skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You can have high levels of diversity without having high levels of conflict. We’re divided because we’re in conflict, not because we’re different.
It feels backwards to me to brightly highlight the best words. Almost all other text editors highlight problems, and train us to get rid of all highlights. So your UX works against what everyone is used to.

Could it instead perhaps have two tones of highlights? Red/Pink for word choices that are sub-optimal for your audience, and green (or blue to support colorblind folk) to indidate words that already are good for your audience?
Telegram vs. Slack, What’s best for your online community?
You and your theories... :)
Meet the Everyday People Behind AI
Not, it is a means to better support the ownership model, similar to Rust, that was introduced in Swift 4.0.
So now Swift has the best strings :)
Or at least will have, when these changes are released.

> Single byte storage, so it works well with utf-8.

Check, underlying storage is a byte array with the utf-8 encoding.

> Byte length field, so it knows the length of every string and it can store null bytes.

Check.

> An additional null byte past the end and pointer shifting, so every Pascal string is also a C pchar string.

Check, getting a C string from a Swift string is O(1).

> Reference-counted copy-on-write, so you can copy it in constant time for reading and treat it as if the string was fully copied for writing.

Check.

> Low-level memory management, so it can store 2 GB long strings.

Check, just tested with a 4 GB string on macOS.

> And in most situations you do not need a string builder, because strings are freed immediately and very fast when the refcounts zeros without staying around as garbage.

Check, Swift objects are reference counted, storage of intermediary strings will be freed as soon as they go out of scope.

> Behaves as a value type with the null pointer being the empty string, so you can never get a null pointer exception.

Check, String is a value type.

> (Optionally) index checked with the length, so you can never get a buffer overflow.

Check, this is the default - trap on out-of-bounds access rather than an illegal memory access. If you really want can disable by compiling with -Ounchecked.

> Unfortunately the newer FreePascal/Delphi versions made it all very confusing by adding an encoding field. In the past you could just assume all strings are UTF-8 as code style rule

Check. String operations are performed on grapheme clusters (rather than for example UTF-8 code points), which is generally the right level of abstraction to work with. There are "views" for accessing specific encodings.
Not a valid point, telnet is not encrypted, IKEv2 is pretty solid.
The headline reminds me of my high school math teacher that would say that the difference between tricks and methods is that methods are tricks that have been used more than three times.

By the same token, it's only a trick as long as the underlying mechanism is unknown.
To me this lies at the heart of the problem with discrimination.

People are being reduced to a set of categories instead of being seen as individuals - sometimes in good faith with consequences opposite to what was intended.
Fun to do, even if it's largely for tourists now. I can say without a doubt that east coasters in the Maritime provinces are some of the most genuine, nicest people on planet Earth.
That's what I was thinking. They have sent neutrinos from one lab to another with a man-made source and a detector smaller than 1km^3. The idea is to put a strong source in orbit and aim it at an orbiting detector. Over time this configuration would be used to scan the entire planet. Still a huge challenge.
If life has meaning, will is not free. - This is the strongest statement that I think can be said about the subject.

There is a great conceptual distance between the self-assertion popuparized by Descartes and the theories and observations of physics. Science, even cosmology, has a very long way to go before its methods begin to answer the questions of philosophy.
> We’re divided because we’re in conflict, not because we’re different.

Wha are the main causes of the conflict?
in a clinical trial setting or in general? I'm not sure about everyone else, but I sure wouldn't want the possibility of getting a placebo when I'm at the doctors/hospital.
I figure the ethical debate extends into our societal issue of greed as well. Certain institutions would love to be able to give you no medication/treatment, charge you as though you had received it and you're none the wiser.
I hope to save on performance & memory by cutting the render step and binding immediately to dom elements (But I could be wrong, I will need benchmarks before the switch).
It's still sort of a sample size of one, though. This content would have been more effective if you had an analysis of some factor that measured your hypothesis (length of posting, salary range width) and showed the correlation with conversions. Then this could have been an illustrative case study backing that up. Even better would be the results of the changes, maybe offer for free to turn this into a junior and senior postings and see the difference multiple posts with narrower ranges makes.

The holy Grail of data science is solid math foundation, benefits your clients (more apps), benefits you (more revenue, higher satisfaction), and demonstrates your effectiveness with data and willingness to continually improve.
CSIndexbr: A Brazilian Computer Science Index
I had a psychologist tell me about a case once where a person had a condition (I forget which, I think it was mild diabetes) but only when they were living at home with their family.

They tested positive for this condition. It wasn't all in their head. But then again it was in some sense. They spent time away from their family and their condition would stabilize to the point that they'd no longer test positive. I asked about things like diet and sleep and the guy telling me the story said that this was of course the first thing they checked and the person's diet and sleep habits hadn't changed.

