skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I really think this, along with much philosophical musing about free will, is entirely missing the point.

Exactly! We don't hold babies or the insane responsible for their choices precisely because they don't make choices for well-founded reasons, they simply act somewhat randomly and so clearly don't have a well-founded, deterministic decision procedure. Holding people responsible is how we refine the deterministic decision procedure of a functional brain.

I think it's important people understand that the term "free will" as used in physics simply isn't the "free will" used in law, philosophy or by lay people. They're talking about a type of freedom which lets them set parameters of an experiment independently of the system they're measuring.
There is a project that tries to turn Linux into a library which could lead to a unikernel approach with the Linux. If you look at https://github.com/lkl you can see where they are.

A leaned down Linux-kernel with the application linked into kernel space would be pretty comparable. But it would be pretty enormous beast.
That sounds like the nocebo effect maybe? From the Wikipedia page [1]:

> A nocebo effect is said to occur when negative expectations of the patient regarding a treatment cause the treatment to have a more negative effect than it otherwise would have.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nocebo
I'm currently reading "The Biology of Belief" by Dr. Bruce Lipton and feels very relevant.
If violence is organized through a phone call, is that the fault of the phone manufacturer or the phone service provider? If violence is organized through the use of protest signs, is that the fault of cardboard and marker manufacturers? Heck, why not just go a step further and say that it's the fault of "language" and ban all forms of that.

Ironically, when someone goes and shoots up a school... we defend the gun manufacturers as simply producers of a tool. I see, but Facebook, which is clearly just a tool for communication, is surely at fault here. I don't get people.
I don't know about that. There's also the nocebo effect [1] that is rather well known. You make it sound like "placebo" is purely a bias thing, but AFAIK both placebo & nocebo effects, though presumably psychogenic, can sometimes induce measurable changes in the body.

[1]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3401955/
3. We don't throw people in the deep end of the pool, but that has a lot more to do with not wanting people to drown than with what's best for learning. And regarding MIT, it's hardly an example of a school where faculty either know learning science or particularly care.

4. You may refer me, but popularity is quite different from productivity. Most C/C++ is maintaining legacy code. Most Java is either from legacy code, or from environments where productivity isn't a key metric.

I don't say that cynically; productivity is a key metric in startups trying to disrupt the world. In older, slower-moving organizations, a lot of metrics are more important than productivity. If I'm maintaining a system for a bank which handles employee payroll, productivity is likely not even in the top 10 things I'd look for. On the other hand, if an IT employee quits, being able to replace them easily (without assuming a Google-grade interview process or salary) and have someone else be able to take over (without extensive training+documentation processes in place) is really important.
Methane decaying just means the atmospheric concentration doesn't increase as fast. But if you emit more than the previous year then levels will go up. And indeed, levels are currently 3 times what they were from pre-industrial levels [0].

The EPA says its Global Warming Potential over 100 years is 28-36 times CO2 [1]. 100 years sounds like a very relevant time period to me.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_methane#Patterns_o...

[1] https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warmin...
Absolutely. And most of those are deemed out of scope for Unikernels.
Oh, no. It’s much more complicated than that. The ethical principle you describe might more clearly be defined as beneficence: acting in best interest of the patient. But what about when it conflicts with another ethical principle,namely autonomy: the right to decide what happens to your own body and what treatments you don’t get.

To my mind, there isn’t an obvious answer, but the conflict between these two is why there is debate about “using” the placebo effect as a treatment.
They probably always devoloped like this inside the egg. Eg getting wings and adult features last. So starting evolving metamorphosis might have been as simple as a few dna mutations to make them hatch earlier before being fully developed.

Of course evolving the pupa seems like it would be a lot more difficult.
The difference is that Javascript is outrageously popular, while Perl 6 is confined to an audience of a handful of nerds (me included). I think this is a great time to just switch names, as the number of people affected is tiny.
> And also, Muslims probably hated Cristians just as much.

Surprisingly, not as much as you'd think. In most of medieval Islamic lands, non-Muslims were second-class citizens, but they were generally allowed to worship as they pleased. You didn't get large-scale pogroms like medieval Europe.

