skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My sibling comments miss something important: people actually do something for those 5+ years. They don't just sit on their hands. They're publishing papers, collaborating with respected researchers, building a personal network/reputation, developing new tools and techniques, writing peer reviews, contributing to grant proposals, giving talks, teaching, etc.

I.e., they are actually doing the exact job that they are now being hired to do.

> Is it the ability to conduct research - methods, process, analysis, discipline? Or is it the fact that they have knowledge in that particular field?

When you apply to R&D labs, you are competing against people who spent at least five years:

* building research infrastructure (which includes, but is not limited to, knowledge about "methods, process, analysis, discipline"),

* a concrete track record of producing publishable research,

* a professional network and some amount of respect for you previous research output, and

* experience designing a multi-year research project (from writing/helping write a convincing proposal all the way through publishing, evangelizing, and managing relationships with people who want to build on your work).

Do you have 5+ first author publications in good conferences? Have you contributed to R&D software? Do you have multiple influential collaborators who have a high opinion of you and are likely to help popularize/contribute to/build upon your research goals? Have you written and followed through on grant proposals?

If "yes" to all those things, you should apply for these research positions! Even without a phd, you are a good candidate.

If all you have is a six month MOOC, or some R&D software development but no experience with the full research process, then sorry, but there are people with who have already demonstrated they can successfully design and execute on research agendas. You might still be a good candidate, but preferring strictly more experienced and better qualified candidates who have demonstrated, empirically, that they can perform the full job, is not an "arbitrary blockade".

> Every time I speak to someone with a PhD at work (I work in top 10 tech companies in US), in 100% of the cases in my experience do not engage in anything related to their thesis.

"people I have worked with" is a huge selection bias.

IME, in CS this is almost always either a) not true, or b) a conscious choice on the part of the phd holder (and is more of a pivot than a "totally unrelated thing"; you just might not see that there's a deep connection between the thing that the person was doing before and what they're doing now).
This is actually how I decide whether someone is worth paying to do something for me.
Of course you can assign moral blame however you please, but the relevant "policy" question (in both the gun case and the slack case) is empirical.

You absolutely can but if there's something about my post that insinuates any sort of 'moral' blame that a comparison to the "Guns don't kill people" trope (there's probably a better word for this) is warranted, then I've massively failed to express my intent clearly. Allow me to unpack this a bit for clarity.

The logical framework for "Slack doesn't disrupt your productivity, you allow your productivity to be disrupted" is certainly there, but that's about where the comparison begins and ends to the "Guns don't kill people" argument.

What I instead mean is tools like Slack and other real-time persistent chat apps definitely exacerbate FOMO and the need to reply, respond or react in someway to a notification. Their express function is to notify, to that end they're doing what we effectively ask them to do by using them in our workplaces. Note: I'm speaking rather broadly here, I'm quite aware you very rarely have a choice in the matter when joining a new company what chat service you're stuck with using.

But as I mentioned in another comment, they have this capacity about as much as a hammer has the capacity to injure a user trying to drive nails and hang a picture.

My curiosity of how we effectively 'blame' (pretend I'm speaking with a velvet glove here when I say blame I mean it as positively and delicately as possible) Slack for breaking our concentration is with the hammer analogy in mind. Certainly it has the capacity to disrupt but just like one would probably hold and use a hammer delicately enough to avoid harming themselves but deliberately enough to drive a nail, our comms stacks can easily be wielded just as well.

(That was a bunch of words up there above, but let me raise my hand right now and admit that I am absolutely guilty of checking every notification I see come in and breaking my own flow, it's why I even hold this position).
I watched the video. My Nissan has lane-keeping and it does exactly the same thing as in this video. My impression is it's because it follows the left lane line when it's not sure.
Maybe. Assuming it's a research-focussed MA. Still, the problem is that research needs to be on something, and so they do also need to acquire knowledge at the same time (otherwise they're likely to be a glorified lab tech), so the things an MA can generally tackle are different from those a PhD can tackle.

That said, our department sends MAs into industry as well. Further our department as well as our University has been promoting undergraduates getting hands-on experience in doing research.
> a Poisson process is a memoryless process that assumes the probability of an arrival is entirely independent of the time since the previous arrival. In reality, a well-run bus system will have schedules deliberately structured to avoid this kind of behavior: buses don't begin their routes at random times throughout the day, but rather begin their routes on a schedule chosen to best serve the transit-riding public.

I've never really understood any example involving a poisson process. They always seem to involve bus arrivals or light bulbs burning out, and I can't understand why the memory less property would ever make any sense for these.

Even if the bus system was poorly run, why would it make sense to assume that the expected value of time to arrival doesn't change based on how long you've been waiting?