The psychologist who told me this story wasn't particularly "woo-woo" and was personally blown away by it. He said you can find other cases like this in the literature.

Anecdotes like that aren't proof, but they're interesting in that they agree with some of this placebo effect research. It looks as if the brain has more influence over the body than we realize or understand.
The fact that Serbians assassinated the Austro-Hungarian heir is what started a war in the first place. The fact that World War I was not a small "Third Balkans War" (in three years!) is due more to the great power relations of the time. In terms of studying the causes of the war, the instructive part is not the trigger but why it expanded into war when, say, the Fashoda incident did not.
There’s a great chapter in Thinking Fast and Slow where he talks about how placebo might be only a statistical phenomenon: regression to the mean. Sick people are a statistically extreme group, and tend to revert to the mean over time without intervention.
Right, but where did the article come from at all?

Is it a common misconception that the placebo effect is a 'trick'?
Maybe, but I think it's desirable for certain fringe beliefs to remain on the fringe.
My Experiment with Machine Learning
Generate repetitive documents easily
Agreed, as far as bug reports got that's pretty lousy.
I was addressing search, not advertising or video hosting.
Pain and pleasure, which are qualitative experiences, are the basis of operant conditioning (unsupervised learning ala behavioral psychology). This covers the massive domain of behavior that's informed/dictated by reinforcement/punishment. So they are pretty fundamental if you care about building something that's analogous to biological life, depending of course on how deeply you want that analogy to extend.
Free will is not well defined.

What does it mean for "will" to be "free"? If you could rewind time around one of your decisions, and replay it, you'd make the same decision every time, unless there was a random element involved, because the state would be the same every time.

And if there's a random element involved, it's not really your will, is it?
Literally anywhere that doesn’t think of itself as a “tech compan.” or the job as a “tech” job.

I’m on the line between neuroscience and machine learning. Interviews for “neuro jobs”, even ones where my major responsibility would be coding, usually involve talking about things I’ve done and how I would tackle new problems. Put a similar position in an org that thinks of itself as “tech” and suddenly I’m traversing graphs and drawing trees.
Chatbots – A primer
> They were busy snoring when it came to 9/11.

They weren't snoring of course, there's no shortage of evidence showing foreknowledge about 9/11 that was consciously ignored by the Bush administration and the intelligence services prior to the event and then (only half-successfully) covered up afterwards.
Has anybody watched the animation[1]?

For me it looks like the overall amount of ice in the alps shrank a lot 10.000 years ago. Since then it remained relatively constant with the last 50 years giving it the final straw.

[1]: https://vimeo.com/294517816
Because intelligent people can't vote for Trump, AfD, or Bolsonaro?

In the case of the US (assuming you're American): do you actually think that half of our country is stupid?
There is a massive team watching traffic that leaves China. If the number of people using WG increases beyond their comfort level, they will block it straight away.

The Wireguard code would need the ability to mask itself as other types of traffic. Maybe a module, so people could add or change the behavior as required? I only mention this so you don't build a dependency on it. Every time Tor evolves, it takes about a day and it's blocked again.
The assassination of an Austrian prince on 29th of June had very little to do with Germany invading Belgium on 3rd of August, based on war plans drawn 9 years in advance.

https://www.historyonthenet.com/world-war-one-timeline
Discussed before : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18207129
You need this sort of axiom to eliminate superdeterminism. If an experimenter's choice of direction is fully determined by their past light-cone then a shared physical state in the overlapping past light-cones of A and B could conceivably drum up any correlations it wants.

It's a conspiratorial line of thought on a par with Descartes' evil demon, but in a rigorous proof you have to rule these sorts of things out.

The axiom comes into play at the top-right of p.229:

> ...since by MIN the response of b cannot vary with x, y, z, θ^G_0 is a function just of w
That's addressed right in the post linked in the question: https://www.gwern.net/Music-distraction
It depends what you have. I don't want to feel great if I still have terminal cancer. I want it cured.
> , is it okay for doctors to lie about placebo treatments if it actually helps?

Placebo does not work on everyone. And it's not the best treatment even if you consider it "works somehow". So doctors will provide what work more often than not, hence an actual drug with proven efficacy vs a placebo.
Amsterdam has this but with canals not parks. Not quite the same but a bit interesting.

https://www.google.com/maps/@52.3676938,4.8960709,13.63z
Why Indonesia Became My Favourite Travel Destination
My personal opinions on that would violate HN’s rules on political discussion.
Downloading from the link https://www.bourns.com/pdfs/OnlinePotentiometerHandbook.pdf produces a corrupted copy (many pages missing or out of order.)
This is a better link: https://www.bourns.com/docs/technical-documents/technical-li...
From a light bulb to our first customer, all during SUS2018
Sounds like a nightmare to me. Probably most of those developers secretly think they work with incompetents.
I wish him to have 150 Mio. users, but there is no reason to spread information that is just wrong.
It all comes down to the fact that we don’t really understand what intelligence is. We know it is an emergent property of several mechanisms, working together, and we are even getting a decent grip on what those mechanisms are and how they work, but we are still struggling to see the big picture of how intelligence actually emerges.
>If someone is busy triggering mail bombers and lunatic shooters just by targeting and upvoting their posts on social media what's all this sci-fi stuff good for?