Edit: It's telling that people are downvoting this.
It had nothing to do with Serbian ambitions?
Yes, but patients always consent to be randomized to the possibility of being treated with placebo.
I don't see the distinction. If you think you feel better you do feel better, doesn't matter why. However, unlike some, I do not think this justifies the use of nonsense medical practices. You can be kind and caring to the patient and NOT sell them kinesio tape or wathever.
The text of the bug doesn't have any suggestion of it being a vulnerability and as the closing comment indicates, not enough information to reproduce
I don't really think that gender confusion has that simple a cause.
I don't think pain can be measured reliably at all, nor can it be reliably communicated.
Nice idea - Those who is paying a royalty for it is literally paying for nothing.
This sounds interesting, would you mind going into detail about this? Maybe a quick list?
In the article's scenario there are a finite number of Turing machines to check in order to find one that matches the specification. So, eliminating some of them will lead to a speed up.
Legal marijuana in Michigan: What you need to know
Since the final solution for cancer doesn't exists (yet), every improvement is better than nothing. We will all die. So the question is: how long will a person live. Prolonged life means some "extra days" for cancer patients...
The claim is that physical ailments improve, which isn't true if there are physical measurements takes.
Status and Prospects of Mind in Nature (1925)
Perhaps they were different people, saying each thing. There are a lot of people
Scouts range ~12 up to 18. Cub scouts are pre-pubescent and also a different organization.

Adults should have nothing to do with sexuality then, but it's definitely there for the scouts. The discussions in my troop were very much "keep that away from here" which is a correct attitude coming from 40+ year olds who aren't family.
There seems to have been some research around the "nocebo" effect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nocebo#References
You're better off thinking about the logical properties that entail moral responsibility. Consider that it makes no sense to hold a car engine morally responsible for malfunctioning and killing its passengers, but it does make sense to hold a driver responsible (and it might make sense to do the same for a general AI in the future). Why?

What distinguishes how we deal with one deterministic system over another? That's what free will is. The debate has progressed quite well over the past century, and most philosophers are Compatibilists like the OP for very good reasons.
Not sure why you are being downvoted. Some scouting organizations required their scouts to carry firearms, for example The American Boy Scouts (ABS), formed by William Randolph Hearst, carried rifles chambered in .22 and .32 rimfire.
I had a similar reaction. Nondeterministic conceptions of free will similar to that of this paper are really more like an intoxicated state or something, where behavioral outcomes are totally unpredictable. It's the absence of free will, but due to complete randomness rather than complete control.

The prior state idea seems more accurate, but even that (at least in its extreme state) doesn't seem to me to encapsulate the idea of free will because it disallows the idea of a decision being undetermined and free to decide.

I personally think the notion of free will is fallacious because it's poorly defined, or even undefinable. I admit I could be totally wrong about that, but I think lack of predictability leads to an illusion of free will. It's the same illusion as the god illusion, injecting agency as an explanatory mechanism when there is none, either through chaotic processes, true randomness, or epistemological weaknesses.
We're not talking about discriminating against girls, but against atheists and LGBT people.
Got it. The system does use a state-of-the-art POS tagger, but I think 'key' was mistakenly tagged as an adjective instead of as a noun for your sentence. I'll try to fix that -- thank for pointing it out!
>I don't think this is true. We know that thought and memory are constrained (accessed) at a physical level - at least to some extent. That is, damage to your physical brain can result in diminished or eliminated access to those things.

Sure, the damage changes you. It becomes a new part of your state prior to making a decision.

>You remember, but unless you choose, you are nothing but memory.

Completely agree, but we don't think really know much about the relationship between how we store memories and how we incorporate those into a decision making process. I may be wrong, I don't know much about neuroscience. My take is though that it doesn't matter. All of that is part of our self. Memories, decision making processes, neurochemistry, it's all part of our state and our decisions are only truly 'ours' to the extent that this state determines or influences them.
In case A, a village member knows a private fact about you.

In case B, an arbitrary person or collection of people across the globe know private facts about you.

The hypothetical individual in case A has _drastically_ different incentives regarding disclosure or use of that information. I wouldn't even call it superficially similar.

The modern example would be that your roommate knows fact X, vs. some larger group, or the entire world, knows fact X.

The former can, but not necessarily will, lead to the latter.
WLinux – A Linux distro optimized for WSL on Microsoft store for $20
"If I could offer you only one tip for the future, Sunscreen would be it"

A lot of wisdom in a 5min song:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTJ7AzBIJoI
Consciousness and its Place in Nature (1994) [pdf]
Don't you think it is intriguing that the placebo effect only gets reported for non-specific subjective complaints, and not physically measurable ones?
Zombie World 2 izle (2018) Türkçe Altyazılı HD
If you don't mind my asking, could you give a few examples of these social situations and what troubles you had?

I only ask because I went through rather an opposite path of believing from a young age that because I couldn't manage certain social situations that I must be on the spectrum in some way^[1], and once I changed who I was in those situations with I was able to relearn how to work in them.

So it's interesting to me to hear what someone on other end experienced.

^[1] (even after my school sending me for analysis cleared me of that almost immediately, I assumed there must be something. Later it turned out I was in a very inhospitable environment growing up and had developed coping mechanisms for being around people that didn't express around psychologists or psychiatrists)
Guys, guys, guys, the opposite of "a divided nation" would be homogeneity, a lack of a diversity of ideas. That's not something we want.
For me, it has two problems. The tone has this anodyne corporate PR flavor: whiteboarding isn’t really collaborative (“our”), nor is it an “experience” in the way that, say, hang-gliding is.

