skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
As in it's possible the build can't interact with the patch tool. Thus, they needed to make some fundamental fixes that just requires a flat out new build. I don't know, I'm speculating. But I highly doubt there going "Hey, let's throw in 50bg+ of stuff just to piss everyone off! That'd be funny because everyone is already complaining about online only." Shit happens. Especially when people also decide to try hacking the crap out of the builds and post the results online.

I mean, for a community of devs, I'm really trying to figure out all the "None of this makes sense." You'd figure on HN, most people would start speculating why instead of throwing shit in the dev's face. I work on only small to medium sized projects. Nothing to the scale of what this game is. But I've been contracted to fix, have seen and heard about far worse problems than just a new build download patch.
Now we're having to do this with OS updates too:

https://www.engadget.com/2018/10/06/windows-10-october-updat...
It's an online only game. If this would really take you 3 days to download, you wouldn't be able to play it anyways...
Ms. Sandberg has overseen an aggressive lobbying campaign to combat Facebook’s critics, shift public anger toward rival companies and ward off damaging regulation.

Facebook employed a Republican opposition-research firm to discredit activist protesters, in part by linking them to the liberal financier George Soros.

It also tapped its business relationships, persuading a Jewish civil rights group to cast some criticism of the company as anti-Semitic.
After an election cycle or two they would figure out this is helping their opponents - like in first-past-the-post how it takes a few election cycles for people realise that splitting the vote really helps their least-liked candidate.
Good news! This already exists. It's called 'rlwrap' and it's awesome.
Looks like PostgreSQL has a foreign data wrapper for CSV.

https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Foreign_data_wrappers

In fact, seems it has several.
How does this fix it? It automatically includes a size_t with all array types but does it also rely on the programmer setting the size_t value correctly? If so there will be the same problems. It seems like this is exactly the same as just passing a size argument along with all array-type arguments, which is already common practice.
why do you assume the opposition came from uninformed people?

Do you think they were not able to identify what is in their best interest?
The PC/Mac/Linux version with full audio is available for free: https://www.gog.com/game/beneath_a_steel_sky
To me the negative press cycle involving Facebook and other advertising companies is more about the hidden war between the new age digital advertisers, and the former rulers of ads: the conventional news outlets. The news outlets will jump on any chance they can get to kill their competitors just like any other company. Without Facebook, they could become the sole source of news again, and reap the lost ad revenue themselves.

That's why I don't trust anything I read in the news. If I don't hear it from a friend working at one of the SV companies (which isn't that hard to find, we're a much smaller community than one would imagine) then I consider it to be sensationalized, hyperbolic, and/or downright wrong.
My humble opinion is that at some point the started using data to steer the company, and that's why we saw an increase in the "video" and "sharing posts" and "politics", and such a push to add everyone that you have ever come across in life as "friend", because it increases the screen time for users.

Had they stuck to their original vision, share baby photos, life events, etc., the user engagement would be much lower, but it would be a happier place.
yeah. :-)

once in a while my attempts at humor somehow dodge down voting, but not this time. tough crowd. tough crowd.
If the critieria for cloud is "it's a service on the internet," wait 'till they hear about Google's "cloud advertising" business.

You don't even have to host your own ad servers! They just appear on your website like magic!
> it can't be that hard for life to start.

We have a selection bias happening here. We observe life because if life didn't appear as soon as the Earth was cool enough, the odds of us being here and able to reason about that would be small. We shouldn't consider it particularly abundant until we find a separate biosphere where life developed independently.

I personally think it's really easy to get molecules making copies of themselves, but we don't have enough data to claim that.
A floppy drive you don't use is bulky and expensive. A 3.5mm jack you don't use makes no perceptible difference.

When you remove features, there should be a net benefit to doing so.
Your first quote describes reality, your second is nonsense. If there were an outcome where everyone's needs are met and nothing need be sacrificed, there would be no opposition to the changes.

Basic income is system that would approximately guarantee all people's basic needs are met yet there is certainly opposition to it.
> FPTP elections are where the candidate with the most votes wins. By that definition, it ALWAYS delivers results that reflect the desires of the electorate.

How is this tautology helpful at all? Why would we want this definition of what the most desirable candidate is?
To be fair he is a patent troll who somehow managed to engineer "invention" of integrated microcontroller patent grant in 1990 for his 1969 application thru multiple patent application amendments/extensions. He kept massaging his 1969 patent application until someone at USPTO got suckered into rubber stamping it.

http://www.righto.com/2015/05/the-texas-instruments-tmx-1795...
SSNs have been terribly abused by private industry. They were never meant to be handled by private companies, but here we are with a non-consentual credit scoring system based atop it.

