skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What are the factors of 2519590847565789349402718324004839857142928212620403202777713783604366202070
7595556264018525880784406918290641249515082189298559149176184502808489120072
8449926873928072877767359714183472702618963750149718246911650776133798590957
0009733045974880842840179742910064245869181719511874612151517265463228221686
9987549182422433637259085141865462043576798423387184774447920739934236584823
8242811981638150106748104516603773060562016196762561338441436038339044149526
3443219011465754445417842402092461651572335077870774981712577246796292638635
6373289912154831438167899885040445364023527381951378636564391212010397122822
120720357 ?
>>Any proof of your claims?

Google, FB, LinkedIn etc engage in super creepy procedures and suck as much data as they can. Some to be used today and directly, other data to be used indirectly...or just to be there just in case. Plus, if you read it again, it's clear I was saying what I believe it to be likely.

>>By law, If they say they do not, they do not.

Ummm, no. Justice system isn't based on what the accused says. That's only part of it, called (more or less) the defense. Others chime in too
Indeed. Yet, it is still based on True/False pair, which does not reflect neither reality or human experience in most cases. Where it is applicable - it perfectly works. But the scope is limited.
Unless we have a complete picture of "success", which means:

- How much of our behavior, habits, intelligence and success comes from the environment ?

- How much of stuff like education levels, income levels come from birth, social and environmental factors?

- How epigenetics shapes our life in a dynamic fashion? This field is pretty new, and we have just begin to understand it.

- What is intelligence or success in the first place ? How do you measure it that is all encompassing and diverse ? I have never seen a solid definition of that. Should we care about their definition of success? Can there ever be one definition of success for all groups? My own personal definition has changed over the years.

- Is Gene state correlated state or unchangeable predictors (which I extremely doubt in light of above points)

- Has there been a complete study of exceptions?

all of this is extremely reductionist at best and trying to push a malicious self serving agenda at the worst which can cause havoc in hands of any stupid policy makers.

From what I understand, we are very far off from getting a full picture of these questions. At least decades away if not more.
i don't like this either. especially because often bugs are in places which aren't even necessary to begin with. Like if you find invalid data as a firmware on some device you need to use, just give a message about it, BUT LEAVE IT ALONE DON'T DESTROY IT! people think it'll be a clever trick to do these things, but really it will be asking for trouble if you scale it up to loads and loads of users who YOU CAN'T EXPECT TO FOLLOW DEFAULT / RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES.

I mean really, all that was needed was to read the content of the disk, and if you couldn't use it. just print that it was unusable. but somehow someone put in write functions to destroy peoples data because they assumed they knew all cases that would come by. instead of assuming they don't know everything and building a more careful product. the unknown unknown is what hit this developer and user of the product. it's a shame this happens especially with such a framework who is supposed to replace 'legacy' things. if this is a sign of how modern frameworks work for these kind of interactions , i'll take my legacy rubbish over it any day of the week.
It's a bit like shell scripts that call for sh, but have bashisms in them.

Thanks for the comments. It's easy to forget the norm is not testing on multiple compilers and OSs. BTW, I haven't been testing my stuff on ARM and I probably should. Not that I expect anything to break, but I don't want the stuff I don't expect to break surprising me.
Replacing people might be easy, but it's never cheap - even in industries with an abundance of candidates.

The real issue with having your work-force leave is three-fold. First, you lose all the accumulated knowledge of your team. Second, you lose the cohesiveness of your team. Thirdly, you have to _pay to get a new team_.

All of these things conspire to make all but the lowliest of jobs (think Target Associate) much more painful to replace than it seems.

In short, there are lots of hidden costs in recruiting.
Ohio Becomes First U.S. State to Accept Bitcoin for Tax Payments
You may be strictly technically correct, but it doesn't reflect reality:

- iCloud free tier is 5gb -- not enough for even a casual phone user with 1 minute 4k 60fps video (option on iPhones for 2-3 years now) takes 400mb.

- The alternative to "paid" apps are ad-supported apps. You're paying either with your bank account or your data and attention. I don't think we should call this optional and otherwise encourage ad-based ecosystem. (And, side note, I argue Apple should also tax ad revenue to prevent the current artificial advantage ad revenue has over IAP.)

The rent seeking point from Stratechery is taken directly from Apple's own earnings calls where they are now measuring their success based on revenue from this rent-seeking instead of on devices sold.

Whatever is measured will drive the company focus. To sell more devices they have to innovate and increase excellence. To increase rents they have to wring more and more $$ from existing users (with a secondary focus on increasing the hassle of switching). Apple themselves explain that they have shifted their focus from the former to the latter.
I wonder if it has anything to do with that intense extended cold snap we had last winter? I seem to recall it was record setting and it happened near the end of the winter.
Baidu has been worse than Google at Chinese language search for its entire existence and only got traction because it was the best way to get porn and Google’s performance was highly degraded by package dropping. Google has no competitors in search. It’s so much better that the other search engines are just comical.
This is an open question and deeper than it seems. What to do with dictatorships and failed countries?