It’s also not particularly actionable. Obviously, it implies that you need to brush up on either a) algorithms, b) coding, or c) investigating a problem. However, you could just come out and say that. Some specific feedback on the problems that the applicant “failed” would be incredibly nice but is probably too much work. However, some general suggestions for how to improve would also make this feel more constructive, along with some instructions (if any) on how to reapply. Possibly something like “We felt that your knowledge of data structures was a weakness. Many of our engineers swear by Skiena’s Algorithm Design Manual, or.... If you are still interested in ABC Corp, we would be happy to consider a new application in six months.”
Educated people voted for Donald Trump in the USA, for AfD in Germany, for Geert Wilders in the Netherlands, for Duterte in the Philippines, for Bolsonaro in Brazil.

Education does not appear to make people less stupid somehow...
Payments Dialog Ep 3: Why Use Multiple Payment Gateways?
> Another customarily tacit assumption is that experimenters are free to choose between possible experiments. To be precise, we mean that the choice an experimenter makes is not a function of the past

Garbage in, garbage out. It isn't clarified whether an experimenter in a nondegenerate superposition of states (will choose x, will choose y, will choose z) is considered to have "free will". If you call that free will, then the result that result that the particle can end up in a superposition of states is not novel. If you don't call that free will, then the assumption is false and the theorem vacuous.
> The advice to “know thyself” is ancient, carved on the Temple of Apollo at Delphi

Not an expert but I'm a bit annoyed when this comes up.

In ancient morals, the injonction to Γνῶθι σεαυτόν was likely to be understood in terms as "know your position, you are not a god (even if favoured by the fortune)".

It may well be a sentence against "hubris", with little relationship with the particular interpretation Socrate had of this sentence in Delphi.
The Wikipedia page has several paragraphs on "this disputed issue", describing both pro- and con- views. One cited paper concludes "relative affluence and the number of neighbours has a greater effect than either being on a cul-de-sac or being on a through street".
Some feedback:

* not clear enough what the color of the word means (I eventually gleaned that very red means it is effective?)

* on short text, a rating without any analysis which is not very useful

Would like the analysis to provide specific suggestions, and hopefully more than just thesaurus style changes (cooperate => collaborate)

PS Interested in this space (AI aided writing) but looking for something more than the typical offering of this type
Italy (where nuclear power was banned by referendum many years ago) is not able to meet its internal demand, and need to source energy from neighboring countries (including France), not really surprising.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Italy

Germany and Belgium are phasing out their own reactors:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_phase-out
I don't know if it's in this book, but I remember reading that apparently there's also a "class shaming" effect that can also help: if you can get the poorest members of a group to do something which is perceived as advanced and ultimately beneficial, everyone does it, eventually, out of shame of being "outwitted" by the poor.
Is that basically saying that at some level, we should be able to see effects that have no cause? Is that what freewill boils down to?
Alpha, Beta, Gamma Naming Convention
The issue is that "green" parties in Europe (and maybe the US) do not want to hear about nuclear either. Germany even had to shut their nuclear power plants down and go back to coal (!!) which is considered as major victory for the environment by the green parties.

It seems impossible to find green political leaders willing to improve our CO2 emissions while accepting that we can't just rely on renewable energy only right now.
>it's all part of our state and our decisions are only truly 'ours' to the extent that this state determines or influences them.

I suppose the argument I was trying to make was about what is fundamentally 'you' or 'me' and what could be emergent properties.

I agree that our decisions rest on prior states. Even if we remember nothing of our past, that has an effect on what and how we choose.
Boot camps, just like business schools, serve hundreds of students each year. So they can spend lots of money on branding and advertising (including events, blogs, whatever).

An individual tutor doesn't serve as many students, so even if she spends 10% of her revenue on advertising, it's not going to help much in building a brand image, explaining how she engages with students etc.

Sure, tutors could get together and advertise together, but that would require coordination, and for them to have some commonality in how they support students' learning.

The latter can work for certain markets (e.g. "Chegg - Get 24/7 Homework Help"), but it's hard to standardise for all possible topics.

I'd love to be able to get instant support for learning advanced mathematics, e.g. something using a model similar to HackHands: paying per minute for instant-ish access to an expert.
What about mingling in technical mailing list, such as Python development mailing list, or Solidity gitter chat room, or other tech Slack group?
The main view is a canvas. Regardless, my hunch is event delegation would be more performant.
This is a completely false, irresponsible analogy.

A villager knowing a fellow's face is not analogous to a facial recognition surveillance system. A distributed group of people who know each others' faces do not communicate perfectly. Meaning one person can only know a small bit of a recognized individual's activity. In order to construct a full(-ish) picture, cooperation amongst the community (of peers) needs to occur.

