skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Well, as I said you could think that is jQuery "has been added" to the javascript expected api. Some functions calls has been renamed, others have been superseded, but the "vanillajs" of 201x is pretty different from the 199x - and more similar to the jQuery usage.

jQuery rise (but also underscore and others "low level libs) was interwined with the need of common functionalities, such as the DOM manipolation and the ajax calls.
I still remember when all you could use was the .innerHTML property and the "new" DOM level 1 api [ https://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-DOM-Level-1-19981001/ ]. jQuery selectors were so game-changing that the "new" DOM api were basically copied.

I understand how incredibly difficult is to find a good balance between an "anemic" stdlib (like the barely sufficient c stdlib) to the giant ones (like java has had), moreso that a bad/poorly secured function should still be mantained "forever" for backward compatibility.

Still I think that this movement should go forward to finally have some form of "batteries included"
The author has written on that extensively, spanning years. See the GC blog and my old one at rebootingcapitalism.com
Sarcasm works really well in a text-only format!
Can’t speak for OP but I’ve been using the IQAir Air Visual Pro and can support everything they’ve said. I try to keep CO2 around 400-500 in my office and home but it spikes surprisingly fast with even one person breathing in a medium sized room.

It can integrate with HomeBridge and has a good API and unlike a lot of IOT stuff it’s well supported and stable.
Yes: reliability, monitoring, and error handling were the types of things I’m looking for more information on. Do you have any recommendations for more information on these topics? I should have clarified that my question was geared towards important concepts agnostic of languages/frameworks/etc. This is a great list of further reading, thank you.

Also what does observability mean is this context?
Yeah, your parent is wrong about it being in the RFC. ESNI is something that they decided wasn't possible and ruled out of scope for TLS 1.3 but then somebody had a brainwave and Rescorla plus some people at Cloudflare wrote IDs and did live fire testing. The drafts are maybe at the "this is the rough shape of a thing" stage, more than ambitions but not a basis on which to announce specific plans.

It's also pointless without DPRIVE. If people can see all your DNS lookups they can guess exactly what you're up to. That's why that Firefox build did both eSNI and DoH
> strong, almost gamey taste

Many people don't like that so farmers spent quite awhile breeding out the gamey taste. Only recently is it coming back into favor.
What does it mean to be overpaid? There are certainly professions that provide more overall value to the world than software engineering and yet make less money. So in a sense you could say every software engineer is overpaid. Otherwise what does this mean?
Didn't the UK prevent SMS encryption when the standard was developed?
Central Banks’ Window to Restock Ammo Is Closing
Looks like a different source for https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18960564
I’ve seen it on both sides. My mother was cut out by her sister with paranoid schizophrenia. I cut out my father and step mother (see my other comment for details) due to alcohol abuse.

I will say that never once was it “the governments problem” to deal with them. That wasn’t part of the calculus, and in fact the laws in Ohio were the biggest barrier to us getting them help. Despite being unable to walk and feed himself because he drank so heavily, the state wouldn’t grant me guardianship and said it was his choice to drink himself
to death.

If the implication is that families need to be responsible for one another, we need to make it easier for children to attain guardianship over health decisions when their parents stop adequately taking care of themselves. Otherwise you’re throwing a burden on children without any legal authority, so you just end up in a constant high stress situation where you’re trying to convince someone to do something that their brain is incorrectly telling them to be skeptical of and ignore.
This is not logically sound at all.

We can replicate a great many things we don't fully understand.

Text to speech is a good example. Early text to speech were format based - many of them tried to physically emulate the human vocal tract. And it gets passable results, but the best current results comes from throwing away that and not try to understand and model precisely how we talk, but instead "just" apply machine learning approaches to create a model. The result replicates human speech vastly better, despite us explicitly "giving up" on understanding precisely how to model the underlying system.

The same is true for a huge amount of other control problems, where we often achieve far better results at replicating something when we don't try to understand or assess exactly how something came to be or works, but instead design systems to learn by example.

We still may see benefits from trying to achieve a deeper understanding, but there is little to suggest that there is some universal law that we need to understand something to replicate it.
>Here's my shorter-term thinking. Current ML can't generalize well [0], can't do arbitrary & conceptual thinking, and has trouble with language.

To be honest a lot of humans struggle with the same problems.
If we’re taking about actual Near Death Experiences (NDE), the research shows an interesting pattern:

Near-death experiences: clinical implications http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S0101-60832007000700015&...

> “Compared to non-experiencers, NDErs report greatly increased concern for others, decreased fear of death, and increased belief in an afterlife, increased religious interest and feeling, and lessened desire for material success and approval of others (Flynn, 1982).”