What is an actual phenomenon that is well modeled by a poisson process?
When I enter something, I want to see what's relevant to me, not what other people searched for. As such, it makes sense to not suggest anything when I type in 'Muslims are', as Google doesn't know what I want to see yet; it could decide that once I started typing in more strings on the next word. It'd make more sense to me if, instead of completing search queries, it just completed individual words in the queries.
I agree with your point on kitchen sharing, but I'm wondering if we sharing an incorre assumption:

should we expect that the laws will be followed?
Policing unlicensed taxis _should_ have prevented Uber from succeeding. I recall early Uber being a considered "ride-sharing" in attempt to avoid this problem.

How will unlicensed restaurants be enforced? Will people simply call the practice food-sharing or splitting-meals? Start from the same model: two friends living across the city but one didn't cook, the other makes large meals. Uber meals is just a delivery service. Combine with money transfer app: it's not a restaurant, is a group of friends pitching in for a good meal.

Uber successfully managed to get driver's to assume the risk when running unlicensed taxis. It wouldn't surprise me if they could reimagine that success here. The biggest hurdle I foresee: keeping the branding, and scale small enough to fly under the radar until it's well established
Curious, Is the adoptjdk or openjdk not an option for some reason?
It's an interesting acceptable use policy [1]. Interpreted literally, it is breathtakingly broad to the point that it is hard to imagine a useful site that does not violate it.

There are three categories of things that you are not to post, transmit, re-transmit or store on or through any of their products.

1. Material that is "in violation of any local, state, federal or non-United States law or regulation".

2. Material that is "threatening, obscene, indecent, defamatory or that otherwise could adversely affect any individual, group or entity".

3. Material that "violates the rights of any person, including rights protected by copyright, trade secret, patent or other intellectual property or similar laws or regulations including, but not limited to, the installation or distribution of “pirated” or other software products that are not appropriately licensed for use by Customer".

[1] https://www.joyent.com/about/policies/cloud-hosting-acceptab...
It's not hard, if you use paper ballots and well-established protocols for securing elections.

On the other hand, if you use electronic machines without paper backup, it's basically impossible.
1894. The main character of H.G. Wells' "The Time Machine" was simply referred to as "The Time Traveller".

(Source http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/292042 -- may be pay walled)
> When one types a query, why should a search engine model search success based on what everyone else in the world searches up? Doesn't it matter more that Google finds what that person wants?

That's exactly what I want, at least. It'd make much more sense for them to just work on autocompleting individual words instead of queries. That way it's useful to the person who's searching and it doesn't matter what everyone else searched.
I'm pretty much convinced that the greatest threat to true freedom is pervasive monitoring. It is impossible to resist any powerful force when they know everything you say and do. They can simply undermine any activity.
I realized this when my buddies were telling me about their work on facial recognition for WalMart stores. And then read about how WalMart finds reasons to fire everybody who had contact with union organizers. That is just the tip of the iceburg, as the powerful will get better and better at both monitoring and control - without our awareness that we are being controlled.
Show HN: Read HackerNews Later (PWA)
> Well, it may be for you. I've been biking for 15 years and it really is an issue for me. I don't want pedestrians, cars or fast objects on bike lane. If there are a lot of bikes on the bike lane and convoy goes at 30 kph that's perfectly fine, I go 30 too. But if people go 25 and some asshole is trying to go at 35, then we have a problem.

Speed differentials like that are the norm where I bike. Bikes mainly share a section of the road with pedestrians. So you get people standing around, going 0kph; you have people walking 5kph; people jogging 10kph; kids, the elderly, and people loaded with groceries biking 15kph; normal cyclists who aren't in a hurry doing 20-25kph; fit cyclists and people in a hurry up to 35-40kph. I don't think anyone's got a problem with it really. We kinda know how to share the road, even with people going different speeds.

Drivers, mainly, are afraid of fast cyclists jumping red lights.

I, as a cyclist, am more concerned about dogs, but that phenomenon hasn't bothered me much in the recent years. I once got bitten by a dog that gets excited by cyclists..
This is basically how I feel about eating meat and free software. RMS and Vegetarians have made an argument that I cannot disagree with. I try to eat less meat and use more free software, but out of convenience and laziness on my part I don’t commit to abstaining from either.
The "just" in having to analyze some results and come to the conclusion that I need to rerun the query with some prefix is not so convincing. I've already wasted time at that point.
You've heard of binom(N, p)? Now try binom(M>>N, q<<p)!
Huh, what? Saying that anyone says "bikes are dumb" isn't making up what people are talking about? The argument revolves around the fact that there are a lot of situations when a car(-like vehicle) is appropriate, not that bikes are dumb as a whole. Literally no one says bikes are dumb.
it feels more structured around certain tasks.