Should people be required to hold a national ID card? It may have been rammed through in Germany, but many are not happy with national IDs. Its a basic consent of the people problem IMO. Passive acceptance is not consent or support, but merely dealing with the situation at hand.
I think finding life on any other world would be very exciting even if uni-cellular. While we know which organic compounds are common in the nearby universe, we have no idea what other "architectures" are feasible, even granted an environment (temperature, pressure, solar spectrum) roughly like ours (including extremophiles). Life optimizes, but it's also path-dependent. Surely Earth's genetic code is accidental and path-dependent, but how constrained is the protein design space? For example, given a star like ours, do we have optimum chlorophyll? Or if you make your living as a sulfate reducing prokaryote, how many different ways can you do that?

No telescope will tell us what the ribosomes of Barnard b look like, of course.

But if only macroscopic life excites you, is it clear that you need eukaryotes for complex (multi-cellular) life? And how can you know it happened only once? It could also be that it happened multiple times, but one strain outcompeted (or just ate) every other. There could be undiscovered alternate "eukaryotes" if they remained single-cellular, too.
I don't get this point. The probability argued would take this into account. It could be that the probability is _that_ small that even if you keep rolling you don't reach it.
Losing 2 to 4 million users out of 375 million users is hardly "significant". It's something to look out for of course, but trying to insinuate that Facebook is in trouble in Europe with those numbers is a stretch.
Scheme and C evaluation rules are very similar: in both languages, the order of evaluation of function arguments is unspecified.

Common Lisp is left to right, so that (list (inc i) (inc i) (inc i)) will reliably produce (1 2 3) if i starts at zero.
You can’t expect Apple to do an investigation of every phone they wipe at a customer’s request. What about Google Docs? Even if the user clicks the “delete” button, Google performs the physical act of deletion. So should clicking that button trigger a pop-up with the message, “Deletion will occur once we’ve verified that you are not under investigation by the authorities in your jurisdiction”? Or should it silently send the “deleted” document to an archive that Google must maintain indefinitely for the purpose of responding to subpoenas?
Perhaps, but this quote is used so frequently on HN that you should probably just assume it's already been posted to every comment thread.
> What's the advantage of IV over oral / nasal ingestion?

Generally, oral anabolic steroids are more hepatoxic than their IV counterparts. So the advantage is that you end up with less liver damage.
>No, that's not how it works. You can't compare to a random, made up scenario. Go look up antitrust cases...

... That's exactly the issue with the current paradigm of monopoly enforcement. You can subvert a market, then if you fly under the radar for long enough, the competition bureaus have no ability to determine that pricing pressure is being exerted because the market is already non-competitive at the point of the comparison.

You conflate the limits of our current enforcement framework with the principles that underlie the effort in the first place throughout this thread.
Google also wraps GSuite into Cloud revenue, and Amazon wraps their competitor into Cloud revenue. So, it's not misleading.
Touching on big G trying to catch up - I've recently had some issues with GCP and while the addition of more accessible support (you can now reach some support person relatively easy) it helps little unless it's a request that they can handle with a single button press. While it now FEELS less frustrating as you have somebody to talk to, it doesn't help that I have an issue that is being ping-ponged around different reps for >10 days by now.

Regarding MS taking 2nd place - recently came in contact with their cloud. It's not up to par to the rest from a tech perspective, however, they are killing it on their sales channels and in sectors such as banks and retail due to their ubiquity in those.

Edit: Wording, horrible is not the best description of the MS cloud, just not as good for me.
DuckDuckGo’s search results aren’t as good for the average user.
cookie: A Template-Based File Generator (Don't Repeat Yourself!)
For those on mobile, this is the file you are looking for in that repo.
https://github.com/lukasz-madon/awesome-remote-job/blob/mast...
>I think that if people had understood what the algorithm was optimizing for—sleep health of high school kids, getting elementary school kids home before dark, supporting kids with special needs, lowering costs, and increasing equity overall—they would agree that the new schedule was, on the whole, better than the previous one.

I gather that the new schedule was not presented with a score card, comparing it with the old schedule, or that the score card was maybe buried in a report.

Numbers like:

- expected decrease in number of elementary students getting home after dark

- expected decrease in number of early pickup of high school students

- expected decrease in cost

- expected capacity for special needs, compared to old system

- numbers directly supporting the claim of increased equity

can be understood by everybody, and would go a long way.
In my hypothetical, I'm not on the line about approving of the middle candidate. I disapprove of them strongly... but I also vastly prefer them to Satan. If Satan and the middle candidate are the only ones with a shot at winning then I absolutely want to vote for the middle one. If the third candidate can win then I don't want to vote for the middle one. If I'm not sure who's viable then I need to figure it out and hope I get it right.

It's much simpler in a plurality system. First, I decide if I want to make a statement or a difference. If I want to make a statement, I vote for the candidate I like best and that's it. If I want to make a difference, I choose the candidate I prefer from the two major parties. In the unlikely event that I like them both equally, I can either keep looking until I find a reason to prefer one, or I can abstain knowing that either one is equally good (or bad). Note, I'm not saying this is good, just that it's simple.
"Tumble" always needs context.