Even for those who did not have a NDE,

> “Compared to persons who had come close to death but not had NDEs, experiencers place significantly lower value on social status, professional and material success, and fame (Greyson, 1983a), and find death less threatening (Greyson, 1992).”
Early employees who cash out are a bit different than the rank and file.
Great free tools for working with data
Let’s not forget the 98% “chance of winning” estimate of the 2016 election.

For months ahead of the election, the election was never called by The New York Times as being below a 90% certainty.

They were basically declaring a winner up front, and contributed to the spectacle of total upset.

Now as an outlet, it just spews shit on a daily basis. And I mean shit. It’s been unreadable since then.

The last time I observed good coverage on anything from The New York Times was during the first two years of the 2003 Iraq war. Since then, garbage. Hot garbage.
If you cooperate you have two bunkers so you have a second strike on whoever attacked you unnoticed.
Reminds me of Clerks and the Death Star contractors, though this line of thinking has scary implications for working in the World Trade Center, any federal building, or Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQdDRrcAOjA
yes revenue is the reward, however when a big bad kid uses his toys to assault anyone else in the sandbox we take those things away. the fines being levied are no where near enough to be punitive, and can be simply shrugged off as a cost of operation. If googles executive was relieved of thier positions even temporarily by a court appointed 3rd party for the purpose of remaking google in a compliant form, the problem would end dead stop.
"When I talk about shifts, I'm referring to things like the proliferation of smartphones and tablets, which increase the net-demand for software and along with an entirely new specializations of knowledge."

iOS was basically AppKit, so anyone already developing for the Mac knew most of what they needed to know to develop for iPhone.

Pretty much every programming innovation is incremental, and doesn't require throwing out all of your previous knowledge and starting over.
You don't think it will pass the bullshit test if someone claims this computer is more intelligent than humans, and vastly more so ? How is that not measurable or easily taken down?

If we can't do that, I would argue that the computer has indeed become very
intelligent, even if we can't define it. Just like beauty: we don't have a good mathematical model for what makes certain humans beautiful, but we all sure know it when we see it.
The reverberation of a single tone can be in phase or out of phase. The results is observed as a beat frequency in amplitude.. not in tonal frequency, that's what why bitrate matters.
I think you may misunderstand what a DMCA takedown notice is, or how they are used.

You send DMCA takedown notices to innocent parties, that's how they work, that's how they're designed to work, that's the only way they work at all. If you want to send something to a guilty party then you send a lawsuit instead.

You can't send a DMCA takedown notice to Lex Luthor's office supplier, because the office supplier doesn't claim DMCA safe harbor. YouTube does, Steam does, so you can send DMCA takedown notices to Steam and YouTube. You can't send DMCA takedown notices to Lex Luthor, his office supplier, or the publisher at fault here.

In effect, the DMCA takedown notice is just a way of telling YouTube, "Lex Luthor does not have the rights to this video." This is not going after YouTube in any meaningful way. This is exactly what the DMCA is designed to do... prevent YouTube or Steam from being targets of lawsuits. Because Steam accepts DMCA takedown notices, they are protected from certain lawsuits for copyright infringment. DMCA takedown is a process where you tell Steam about third-party copyright infringement, and they remove the content and this clears Steam of liability.

When Lex Luthor posts my video on YouTube, I can do two things: I can send a DMCA to YouTube and I can sue Lex Luthor. Suing Lex Luthor is expensive, so I start with the DMCA takedown notice to YouTube.
As with most technologists and futurists, he fails to grasp that things take time, lots of time, to make meaningful progress and adoption.
>Most people own more than one PC (easy win)

What's interesting is that I think most people own just one general purpose computing device these days, their cellphone. Yeah, they maybe also have a TV that can play netflix or a game console, but my observation is that most people don't even have one PC in the old sense of "a general purpose computer with a physical keyboard that you use by sitting down" - and if you exclude laptops from the definition it's even more rare.
yup, its called defense-in-depth
Gave up at page five of "this is what this presentation is about", can you summarize his main argument on why robots will never have sex?
A correct question to "100 random people" would be "Does Google do ads personalization".

My guess is that 70 people would not even know what "ads personalization" is.

Out of remaining 30 people, 28 would correctly claim that Google does ads personalization.
Whatever the reward function dictates would be a win :)
Question: does APT work with HTTP proxies, which e.g. some company networks impose as the only means of internet connectivity?
>>I, personally, when I browse internet, strongly prefer personalized ads

Which is fine if you want to click the checkbox to enable personalization. But not everyone wants that personalization and tracking. For instance, I've found personalized ads to be worse than generic ads, where Google tries to sell me a product for weeks after I researched and purchased it. If you enjoy the personalized ads, there is nothing to stop you from opting in, but that shouldn't be the default behavior.
What a vain and outdated way of thinking.
Googling 'web'.. First result is WhatsApp
> Cables connecting computers and peripherals have almost completely disappeared.