This might be the key to whatever becomes the big "Slack-killer", assuming one comes around: Real-time-ish chat that with respects to workflow and UI/UX are structured around action-items (be they user stories, support tickets, or deployment artifacts), easily searchable, with support for taxonomy.
Ah, thanks for sharing. Good to know. I usually give a low rating (and then Uber called me a few times to understand why), but this is much better!
I find that article odd: it implicitly assumes that it's ridiculous to ban electric scooters on pavements that are intended for pedestrians, but the ban seems like a pretty good idea to me. Why does it matter how old the law is? Or how funny-sounding it is?

It then only briefly touches on why they're not allowed on the roads, saying that lights and breaks are required as if that's also ridiculous. Actually that also sounds very reasonable to me! Is that really such an arduous requirement?

I could understand if someone disagreed with my opinion. But the article's tone is that my opinion isn't even valid. Now that is ridiculous.
The thing that really impresses/surprises me about the growth of services like these is that people have so much disposable income to pay for stuff like this. In the news one reads constantly about how people are stressed financially. Maybe people are diverting money they once would have spent on other luxuries (cable tv maybe?) toward this kind of expense.
Comprehensive Resources for Deep Learning
I suspect all these people who get anxious using Slack have never used IRC or similar stuff; their only experience with IM might be whatsapp, twitter DMs, etc
People have granny gears. I see kids and the elderly and everything in between regularly coming down hills that get you to 25kph and more if you pedal a little.

I also see unfit people hike up their bike and then ride down. I'm ok with it. If it gets them moving, my hat's off to them.
Try these small steps to drop excess pounds and get big health results
Depends which season of Star Trek it's from.

Early in the run it'll come across as kinda corny, but mid-way through the run it'll be a strong episode and one fans will cite as a favorite forever.
In London, pretty much all restaurants are on both.

It was actually crazy when Uber Eats appeared last year or so. In a few months they captured all the restaurants from Deliveroo and another truckload of restaurants/chains that never did delivery before.

That should be taught in business class. The power of a brand, destroy your competitors and double the market in a few months.
Just some thoughts, never took the course:

These AI-Bootcamps can, i would expect, only complement existing skills. I think they are a bit misleading, since I expect the typical day to day work for the graduates to be more Data-Sciency than ML-engineer (I would expect the graduates to be quickly out of breath in a real ML-(research?) engineer position). The challenges in many Data-Science roles lie mostly in understanding the data and not in the algorithms. Domain-Knowledge is also very important in many Data-Science (especially non-big data related) roles.

I think the day to day tasks of a lot of data-scientists are not what what you usually associate with "AI".

Any real experience to validate/invalidate my thoughts?
Tahoe Tech Happy Hour: Thursday, Nov 1  the Coachman Hotel
Do you work in technology or at a startup? Do you want to? Are you a founder or aspiring entrepreneur? Come hang out, meet other like-minded people, discuss your projects, and drink delicious beverages.

Sign up for email updates here: https://airtable.com/shrEMcfaI012M7VII

RVSP on FB here: https://www.facebook.com/events/1095267700622359/
Google isn't really evil, they just do what they can get away with. In the European Union that isn't a whole lot. In the US there are no limitations. And god only knows what China will allow.
a) it's not absolute

b) you could apply to phd programs and get a phd.

But yes, it's impossible to get into R&D labs if you've never done research. You can self-teach and publish in top conferences on your own (this is probably much harder than you think it is but is not impossible!), or you can defer income to get an education from one of the many structured educational programs designed to teach you how to do research.

I'm not sure why you expect industry R&D labs (as a researcher, that is) to hire people who do not already know how to do the job. They are companies, not guilds or universities. Software Engineering positions certainly require people to already know how to program, after all. How is this any different?
Honestly I'm baffled by how Musk/Tesla get away with all their branded self-driving-but-you-must-always-be-in control messaging and jokey terminology like Mad Max mode etc.

Given how aggressively US DoT enforces safety regulations for vehicles you would have thought there would have been far more pushback, not just on truth in advertising but more importantly road safety for both SD vehicles and the people around them.

Presumably the bureaucrats are asleep and not paying attention, so there is no formal adherence to the levels of self driving that everyone except regulators seem to regularly quote (Toyota et al)
https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2017/05/25/...
As possible counters: vehicles are larger, and pedestrians are more likely to see and/or hear them; this changes with electric vehicles becoming more silent, however should be counter-balanced and improved with AI and autonomous driving protecting pedestrians.

I'm quite certain scooters go faster than 15mph as well? I could be wrong though. You also don't expect vehicles to drive on the sidewalk, however as I said, scooters on the sidewalk seems to be a problem; equally what can be dangerous are motorized wheelchairs who I've experienced a few times going full speed, driving recklessly.
Quite a few companies' leaders attempted to re-imagine their business as such:

"We're not an X company, we're a technology company that just happen to do X"

Never bought into that BS. Never will.

