UIs and scripts; users pay for the product/service

- "extract value from user" - dumbed down, shiny interface, no power-user featuers; locked down SaaS little to no API access; sometimes paid, but more likely free in order to maximize user growth, which leads directly to the company being acquihired, product being shut down, and users being left in the cold

(Yes, I'm pretty bitter about the state of things, and I generally refuse to use most SaaS products because of the dominant approach of such companies.)

--

[0] - as a real-world example, consider software for managing products in ecommerce. Take away batch-processing capabilities, and your user's productivity will drop hundredfold. Which directly translates to a) frustration, and b) the need to hire more people for the same task.
The cost has always sunk. The fallacy is assigning it value.

In the broadest sense the fallacy is about not wanting to waste past effort. Whereas in reality 'wasting' past effort doesn't cost anything but wasting future effort does.

Now it can be hard to tell to what extent your past effort actually brought your goal closer, so it can be hard to judge if continuing effort may or may not be worth it, but if you're arguing it is worth continuing because you don't want to waste past effort, and not because the goal is worth the remaining effort required, then the reasoning is fallacious.
Maybe you will find some introductory stuff on quantum optics interesting. Check Nicolas Gisin's book "Quantum Chance".

A few articles about the experimental violation of Bell’s inequalities:

https://static.scientificamerican.com/sciam/assets/media/pdf...
https://qudev.phys.ethz.ch/phys4/studentspresentations/epr/a...
http://drchinese.com/David/Aspect.pdf
http://www.rpi.edu/dept/phys/Courses/PHYS4510/AspectNature.p...
Exactly. And what's funny is that people seem to think that physicians make accurate judgements all the time and don't make mistakes. And that there are not a host of gray areas which are taken into consideration.

Maybe a similar example is with a dog bite. If you say 'no it was my dog and they are not rabid' then doctor says 'ok no rabies shot needed'. If you say 'it's a wild dog (or friends dog)' and you don't know if it's rabid doctor thinks 'rabies shot needed'. Even if the actual chance of rabies (in your friends dog) is quite small (if the friend doesn't know if the dog has shots I mean).

More info is not only not always helpful but comes with risks as well. If not we would monitor things more frequently than we do and the simple scale would lower the cost.
Code does not exist in a vacuum. There are two flavors of this. Many get the first part well before twenty years: all code exists to serve someone else's need. It might be another programmer at the next layer in the stack, all the way up to making a profit, furthering scientific discovery, or serving national security. You can not write good code without understanding why that code exists in the first place. But, as I said, most people get that before twenty years.

The other way code doesn't live in a vacuum, which I've seen too many people fail to understand for far too long, is that code is the tip of your personal pyramid. The foundations of that are your mental health, your physical health, your family and friends, your professional connections, your civic connections, etc. If you don't look after those things, it will affect what code you write and how efficiently you write it, or possibly whether you can keep coding at all. Think about what it means to be doing this for 20+ years, from young adulthood through having a family and even to the empty-nest period. Don't burn your bridges or burn yourself out in five years. Learn to do what you do sustainably over the long haul.
An Inside Look into Adobe’s AI Effort
The more tools built around youtube-dl to make it usable by your grandma, the more likely it gets shut down, like Popcorn Time.
All programming concepts are fads, except for legacy.
AI and Machine Learning Are Redefining the War for Talent
I suppose this doctor will prescribe you to not use all new medical tools available in case they might find something.
I don't understand the logic. Having mass adoption tools to check your health is the future. This will never be 100% accurate, but like medicine and doctors will never be.
I rate Firefox pretty highly since Quantum released. It's fast, polished and in my unscientific testing, consumes less resources.
Reinventing the duct tape and the birth open-source code
Well, introduction of open borders is also fairly recent, don't you think that might have more impact on the within-eu migration than shared currency?
Long into the evening multople days while you are increasingly sleep deprived.

As staying long in one company - imo depends on company.
Having a local, searchable version of some channels would be great, especially if it can be configured to download new videos automatically. Some channels are notorious for having videos deleted (e.g. commentary channels that have to fight with contentid or educational channels that have videos involving gunpowder or uranium). Manually backing them up and organizing the videos is very cumbersome.
One thing I will try doing soon is to look for job postings of companies, and then look what those companies are looking for, and what domain they're in.
The theory is: maybe I can get product ideas 1) as spin-offs from their general mission, or 2) maybe I'd be able to replace their job posting with a product.
So you have decided what rights you believe as fundamental, but through no arguable basis. Unfortunately for you, the rest of society (as evinced by copyright laws) have decided that the of opportunities to make a sale are fundamental. There is no such thing as a fundamental right - they only exist because a certain group of people decides to abide by them and will fight to the death to mail Tain them
Semi off-topic, for a more in depth treatment I recommend "Mathematics of Classical and Quantum Physics" by Byron and Fuller.

It's a graduate level text, so probably somewhat dense if you haven't been exposed to the material in some way before, but as a mostly refresher I found it very good.

And, it's a Dover book, so it's very cheap.
Does making a joke about something imply that there aren't “real” things to be said about it?