Your first assumption is that any of those actions were against the ethos of the ones in charge of this technology. They aren't there to stop the bad guys. If anything, the bad guys winning some of the time helps provide public support for the endeavors of those behind this technology. Consider how the people in charge of this technology either gain or lose from the actions of the people you want monitored, compared to what they have to gain or lose from the actions of others who they could use this technology to monitor.

In my personal view, MLK Jr., after his turn to focus on the plight of the poor, is far more a schema of the intended target of this type of technology than James Earl Ray.
> Yes, but patients always consent to be randomized to the possibility of being treated with placebo.

This is false as a blanket statement. For specific categories like Cancer treatments, nobody is given placebo in Phase III for example, because their life/survival is at stake. For such clinical trials you prove the efficacy by comparing with the typical survival in other studies/other treatments (overall survival chart) like this: https://media.revlimid.com/wp-content/uploads/mm-hcp-overall...
Hm, disagree. Socially, its only important if someone you have to deal with, knows something about you that they shouldn't. That the set 'people you have to deal with' is larger now is true, but maybe not critical.
> archaic favors, missing recent terms, confusing opposing meanings,

Humans make errors like these all the time (e.g., I don't know what you mean by 'favor' here, and I'm sure many people wouldn't have the type "ELMO"), and the dictionary definition of the word shifts accordingly, except we can't really call them 'errors' when it's a natural phenomenon that we're trying to match. Humans make seemingly random errors sometimes too, confusing one word for a mother, I mean another. When we do it we infer (perhaps correctly) deep psychological causes. Current machines don't have personal identities and desires and goals like we do, but embodied agents with a natural selection process could have those things, there isn't an obvious technological barrier. And if you build in a language model that shares some of the general computation machinery we could reasonably expect it to make those kinds of errors.
> You are, at your basest existence, the ability to choose. A choice engine with a physical layer; a physical memory, physical emotion, the ability to think. But at your foundation, you choose.

I don't see how this is at odds with the prior state view. You are a state machine. As time moves, you have no choice but to choose, and this is entirely dependent on your previous state and your current environment. The physical layer is the choice engine, and it physically must continue to make choices until it is incapacitated or dies.

You are a state machine that must step through its state transitions to the beat of the universe, navigating your small corner of it, enjoying the ride (or not), until you cease to function, and the state machine of the universe runs on without you.
carrying ID is not required in the UK. The police can ask for proof for identity and address under some circumstances (e.g. they need a reason more than just "you were protesting" and I think generally this would take time and paperwork, including the police giving a receipt to the person. Much easier and cleaner to take a photo.
The Boy Scouts have used the trademark rights granted by their federal charter to bully other organizations to change their names. In a trademark dispute it would be necessary for a claimant to demonstrate that there is a likelihood of confusion between their mark and the allegedly infringing mark. The BSA has claimed that their federal charter allows them to be exempt from that requirement and, in the 2008 Wrenn vs. BSA decision the court affirmed that claim, stating "The Court agrees with the BSA that it need not demonstrate the likelihood of confusion because it has been granted special protection by Congressional charter."

That is sufficient demonstration, to me, that they derive value from their federal charter above and beyond it simply being an honorific.
I think that the size of the round about matters. The larger it is, the more opportunity a driver has to get to an internal lane and not destroy on-ramping from other directions.

Also the timidness of drivers to enter a circle kills the flow and causes a backup that takes time to clear.

I hit 4 different traffic circles on my 40 mile trip home, two of them are 1 lane wide and only about 100 feet wide, the other two are a lot larger and have 2-3 lanes.

The narrow ones [1] back up much quicker during rush hour(s) especially when you have non-commuters using them (you can tell who they are).

The one that is 3 lanes wide [2] usually has a protected lane for only going to the first exit (on then off), then a middle lane that circles the entire roundabout and a middle lane that allows you to exit at any of the exits whenever you want. It works very well. I have never seen a backup on it.

The one that is only two lanes [3] backs up quite a bit during rush hour, when there is a West Point football game or because someone is too scared to enter. The backup clears relatively quickly, but I feel it wouldn't back up at all if there was protected on-ramp.

1: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.324487,-73.8829004,106m/data...

2: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.2981376,-73.935245,212m/data...

3: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3202891,-73.9909974,212m/dat...
According to someone at DerbyCon (I know who, but don't have permission to say who), they made the claim that Bluetooth is always on and does not randomize the management frames. And that when phones turn off Bluetooth, they actually just turn off data comms from the BT chip TO the mobile CPU.