More often than not, they just got an ecom presence now and/or in-housed some pedestrian software dev.
I cycle as my primary means of transportation, on a flat-bar touring bike in normal clothes. I average about 12mph. I'm faster than most other cyclists I meet on the road. The only cyclists faster than me are on road bikes and wearing specialist cycling clothing (I estimate about 20% of cyclists where I live).

I could go faster, but then I'd have to change clothes and shower, which would make me slower overall.
The bit I find strange about this tracking is the whole daily spend thing.

I track my finances too and I have many "zero-spend" days, but it doesn't paint a true picture because some costs come out all in one go (e.g. rent, bills etc)

Unless he's amortising those costs in his tracking?
On Signals
The terror attacks are themselves partisan sniping with live ammunition. This will continue until the right realises that it's better to live in a peaceful country than win at all costs.
no, they don't expose the sources.
couple factors

- growing inequality: more people at each end of the spectrum; rich get richer (and have more income for food delivery), poor get poorer and lack full-time job opportunities (and are more incentivized to take low income, insecure delivery jobs)
- it's expensive to be poor: working more hours means fewer opportunities to buy groceries or take time to cook.
Every in-office job I've had has been the same way. Not that we didn't ever talk in person, but so much of the normal communication happened over text, even if we were in the same room.
> When waiting for a bus that comes on average every 10 minutes, your average waiting time will be 10 minutes.

This is very ambiguous. Unless he gives a time frame the numbers do not make sense. Average in a week? Average in a year? This is not how it works in real life.

And I cannot accept his premise. My experience tells me that, in New York, when I used to take a bus to work, sometimes the bus was coming as I was walking to the stop; sometimes I would wait a long time. Sometimes not very long. There was no observable bias.
I find it hard to follow these kind of no-chat articles since they usually come off as a bit contrarian rather than something that makes sense:

* Why does a chat blackout naturally follow a fear of missing out?

* What's different from the good ol' IRC days? Mute the channels, see them as transient, and focus on 1on1 conversations.

* Important conversations should not be solely communicated through a short-lived channel chat, but be summarized through email or whatever.

* You're already missing out on all the 1on1 conversations you're not in.

And I write this as someone who chronically checks for slack updates.

Maybe the "fear of missing out" isn't really about missing out on important information, as I initially thought, but about missing out on participation and the inevitable social/office dynamics around that?
Most definitely. Must respect the weight. Ironically, I originally injured my back when lifting weights. In my case I was just being sloppy and beer may have been involved. :) This has been a hard lesson.
This is why I truly believe in a consumption/sales tax instead of income tax (aka FairTax). You can build as much wealth as you'd like, but it doesn't do you any good until you spend it. At that point there is no avoiding the tax and it's much easier for the IRS to track.

Even if a black market developed, at some point that money flows back into the economy and is taxed whereas today it does not (aka tax havens and many other schemes).

It's also very logical to be taxed for what you take from society vs. what you give to society. But that's just a minor point.
IBM Nears Deal to Acquire Red Hat
I have two houses paid off in the Seattle area. I'm tempted to sell them (I rent one out), but I don't know what I'd do with the money. I could hold and wait for a downturn and buy again but that seems risky.
I disagree that for becoming an expert you don't need PhD., or some kind of 3-4 years focused work in a particular topic in AI.

But the question is are all Ph.D equal, in my view many students fraudulently awarded Ph.D without enough rigorous work, earlier those won't get hired, but because of AI hype they get hired. Also many old PhDs brand them-self as AI expert even though they don't know much.

Hiring is still runs on hype and there are many bias (including gender bias) exists in industry.(e.g. Facebook's Mark does not like to hire 30+ people)
Not your comment, but since you're willing to step in to defend OP:

> "or had elderly parents. When someone needs to use a walker, good luck getting them on a bicycle. Plus, where do you carry the walker?"

This is a straw man argument, since at no point was anyone saying that Grandpa has to cube the car and hop on the saddle. The fact that some people cannot use a bike is a terrible argument against using bikes in general. That's like saying "well, some people are blind, so let's just ban cars".
I agree that slack can have a place as long as there are expectations around what to use it for.

How do people coordinate around incidents without something like slack? It used to be that everyone had to hop on a conference bridge, which I personally never liked.

For important discussions and decisions, we often paste a log of a chat and a link into tickets or change requests. This helps capture the conversation and people can review and/or challenge what happened.
Fuck. RH seemed like a good company, and for it to go into a slow wasting death at IBM is a bummer.
I will not order take out from Uber. I’ve seen drivers with the food on the floor with passengers sitting over it. Deliveries also aren’t quick.