This one is unfortunately happening right on schedule, at least if you use Apple hardware. "A $1,000 computer can perform a trillion calculations per second" should be considered "premature" as well, seeing as current GPGPU hardware can go well beyond 1 TFLOPS.
I use these sometimes in personal projects:

https://gist.github.com/thisredone/783407f9aacc496c4c13e4076...
What makes you think there is anything in the human mind that is not inherent in the algorithms encoded in the human mind itself?

What you are effectively arguing for is a supernatural element to the brain. You're free to believe that of course, but it is pointless to have this discussion if people on side believe in a materialistic universe and people on the other side believe part of the process does not follow the natural laws of our universe.

With a materialistic interpretation, there is simply no reasonable argument for why a brain is anything but a computer we don't understand well enough yet.
“bugs”
I don’t think anyone here disputes the logical possibility, but rather that such systems are still far off, not as near as the singulariati would have us believe.

From the perspective of embedded cognitive systems, intelligence is not an abstract property but a faculty derived from an agent embedded in a world with an ability to act upon that world in specific ways. This is reiterated in cognitive linguistics by Lakoff’s metaphor work et al. I take this to mean that the question of AGI itself is missing the point. To wit all recent provoking demos of AI (Alpha Go, DOTA) are embedded within specific environments and actions of a model-specified agent. It is then extrapolated that AGI will appear automatically induced by a series of more and more competent AIs.

Incremental evolution as a means of indiction as we know from biology can take a long time, and the landscape is complex. Hence the view that it might be coming but not soon and not with a roadmap.
This leads to a possibility I'd not considered before. Trust in the media has deteriorated extensively. This seemed logically attributable to the rise of the internet thus ostensibly creating a race to publish, and publish sensationally, like never before. But something that always bugged me is that distrust of the media is nothing new. Writing in 1807 Jefferson stated [1],

"To your request of my opinion of the manner in which a newspaper should be conducted, so as to be most useful, I should answer, "by restraining it to true facts & sound principles only." Yet I fear such a paper would find few subscribers. It is a melancholy truth, that a suppression of the press could not more compleatly deprive the nation of it's benefits, than is done by it's abandoned prostitution to falsehood. Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knolege with the lies of the day. ... I will add, that the man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them; inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. He who reads nothing will still learn the great facts, and the details are all false."

Yet in my own personal experience, the media seemed at the minimum 'better' before the internet. So what gives? Maybe there is a very simple explanation. What may have changed is that now the internet enables individuals to share their expertise (and the media's lack thereof). It's no longer just the man who is an expert in a field facing disillusionment, but rather now anybody at all that reads his testimony. In times past there was no way to get such messages out. In other words the internet did not create mediocrity in the media, but rather emphasized it loud and clear for all to bear witness to, even those who otherwise would have been none the wiser.

[1] - http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendI_spe...
Well, just about all the measures of potential future computer-intelligence more or less use "human abilities" as a placeholder rather than quantifying these abilities. That is indeed a testament to how little we have charted this intended final goal.

So basically, not only do we not have a road map, we don't know where we are going. That may be a reason for an extreme pessimism or it might be a reason for extreme uncertainty. Is adapting to the environment without prompting a small piece or a big piece? Could intelligence be a simple algorithm no one has put forward yet? If we don't know the nature of intelligence, we can't answer this sort of question with any certainty either way.

No one has put forward a broadly convincing road to intelligence. But maybe some of the so-far unconvincing roads could turn out to be right.
some neighborhoods in the US have tried local internet providers, worth looking into
I didn't know that website but it seems to have lots of interesting content.

On a related note, Thinking in Systems: A Primer by Donella H. Meadows is one of my favorite books.
Not even that, mice are very social creatures, they make friends with other animals.
They have so many other micro traits
By that logic, why did we need 4g? Depending on your frame of reference 3g was fast enough to stream videos.

Point being, there will always be uses for higher bandwidth and lower latency even if you don't need it yourself.
In interviews back before GDPR, the CNIL stated that, when the maximum fines allowed weren't enough, they saw the PR embarrassment of making their rulings public, which is not required, an even higher punishment for Google. So they have been making strategic decisions for a while.
True, it doesn’t always take a NDE, but I think it does require a certain amount of hardship and/or trauma. People need to be pushed into a corner to find out who they really are. They need to be truly alone, and often not by choice.
If there are 50 commits in every release, and a 2% chance of a given commit breaking something, then in expectation every monolith deploy gets rolled back. As release engineering gets harder, time between deploys grows, so number of commits per deploy grows, so release engineering gets harder still.