Their claim was that BT still responds to mgmt frames even when off, doesnt randomize MAC addresses, and some data can even be sent that will then turn on when the BT is 'turned on'.

I saw demonstrations of it. It, well, scared and awed me.
I tried to give this an extensive run through as I think I'm in your future target market for this (content marketing professional in a technical vertical).

I used it to evaluate the text of this article [1], which is a pretty typically broad business type article (aka not "Here's how to use XYZ.js").

Feedback

- The side by side view feels like a developer thing. Like a markdown editor or HTML/CSS preview editor. I'm not sure it serves a purpose here as you only ever look at the right side after you paste in text.

- The "rating" bar for "fit" isn't prominent enough and doesn't convey enough useful information.

- Despite this being an article about software bugs, Kerberos, etc. it was rated as only "average" by every single target group.

- Some of the substitutions were just wrong. Example, it suggested "attacks" as a replacement for "defenses."

- Some of the substitutions were the same? Example, it suggested "security" for "security."

- I think the coloring gradations have some meaning in the drop downs, but I'm honestly not sure exactly how it works (pinker is closer to what your target?)

- Target categories are odd (I'm presuming that this was more just about where you pulled training data from than anything else), but I'd encourage more verticals.

Overall, I think this is an interesting experiment but doesn't seem useful in a professional context. In particular, I think there may be an assumption at work here that it's the specific word choices that define the differences in writing for these various groups, when in fact it's much more the approach, what's considered, or what's left out that really makes the difference.

1 - https://www.varonis.com/blog/zero-day-vulnerability/
Here's a rotary in Boston (Sullivan Square) with a traffic light - https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3840002,-71.0744129,3a,75y,9... .

Here's a roundabout in Cape Town (Adderley Street Fountain) with a traffic light - https://www.google.com/maps/@-33.9202591,18.4250697,3a,75y,4... .

Here's one in Cambridge, UK - https://www.google.com/maps/@52.2084812,0.136931,3a,75y,82h,... .
“Unreproducible” can also be read as “Wasn’t worth the effort to reproduce”.

Very, very rarely will a Sev1 crash in production software be instantly reproducible. When it is, it’s an utter embarrassment. More often the full set of conditions which lead to the crash are unknown, rare, and hard to fully quantify all at once.

And yet, we know with certainty that the crash did happen and by definition it is a valid bug in any sane world where “don’t crash” is an absolute requirement.

Any crashing bug in a hypervisor must be assumed to be security critical until proven otherwise. Even after “proving” a crash can’t possibly be exploited, you should still assume that a clever attacker will figure out a way. The Venn diagram of “crashing bugs” and “security exploits” is vanishingly disjoint.
does that stand up to experiments pitting a placebo group against a control group that gets no treatment at all?
> Whoever thought the placebo effect was a ‘trick’?

People pretending to be journalists who need to clickbait to make money.

I wish the nytimes would stop making their headlines a question already.
I suspect that much of this issue is resolved by looking at how they sought consent for their study, since they had to inform participants about what they were going to do to them (though they could have phrased it as, I may do A, or I may do B).

Now, they can say, "I may do A, and I may do B, and there is evidence that both are effective"
Fundamentally I agree with this, it's very inefficient and wasteful of resources, although I sometimes wonder whether it's the only practical way to provide welfare in places where politics / prevalent ideology oppose direct social policies.
It's a bit more expensive, and requires buying extra antennas.. But this is a coherent SDR built on 4 realtek chips:

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/kerberossdr-4x-coherent-r...
Genetically modified insects delivering “payloads”
According to the author it can open DNG RAW files, or at least he claimed it in the AMA
Which is interesting because presumably if they didn't charge you it would shatter the placebo effect. I wonder if cost of the procedure actually impacts the efficacy of the placebo?
> Normalization helps somewhat, though it's another expense at string creation time

And needs to be handled with care...there are edge cases where it can bite you. For example, if Unicode is being used internally to process data in a legacy CJK encoding, normalisation may lose distinctions that are needed for accurate round-trip conversion.

Another surprise "gotcha" is that simply concatenating two already-normalised strings may give you a result that is not normalised.
How so? I'm having an open conversion. The goal is to align expectations. It makes little difference to me on a personal level what their answer is. I'm representing the company and they are representing themselves so they have way more skin in the game. It's my moral perogative to have this open conversation with them. I don't want to hire them if the lack of career opportunity/progression makes them unhappy but if they still want the job even after it becomes evident that they may have difficulty reaching their goals in this organisation I'll still extend the offer. I'll only ask this question to people I've already decided to try hire.
Using GlTF Models with A-Frame (2017)
There was an interesting article in the New Yorker covering this as well, for those who want to read more: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/12/12/the-power-of-n...