You can't isolated them but neither you can fully accept their conditions. Maybe the google employees decision will put other options on the table.
agree. i don't quite see what enduring, long-term competitive edge Google could actually have in China.

is it the huge quantity of computing resources behind their search engine? (wouldn't Baidu or other Chinese companies be able to easily outbuild Google?)

is it the incredible, mysterious superiority of the super-duper secret Page Rank algorithm? ( jk )

is it the sophisticated and complex home page design and superior google doodles?

i mean what is it exactly?

google won't be able to reach the monopoly level of market share it enjoys in the US search market so it would actually have to compete on a month to month basis for its very life. this means it will hire a lot of very hard workers in China. and that means google's secret sauce (if it even exists) will make its way out and into the competitive landscape before Google can get close to being a monopoly. it just seems like a losing game.
Azure prices are (notoriously) public, and there is a nice public calculator available at:

https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/calculator/

(link may redirect to localized versions)

I have no idea where you'd get the "get a quote" thing, other than corporate customers usually needing (or wanting) some hand holding and guidance given that a) most of them already have applicable discounts as part of current enterprise agreements and b) accurate quotes require more than guesswork at sizing - we take into account usage patterns, whether or not the customer can benefit from reserved instances (which significantly lower costs 1-to-3y down the road), etc.

(I'm a Microsoft FTE working on Azure solutions, and have a personal Azure account which has detailed, per-resource cost breakdowns complete with links to the public pricing pages...)
> What does all this mean? Watson may beat us at Jeopardy, but we are convinced we have something AI will always lack: We are agents in the world, whose decisions, choices, actions are made meaningful by the content of the belief/desire pairings that bring them about. But what if the theory of mind that underwrites our distinctiveness is build on sand, is just another useful illusion foisted upon us by the Darwinian processes that got us here? Then it will turn out that neuroscience is a far greater threat to human distinctiveness than AI will ever be.

I'm not sure how someone could believe that AI would always lack these things without also believing in some form of essentialism, basically believing that major parts of the human experience are "magic" somehow rather than derived from physical processes.

Anyway the author's major concern seems to be that neuroscience has demonstrated that desires and beliefs are not directly real in the same way that, say, your brain is a particular collection of atoms restricted to the physical confines of your skull. I suppose this could be very disturbing if you have the sense that your life is significantly more meaningful if all of your desires and beliefs are as real as the ground you walk on rather than being some illusory projection of the brain.

The problem actually arises from the associations that we have with the word "illusion". As soon as we start to think of our beliefs and desires as "illusions", it's natural to leap to terms like "fake", "false", "worthless", "deceit", and so on. In other words, there are all kinds of negative connotations that we associate with the word "illusion", so when we use that to describe core parts of what we think of as the human experience, it makes us feel bad.

But this is simply a limit of our language: what are the illusions of "beliefs" and "desires" anyway? Desires correspond to our experiences; if we want food, that corresponds to a very real physical state of our physical bodies. Beliefs are a lot shakier because they tend to be be built on complex layers of ideas, but they correspond to physical reality as well, whether or not they're particularly accurate. So these things are very useful and important despite being "illusions". And there's a huge difference between these "illusions" and direct falsehoods. So I think the real limitation here is that we don't have language that's particularly well adapted to discussing and thinking about these things.
The primary reason is that with sans serif fonts there are fewer pixels to send. This isn't really a big deal until you get to the size of Google or Facebook and it really starts to add up.
In my neighborhood, 80% of the lawns are maintained by landscapers, we need battery powered lawn tools to be commercially viable in order to put a dent in the use of gas tools. I have a commercial grade gas landscaping mower myself. I tried replacing it with the ego battery powered mower, the power was adequate for single use, but the handling was awful compared to my gas mower, and I went back gas within 2 weeks.
I'm from the UK and I'm extremely grateful that the USA is an ally. All politicians are self-interested and every now and again they'll do something I shake my head at but as a general rule the US people are good people and over the years have sacrificed their loved ones and spent breathtakingly large amounts of money to keep my little island (amongst others) in peace during my lifetime for very little in return.
Many-valued logics have been studied for quite a while. As far as I know, their applications are fairly limited.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-valued_logic
Does no one proofread anymore? I'm interested in the topic, but I can't read this article. Every other sentence has a spelling or grammar error. It's like nails on a chalkboard.
"Homeowner's association": restrictive covenants that go with the property purchase.