To put it differently: here, Knuth heard a popular song that seems to be just “That's the way uh huh uh huh I like it uh huh uh huh” repeated endlessly, found it funny, and wrote an elaborate joke culminating in that observation, hewing to the style of CS publications. Why does that make you sad? It's not as if someone's bit of humour has prevented others from saying “real things”.
I agree that commercially SQL was winning by the time postgres got started, but I think it was not yet obvious there was room for only one query language. I also suspect that the early implementation shared a lot of Ingres code as the focus was on the "post-relational" topics. Building SQL would have been a distraction. Perhaps also Stonebraker did not want to Osborne Effect Ingres. I'm sure even early Oracle marketing would have had fun with "even the founder of Ingres agrees QUEL is obsolete". Finally there was a lot to like in QUEL and SQL has quite a few warts.

Thanks for the link. Fast path was mostly about the function manager and only incidentally about data access. As in, "if you call all these functions that are part of the infrastructure, you can get at data". But that's not really a navigational interface (get first of set), more a side effect of exposing the internals via the function manager.

I started at Sybase in 1988, there were a lot Britton Lee alums, who had also worked on the ingres project as well. I ran in the the rest at Illustra in the 90s.
The cost to a false positive in terms of stress alone should not be underestimated.
1) Go and interact with people/companies in "unsexy" industries. The stuff cool silicon valley companies don't want to touch (shipping, waste removal, small manufacturing, etc). They have shit ton's of small problems that they would gratefully hand over spare change for the problem to go away.

2) Find Entrepreneurs that have had a couple of hits, and don't have the time or resources for small things. They'll more than likely just give you the idea.

3) Pick up freelance gigs and get an agreement that give you rights to the underlying code. (I.E. the unique combination of elements belongs to the client.) If you do enough of this you will start to find efficiencies. You will start finding ideas all over the place when you see how other people work.

4) Read a lot. But about niche things.

5) Read blog articles by Venture Capitalists/ Angels. don't work for them... but built the stuff that they want built.

Also... Please build a themeforest for Bulma. I haven't had time to do it and I hate working in Bootstrap.
If you are not going to act on the information, then the extra expense of the exam is wasted.

If you are going to act on the information, then you must weight the benefit of early detection against the damage caused by unnecessary exams and treatment when there are false positives.

False positives are specially problematic when screening a large number of healthy people.
Why do you say that something written and intended as a joke “should not” be a tongue-in-cheek joke?
The issue is not whether it would be of benefit to someone like you. The issue is if having that feature as well as the downside risk to people who are in the general public and don't have a particular risk factor or need. Also it's not an option it's built in the core product. As such it will alarm people that have no reason to be using it in the first place even if it ends up alerting and saving some people in the process.

Is it worth it to give 1000 people anxiety, tests, medication in order to provide benefit to 10 people or even 100? (those numbers are made up to illustrate and are fictitious).
How do we know that the universe isn't sitting on the back of a giant turtle?

Most of the math that we use is self-consistent, and our proof system is, as far as we can tell, relatively consistent with the known properties of the universe.

What I'm getting at is that no, we don't actually KNOW with 100% certainty that, for example, certain proven divergent series continue to diverge at infinity, if your standard for proof requires trial of an infinite span of numbers; but such speculation is so far out of the realm of what is known and "proven" according to our [mostly] self and externally consistent set of knowledge[1] that it is more or less in the realm of pseudoscience/metaphysics.

1. Excluding the Incompleteness Theorem
this mass blocking has not seemingly been the norm for newspapers or other businesses in other markets outside the EU, or noticeably stopped any businesses within it from running websites.

Of course people within the EU will continue to run websites under GDPR, they have no choice. Further, the reality is that enforcement will be squarely focused on importing cash from mid-to-large sized foreign companies. The anti-competitive goals of GDPR will not be achieved by fining EU companies to death - they'll be achieved by hobbling foreign competitors.

As for companies in other industries, I suspect that you're noticing a large number of US newspaper sites are blocking because they have a larger contingent of international visitors than most US sites do, and each one of those visitors could subject them to the enormous, arbitrary penalties included in the GDPR. Massive companies like Facebook and Google can afford to comply and deal with the numerous legal uncertainties associated with it (and have to because they receive a large percentage of their traffic from the EU).
But for mid-tier media companies, compliance is an enormous expense, yet they are large enough that they would be an enforcement target. So they did the financially responsible thing: block the EU.

Finally, most smaller websites won't bother with blocking or complying, because they believe they will not be enforcement targets. This may or may not be the correct position to take; only time will tell.
The way I read it, applying something with a nonnegligible false positive rate to a much larger population (that is, screening everyone without indications) will lead to many incorrect diagnoses because your error rate is multiplied by a large healthy population. Whereas applying diagnostic tests only to people with suspected a-fib gives you a smaller group with a higher base rate of what you're looking for, so false positives are not as much of a problem.
Yes, doctors and health organizations routinely advise patients not to get more tests than they need. A PSA test is cheap and easy to administer but the consensus is that risk of false positives (among other reasons) outweighs the benefits of finding prostate cancer among young men at low risk.
I find NewPipe's built-in downloading functionality more convenient - although it only works for YouTube videos of course.
Like/dislike of a person isn't a binary value. I can think of several people who are very dear to me, yet who have some aspect of their character I find terrible to live or work with. Do I like them? Yes, absolutely. Do I want them to change that aspect? Yes, absolutely!

Working to overcome your own arrogance isn't primarily about fixing a technical work-related problem, it's about treating people the way you'd want to be treated.