JHC how much data is in this URL?

https://finance.yahoo.com/chart/FB#eyJpbnRlcnZhbCI6IndlZWsiL...
This paper appears in November, but in fact, Allen-Zhu (MSR, http://people.csail.mit.edu/zeyuan/ ) already posted his result in Oct. This is their first paper in Oct:https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.12065.pdf, this is their second paper in Nov https://arxiv.org/pdf/1811.03962.pdf
. In MSR Oct paper, they proved how to train RNN (which is even harder than DNN). In their Nov paper, they proved how to train DNN. Compared to their Oct one, the Nov one is actually much easier. The reason is, in RNN, every layer has the same weight matrix, but in DNN every layer could have different weight matrices. Originally, they were not planning to write this DNN paper. Since someone is complaining that RNN is not multilayer neural network, that’s why they did it.

In summary, the difference between MSR paper and this paper is: if H denotes the number of layers, let m denote the number of hidden nodes. MRS paper can show we only need to assume m > poly (H), using SGD, the model can find the global optimal. However, in Du et al.’s work, they have a similar result, but they have to assume m > 2^{O(H)}. Compared to MSR paper, Du et al.’s paper is actually pretty trivial.
To me the negative press cycle involving Facebook and other advertising companies is more about the hidden war between the new age digital advertisers, and the former rulers of ads: the conventional news outlets. The news outlets will jump on any chance they can get to kill their competitors just like any other company. Without Facebook, they could become the sole source of news again, and reap the lost ad revenue themselves.

That's why I don't trust anything I read in the news. If I don't hear it from a friend working at one of the SV companies (which isn't that hard to find, we're a much smaller community than one would imagine) then I consider it to be sensationalized, hyperbolic, and/or downright wrong.

At the very least, we certainly are never going to hear of the things Facebook is doing right. We aren't going to hear about the economic opportunity or positive connections it has produced. To say that something is completely one sided is a strong sign of bias.
> facebook blamed for things created by messages they cannot see

The WhatsApp founder quit over differences around privacy / advertising, and WhatsApp is only one part of facebook. Facebook can see everything on facebook itself, and Messenger. In addition, they failed to the data that they do have private. The problem is they are failing on both fronts simultaneously, privacy, and preventing harm on their platform.

If they were only failing on one front, then I would have some sympathy for your position.
Sharing an experience like this would definitely help bring awareness and empathy to the cause.

OP's parents and the man they hosted should consider if reaching out to someone about their story would be something they'd like to do.
It's also plain wrong. Candidates win on minority shares in FPTP regularly, especially when there is more than two candidates.

In the UK for example, it's pretty common to win your seat with just 40% or less of the vote. The desires of 60% or more of the electorate in that constituency is simply ignored - a majority can vote for someone else entirely, hardly a reflection of the electorate's desire.

> I think you're overstating it when you say that it leads to situations where anyone who didn't vote for the winning candidate might as well have not voted.

I'm really not. The outcome remains the EXACT SAME if everyone who voted for a losing candidate stays at home. This isn't really my opinion - it's a widely known limitation of FPTP electoral systems.
Explain, how it is horrible from a tech perspective? (hint: it's not)

Edit: I'm getting downvoted, but no one as of yet has shown how Azure is built on horrible tech compared to its peers. It's just a flat lie, none of the big 3 are built on horrible tech. It's just being dishonest and is basically fanboyism/hatred of one party. You can argue about UI you like or don't (I prefer Azure) you can argue about APIs, their IaaS and SaaS, you can argue that Azure isn't as good on the "edge" compared to GCS, you can say kubernetes is a bumpier ride on Azure etc, but saying the tech is "horrible" is not correct. Sorry. This isn't early 2000s Slashdot.
Facebook's recent preoccupation with staying in Washington's good graces, as described in the article, seems misplaced. It almost seems like the long-term personal legacy concerns of Zuck, Sandberg, Bickert, and others (many of whom clearly aspire to elected or appointed office) is taking precedence over FB's actual strategic priorities.

If I were running FB, my main worry would be the fact that it's devolved into a platform for baby boomers to yell at each other about politics. An angry Congress, even a really angry one, has a limited ability to kill FB. In fact, I'd posit that a bona fide War With The Man might even be good for employee morale, another Cartago Delenda Est moment.

User shrinkage, declining engagement and general loss of relevancy, on the other hand -- that would be the death knell, and it already kind of appears to be happening.
Yep, same tangent/thinking. Reality is IBM & Microsoft have enough contracts and political capital to ensure their continued existence.
I can't tell, are those monthly active user numbers for all Facebook owned services, or just Facebook itself?