Originally in America these were often for racial discrimination. Doing so directly was outlawed, but doing so indirectly remains a major function of them.
Because if they do, something even more nasty will come in their stead.
> iOS than Windows

Unless you mean Windows on a phone that is completely irrelevant. Unless (when) Apple starts putting only iOS on PC's.
ESASky a Science-Driven Discovery Portal for Space-Based Astronomy Missions
The Chinese appear to think, collectively, that authoritarianism is better than democracy. They could revolt. The Chinese military is under funded with failing equipment, though they are trying to improve in areas. The sheer size of their military makes it difficult to have common weapons and gear available. 100 million citizens throwing themselves against that machine, would wear it down quickly. They don't do this.

The Chinese had a century or more of bloody civil war recently, within historical terms. They don't like regime change.

They historically were fine under the emperor, who was authoritarian. They are use to autocratic, central government. Unless things get extremely bad, I don't see them thinking that democracy is better than their current stability. If Xi Jinping does a decent job of getting rid of corruption and improving the air quality, I doubt you'll see a revolt even with a depression in China.

Edit: for those downvoting, how about a dialog? Democracy is not a native idea for the Chinese. Their major philosophical systems support a rigid hierarchy, which is not compatible with the democratic norm of anyone can attempt to run for office. They've lost millions to wars before Mao calmed everyone down. Even with Mao's major famine, there wasn't a revolt. 45 million died, and no uprising. If 100k died at the hands of the US government, there would be blood in the streets. Probably true with 1k. The Chinese do not care about authoritarianism.
Sure, but then you're doing violence to the structure of the original sentence. (How did the negation get into the consequent?) If you're allowed free reign to paraphrase, then you can always get the right result.

"No student will succeed if he goofs off" is a standard example discussed in the semantics literature, by the way. What you're pointing out, in effect, is that this sentence seems to mean "No student who goofs off will succeed". The problem is that it's unclear how to get to that interpretation given the actual syntactic structure of the sentence. In other words, you can't get there just by following a direction to interpret if...then... as material implication.
Thank you and I agree. It feels like New York Times authors are paid by the word. If you don't like journalists trying to turn every article into a narrative I suggest reading the WSJ and simply staying out of the opinion section.
70M Jobs Seeking CTO/Head of Engineering
70 Million Jobs (YC S17) is the first national, for-profit employment platform for people with criminal records. Over the past year, we've grown our community of active job seekers enormously, landed jobs for many, many deserving men and women and achieved profitability.

Up until now, company technology has been outsourced, but we've outgrown this, and need someone up for the challenge of building the next generation job board while saving lots of lives.

Given the unique nature of our users (the formerly incarcerated) who access the Internet primarily through their phone, we need someone who has a strong UI/UX eye. We do lots of fairly sophisticated marketing and generate lots of data, so there must be an interest there as well. And as we are a decidedly tech-challenged team, we need someone can take ownership of this important part of our business while being very communicative (and patient).

In exchange, we offer a market salary, lots of equity, a very collegial, passionate team, and a chance to work on something that actually matters. We're seeking double bottom line returns: build a very profitable, successful business while doing massive social good.

We're currently based in SF but are planning to move the company to LA beginning of next year. If you share our belief that everyone deserves a second chance and you're up for the adventure of a lifetime, please get in touch.

70 Million Jobs is strongly committed to fair-chance hiring and diversity and inclusion in our workplace. Please, NOT seeking remote or part-time help. Richard@70MillionJobs.com
> it doesn't infer gender from signals such as profession

I'm struggling to tell from the article if Smart Compose ever actually did that. It's certainly implied, but the explanation given about gender balance in different fields is offered by the reporter. The parts actually attributed to Googlers only say they're being cautious about gendering in their outputs and couldn't find a fully-acceptable solution. Which leaves me curious they found specific semantic biases or instead noticed general issues like "our corpus taught the NLG to use a masculine default and simple fixes like randomizing pronouns created new issues".

(Either way, it seems like a reasonable decision. I'm just wishing for a more technical breakdown out of engineering curiosity.)

The other interesting point I saw is that Smart Reply apparently runs on the same system as Smart Complete. Since that offers fully-formed ideas, I imagine gender issues there could be vastly more embarrassing than single-word autocompletions.
Because coordination problems are really hard and that’s what governments and the WTO are for. Also, I’d be very surprised if that kind of coordination didn’t bring national competition authorities down like a hammer on all participants.
'Hard for house dems to regulate Silicon Valley when the likely speaker's husband is knee deep in tech derivatives. $AMZN $FB' ouch
Late but we don't have stats on world's best plumber/doctor either. It becomes a practice at one point and your results/impact becomes the true measure.