Compare this with a camera network covering an entire city. The community's consent is not needed. The effort required to examine a person's activity is trivial. The dynamic and implications are completely different.
I don't know. "effects with no cause" makes me think of the 'quantum soup' at zero-point energy levels: things just appearing and disappearing in some random way. I don't know if that could be classified as 'causeless' though.
It's a Photoshop alternative, not a Photoshop replacement. A bike can be an alternative to a car, but does not replace all its functions.
This article lists a few physically measurable changes caused by placebo:

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/306437.php
How Cooperating Microbes Shaped Life on Earth
The placebo effect isn’t a trick.
Is this another counter-Sokalian paper for fun?
Anyone would think that men... are equal to...

...

nah, doesn't seem to add up.
Indeed! Blue = Introverted, likes the details.

https://www.insights.com/products/insights-discovery
Google, Microsoft Bugs Top the 20 Most Prevalent Enterprise Vulnerabilities
Adding TypeScript definitions to factory-girl
I suppose if you're a staunch Behaviourist you can say that
Your libertarian-leaning sentiments don't change the facts. The Boy Scouts of America have a congressional charter. They've used that charter to bully other programs into changing their names (evidence "Youthscouts"[1] or "Hacker Scouts"[2]).

If they're going to use the imprimatur of the United States Congress to their advantage then it follows, to me, that they aren't a run-of-the-mill private organization and should be bound by the Constitution in the same way as other public entities. (Their discrimination against atheists, for example, is directly in conflict with the first amendment and, to my mind, unconscionable.)

I'm glad to see the Girl Scouts (also federally chartered) going after them. The Girl Scouts have a much better track record of being a good actor when it comes to discrimination and acting like the public entity that they are.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrenn_v._Boy_Scouts_of_America

[2] - https://web.archive.org/web/20130821172216/http://hacker-sco...
>The prior state idea seems more accurate, but even that (at least in its extreme state) doesn't seem to me to encapsulate the idea of free will because it disallows the idea of a decision being undetermined and free to decide.

I certainly think randomness comes into play for sure, but conceptually my personal prior state might include a source of randomness. It could be just one factor, and I might make choices based on my memories and preferences to allow greater or lesser input from that randomness, or I might lack the mental tools to prevent that randomness from manifesting in my actions. At an extreme that might be a form of pathology and then we can talk about the limits of personal responsibility in various circumstances. The idea that my state leads to my decisions still holds though.
> I don't want to hire someone for whom the organisation doesn't have a career path for

and

> I'm not looking for a particular answer just an honest one.

are contradictory one to another.
Agreed down thread that after the fact enforcement action doesn’t seem like a sensible way to do this but political reality is what it is and I expect most of these regulations were intended to encourage people to use non-ozone depleting refrigerants with their global warming potential a problem for another day.

> Hooking up a reclamation machine and paying for the refrigerant disposal would take all the profit out of this service.

Fixing this (Make it cheaper to reclaim? Make the refrigerant more valuable? Some combination of the two?) seems like the way to go rather than just removing all the regulations and hoping for the best.
I really don't like the fact that any argument or concern perceived to be outside a commonly-held value system is usually shut-down by some meta-argument about the strategy being wrong, without even a chance of being evaluated on its merits. I mean, if you're right and no one will bother to listen to these concerns then you shouldn't have to say anything at all, just let it be ignored. If you have a specific better way of communicating these concerns then do that. But the discussion about any given issue often ends up being primarily about how the issue will be perceived, and everyone's perception of the subject is then colored by what commentators think people will think about it, leaving no room for actually discussing the issue honestly and trusting that people are generally smart enough to take in both sides and make their own decision, not because one side had better strategy, but because they heard someone actually discussing the issue and not some meta-concern about how the issue should be discussed. Yes I realize the irony in this comment.
I'm pretty sure doctors didn't write the article name.
Before sale to IBM for billions, Red Hat started in cofounder's closet
Quickly on top of head, ignoring technological progress, philosophical progress and history of 20-century.

1.) None of us has to become soldier and actually kill people to have the right to vote and citizenship.

2.) My friends and students did not instituted tyrannical rule with help of other state which would kill significant amount of citizens.

3.) There is small physical risk in my day to day life. Overwhelming majority of people can read and we have no slaves. My risk to become slave is essentially zero.
“A Horrifically Bad Idea”: Smartphone Voting Is Coming
There's a good documentary on Youtube about toilets. Gates has done tremendous work overseas in the area of sanitation. It's a huge problem that needs solving.
I have an idea for curing psoriasis. It sounds really ridiculous but seeing eating local honey cured my pollen allergies I think it could be worth a try.