Microservices are one way out of that cycle. But then you need teams to run a distributed scheduler, service discovery and load balancing, RPC standards and libraries, IDL registry, central build system, time series metrics collection and reporting, distributed tracing, a standard framework per language, etc, etc. My employer has at least one person working full time on each of those list items. Some have more than 50. And I wouldn’t dream of doing microservices without them.

At least whatever’s in Martin Fowler’s article [0], and more.

A word of caution: any microservices you do before you’ve actually productionized and standardized all that stuff become very painful tech debt.

https://martinfowler.com/bliki/MicroservicePrerequisites.htm...
I just converted one of our medium sized redux apps to immer and it has been a resounding success. I highly recommend it and will be using it everywhere in the future.
Have you looked in to a parental filter? - @DHH starup school talk

You actually should try redirecting sites you waste time on to something productive.

https://sixtymeters.com/hack-your-productivity-by-editing-yo...

That gives you details on redirecting sites to google, but I would redirect your time wasting sites to trello or your to do list.
My personal experience is that AS3 was a better experience over JS and Flex4 was a pleasure to work over the JS frameworks and CSS mess.
It is to the network operator. And anyone that has compromised the operator by any imaginable means, including whatever star chamber forces the operator to hand it over.
> It's not worth it. Productivity will drop enormously

How does TypeScript make your "productivity drop enormously"? It has type inference, union types, looks just like ES6, and the typing is fully optional. The learning curve is quick if you've ever done static typing before (and not that hard even if you haven't).

And you get the productivity boost of not dealing with a lot of the regular JavaScript BS (no more "spooky undefined at a distance" because somebody forgot a 3rd parameter 4 methods down the callstack), as well as the ability to safely and automatically refactor, and the ability to immediately understand the API of other people's code or libraries (as long as it's typed, and most popular libraries have type definitions now).

In my experience the productivity benefits more than make up for the time you spend managing your types.
50M EUR seems like a rounding error. Isn't Google earning over 30Bn USD per quarter?
Thanks for posting these, I was unaware that they even existed.
Can you imagine hiring a self-taught lawyer?
Maybe journalists, or maybe pilots. Planes & airports have long been a high profile target.
Those things don't stop companies from collecting information on you. I wish that stuff was stored locally.

>Most websites and web services, including Google's, don't change their behavior when they receive a Do Not Track request. [1]

1. https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/2790761
Google would be fine, because Google's competitors (especially small ones) would suffer more than Google itself.

However EU users would suffer from GDPR fallout:

- Less services (due to lack of competition).

- Annoying cookies/privacy questions, force by GDPR.
I typically just read the article notifications when they come in, so I think I get a pretty big mix? And I like their evening in review, or morning review sections when I have time.
> all they need is energy

A comment above about being as intelligent as a mouse seems to touch on this problem domain rather elegantly : "navigate the forest floor looking for food and avoid predators".
New Podcast – The Unfit Dev
Google hit with €50m fine for data privacy breach
> A trained NN is only good at the one thing it has been trained at.

I don't know about you, but I only learnt how to read and write thanks to being taught (trained) by other humans.

In contrast, AlphaZero managed to master the games of Chess, Shōgi and Go without ever seeing a single game played, just by being told the rules once, and playing against itself.
I just realized what you might have been reacting to in my last sentence. It should have been "I definitely see.... than about 10 years ago" or something to that effect. I didn't mean there are more women in construction - stop. Sorry about that.

Personally witnessed a few extremely technical women (one of them an ex boss) who, in general could hold up a CS or specific data flow discussion with me that I came up with. She would be on the same page in less than a minute. No other male employee I have ever been in company was able to do what she did (you'd have to have met her). She was from China originally, is a very active CTO in a SV company. She has women friends in similar situations. I'm not saying that you have to be chinese, but the evidence of they way we bring up women in western societies is a much much stronger determiner of personal preferences than "hormones LOL". (And not that China doesn't have other problems either)
Well it's hard to know what fitness terrain lay between the present phenotype and that one, so it's necessarily obvious bthat such an adaptation would occur. Nor is it obvious that stripe attraction is more adaptive. Could be hidden costs I'm not cognizant of. In any case, we were speaking of the zevras adaptation, not the mosquito's. If true that mosquitos are not attracted to striped things, it doesn't matter why zebras have stripes. What matters is the cost to mosquitoes presently incurred by missing out on all that zebra. Indeed, one wonders why mosquitos haven't adapted to the zebras stripes already...