If everyone quit Facebook and replaced it with Instagram, that's a very different story.
Could trying to fit a dissimilar country's system to our own result in a broken system?
I really like Rust.
Uber posts $1B loss
They believe they will benefit. Talk to Scott Walker and his hilariously bad Foxconn deal.
> The standard is Bluetooth now.

It absolutely isn't. It probably will be in a while, assuming they can get at least some of the sync issues ironed out, but it's not the current standard any more than electric cars are.
> Out of all the elected officials who have the power to help change the voting system

Elected officials are initially largely irrelevant, changes to the voting system will start with state-level voter initiatives.

Pretty much everything worth doing to voting systems aside from (1) replacing or reforming the electoral college, and (2) moving away from mandatory single-member districts in the House of Representatives, can be done entirely there in many states without elected officials being involved except in their ministerial role in certifying the results and implementing the dictated policies.
The old Unix personality had that - and now the new Linux Personality (they no longer call it that) implements this for you. This complaint no longer makes sense since WSL was released.
This is like House of Cards levels of evil. So good at playing this evil game that I can't help but respect this move of skullduggery.
Don't you know that quoting the Bible on HN causes great discomfort? For them, the book The 120 Days of Sodom is more palatable than the Bible! What were you thinking?
Considering they are the most privacy conscious, it's pretty hard to avoid running into bullshit like Schufa or the need to register your address with the authorities.
And as discussed to death in the linked thread, what Microsoft should've done instead? Excluded Office from the cloud revenue, simply because Amazon didn't make as much money from their own office productivity suite (but still included it in their cloud revenue numbers)?

MSFT used cloud revenue metrics consistent with those of the competitors (Amazon and Google), which is the proper way to do it, imo.
Microsoft will reap the rewards of supporting XP and Office for decades, that wins enterprise trust & goodwill, and clients will expect that from Azure. On the other hand, every month we have a new product/service of Google being deprecated (officially or by raising prices). Even if it's technically better, the most sane business decision from enterprise would be to bet on Microsoft for support reasons. Microsoft talks the enterprise talk and walks the enterprise walk. Google probably has a fun and hackster image in the eyes of enterprise.
It's unclear to me from the article is this a one time cost? Is it yearly? Monthly?

edit: On reading a bit closer it's over $48,000 per job over 10 years.
This is exactly it.

Look, Facebook needs to get its act together. They are in need for serious reform. However, mainstream media knows that Facebook is under a ton of pressure and these types of stories generate a ton of clicks. I know people want Facebook to die, but Facebook's usage has remained pretty much the same during all these negative stories. The public is not hating Facebook as much as people want to believe.

But the media has its narrative and it'll continue this "Facebook is evil" beat. The same with Clinton's email server, and more recently, the same with that immigrant caravan coming up from Central America.
Seems like a lot of damage could have been obviously omitted by just removing anything os.system(), which for the purpose (not effect here) of Duolingo style education should have been just fine.

I get your point and the other guy’s too. I line up on the side that disclosures should be messy and embarrassing sometimes, as incentive to really think about what you are doing. The danger here is low.
It seems to me that the weirdness comes from this if/else block in how IRV works.

if (highest voted candidate has more than 50%) {
That candidate is winner
} else {
use 2nd picks of voters for least voted candidate
IRV() // recursive
}

A really desirable algorithm wouldn't be a piecewise function like this.
Does one ask virgins for sex advice?

Criticisms like Porter's aren't even wrong. They're not even talking about politics as practiced in the USA. At best, they're kibitzing about folk notions of democracy.

Everyone should run for office at least once. Give stump speeches. Earn endorsements. GOTV. Cold call strangers for cash. Wrestle over policy. Build coalitions. Etc.

People should still criticize, make demands.

I'm just saying that once you've played the game, everyone's behaviour will make perfect sense. And then you'll see where reform is needed, desirable, useful.

Source: Election integrity activist, ran for office.
how would hear about this story unless you are personally friends with alex stamos or zuckerberg or sandenberg? I am all for skepticism but blanket rejection of responsible journalism seems like an over-reaction. the reporting of the new york times on facebook has been continuously borne out by events.
Their UIs and tooling are inconsistent and clunky. They kind of shove some of their tooling on to you as well.

Obviously, my experience is rather shallow here and wouldn't dare go into too deep discussions on that. And the shoving part can easily be avoided with some extra elbow grease.
The old media powers want their control back, so they say "see the stupid masses need us to distill the information to them, these plebes can't handle it themselves". It all sounds very similar to what the European monarchy said about the United States, that democracy would fail and that the US would be begging for a king to rule them. Freedom has risks, but I prefer that to living in a gilded cage.

It mainly has to do with the fact that social media enabled things that these people didn't want like Brexit and Trump. They were singing social media's praises during Arab Spring
Complete with that aged yellow plastic tinge!