I don't think it makes sense to compare a profession to a sport.
Must-Watch JavaScript Talks
new enough in the sense of UEFI and BIOS which is spoken about.
UEFI is from 2007, so they had 7 years to learn how to write code for it and for their own hardware. if it was a 2008 board it would be so new you could expect this kind of random bugs. 7 years on... it's becoming a sign of something which is inherently broken / never going to work as we hope.
At the very least refusing to engage in wasteful and environmentally harmful activities shouldn't be illegal.
> The vast majority of people aren't infosec experts.

Although this is true my personal experience is that in non-democratic societies there is a huge overlap between people who are tech-savvy and dissenters, you just don't pump into an article about the Tiananmen Square massacre, you actively seek it and you understand the risk behind looking for something like this.

I'm not saying they're world-class experts but they'll at least know to use a VPN.
I think it’s relevant to see in the title what kind of options (call/put) he’s buying.
It's useful to track location to figure out which locations have spotty cellular coverage.
I like the systematic breakdown. OP, what are some of your favorite viral marketing case studies?
Ostensibly is defined as:

"As appears or is stated to be true, though not necessarily so; apparently."
It matches this available data: Apple sure as hell gets rent from their patents. And you don't even have to buy Apple to give them this rent.
still seems much slower than the model used by Cloudflare for what they call "workers."[1] A recent blog post a few weeks back was the subject of considerable discussion here[2], and it seems to me to be doing much the same thing as Firecracker, but still faster because there's less overhead. But maybe I'm missing something.

[1] https://blog.cloudflare.com/cloud-computing-without-containe...

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18415708
I have to agree. I read 4 paragraphs and I still haven't read anything I consider pertinent. The fact is that story-telling is powerful...but done wrong it's very boring. Nothing is worse than "back story" on people we don't yet care about it and that's how modern journalists seem to think this works.

Give the facts up front. Lay out the situation. Root the people and the individuals in an important context. Then - maybe - we'll be interested in their lives.
Barbara Cartland was one of the most prolific authors ever, with more than 700 novels to her name.

According to Wikipedia, in total they sold in the ballpark of a billion copies.

Then again, I guess it could be argued she basically wrote the same book more than 700 times.
Wouldn't intelligences engineered to be a component of our society, by definition, be sharing an environmental niche with us. Going back to your merpeople analogy, we wouldn't put in the effort to build AI, just to drop them in the ocean and have them live their lives separately from us and providing no use to us unless they become so economical that they're just literally everywhere on Earth.

Edit: and going back to you merpeople example, the onset of humans represents a mass extinction level event for the closest thing to merpeople: ceteceans. http://www.iucn-csg.org/index.php/status-of-the-worlds-cetac...
I don't see anyone above Staff level or many product/marketing/sales people in the signed letter. Are staff+ engineers, manageres and non-engineers at Google mostly supportive of Dragonfly?
Because in much of the world it dies and turns brown, which is considered unpleasant. Certainly lawns where I grew up (central California) needed it.

I despise lawns but there's a reason they're watered.
‘Ostensibly’ does not mean what you think it means.
Thanks everyone with your personal suggestions.
This will allow me to widen my reading spectrum.
Interesting that no mention about books on History.
Wouldn’t be hard if these were put options…
A good chance humans will be extinct or killed off enough for civilization to end in the next 70 years? Highly unlikely.

Even worst case global warming scenarios would just cull the population back a hundred years or so.
Usability is Security
mdadm tells you to do that as a safeguard against buggy implementations. That does not make it okay to have buggy implementations.
hmm my 65 year old dad figured out bluetooth pairing with his car, and a JBL speaker i got him, BUT takes 10 minutes of fiddling around with car menus to pair my phone when im borrowing the car, AND when you pair more than one device to the speaker, there's no easy way to switch other than going to bluetooth menu and finding the device (re-pairing each time).

i wish it was proximity aware and just chose the nearest device instead of trying to connect to most recent or nothing at all.
How does Apple get a 30% cut out of me using Netflix? If I want Netflix, I go to netflix.com, sign up and give them payment information, and then use my browser, or Netflix apps on phones, TVs, etc. The Netflix iOS app is listed as free to download. Where is Apple's 30% cut of my Netflix subscription coming from?

Same for Amazon's Kindle and video apps. Same for Spotify's app. The trend there seems to be they make the app free, and let you sign up and pay for their service on their own website (which you can do in Safari on iOS, if you want to). So I don't understand how Apple's "skimming" anything out of those apps -- 30% of $0 is $0.
ah i missed that. thanks
You need to find an answer why there is so little
acceptance, why the industry is in such bad shape

Do you have any sources for info about this with a firm basis in fact?

Reason being I've heard at least 4 completely different explanations of why the nuclear industry performs so poorly, and I'm not really sure how to tell which is the right one - would be nice to know more.