skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think it would also be good to mark them as you look down the list, then filter the list and work down it again, marking more until you are left with just one.
Are there any brands or products you would reccomend for measuring CO2 in my house? Ideally with some way to hook it up to my computer.
IMO MMT only works if the currency is a reserve currency.
Whew, that is a hard thing for me to read, it actually really bummed me out (apologies if this comment winked in and out of existence...wanted this to not be one giant blob).

(Bear with me, gonna anxiety dump a bit here ;) feel free to skip to the end where I have a pertinent question...=) )

Background: I've worked as a high-level contributor both at the management and engineering levels for the last decade of my career. Decently respected software dev/leader/whatever, lots of big and small projects and teams, all successfully delivered. People like working with me! I've had friends ask me to come work with them. And I like my friends. They are great people.

However, I'm also known to be really picky about the things that I want to be doing with my time and my career. I'm really protective of it overall, so when I have the opportunities to "do things" with friends or whatnot I have generally said no, for a variety of reasons. They are great people and wonderful developers (legitimately wonderful, brilliant human beings) but in many cases they work for environments or domain spaces that wouldn't really be "my thing". Sometimes I've just pursued my own stuff for a while, since I have had that ability...but what you're saying above sounds like that has been hurting me.

At the end of December, I was in a work situation where the entirety of the technical team was laid off, including myself. I figured at the time, given my general "level" and experience I'd be all right when applying for work.

While I haven't applied to lots of jobs since then, I did apply to a few that seemed like a great personal fit on paper, and that I knew based on my experience I should probably at least get an initial interview.

No dice. 0% response rate. I was shocked! I mean, it's been a while since I've been doing the interview dance, but 0? So I had my CV looked over by people ranging from C-level guys to other software devs of varying levels and no one could figure out why I wasn't at least getting into initial discussions. "It's not you, it has to be them", I got told. But really after a few of these things happening, you stop thinking that "it's them". That can't be, right?

I made a comment to one person that I felt far more desirable to companies when I had much less experience/professional success than after I had more significant accomplishments under my belt.

I hate mysteries - and I hate the not knowing. It's one thing for me to go through an interview process and not be a fit, if such a thing were to happen; it's another for me to never even get to the interview process and not understand why!

So while reading the above is kind of dejecting, thank you for writing it...I guess it provides some illumination for me on what might be going on.

Now rather than hop into my shower and softly weep - do any of your engineering manager friends spoken about above have any advice for people who may have that experience but just happen to be picky about what they want to do, don't want to move themselves to the USA, and don't always jump at referral from friend X?
1. How to start (and keep) listening on a port for requests.

2. How to read request parameters.

3. How to get the stuff you're asked for from the database.

4. How to create and send a response.

Once you can do that you can create a backend.

5. How to not get swamped in a mess and complexity when you do all above faster than you are required to.
A random number generator or binary enumerator could output results that were not inherent in its programming.

Or if you pose they don't, then you need to explain better what is so special about human brains that they can produce results not baked in by natural programming.
It's just YAML until you need:

* multi-tenancy

* auto-scaling

* security auditing

* automated os/container patching

* multi-tenant self-service route/ingress management

* multi-tenant self-service logging, monitoring and alerting

* multi-tenant self-service databases

and so on
I definitely have worked places where co-workers enjoyed staying late and then heading to a bar afterwards, and honestly I did feel a bit left out because drinking at bars held zero appeal to me. Personally, that is more due to my autism-related aversions to crowds and loud sounds, but knowing that the few bar experiences I've had usually involve a strange man trying to talk to me for a romantic reason if I stray away from another man for two minutes... that really does put the nail in the coffin. It would have been nice if there were other options offered, but really it's even more optimal for me just to work somewhere without any expectation of regular post-work socialization and bonding at all. And working remotely does that for me. I don't feel like I'm missing out or not "one of the team" any more.

I'm really not bothered by people sharing a beer or two at the office or lunch though. Nobody gives me a hard time for saying no, as it just means more to go around for others.

As long as there are good options, with equal career opportunity growth, available to people who don't prefer cultures where social drinking is the norm, I think it's not a big deal so long as companies are up front with it. I do worry that some people may get a gig on a team at a big company that has that culture though and feel excluded or otherwise be seen as not a team player for not participating, but that can honestly happen with many different things (ie, vegans/vegetarians/religious people needing food options, parents needing kid-friendly schedules) so I don't think not drinking is especially unique - though it is perhaps very often ignored.
The Guardian is a pretty terrible choice for people who want less opinions mixed in with their news. Their front page with all opinion stuff removed would have a lot of blank space. Not only is your statement about proper labelling false (random recent example: [1]), but on top of that they seem to think that their own opinion entitle them to their own facts. A non-political example: they accused in passing the journalist Matt Taibbi of rape. When confronted with the debunked claim [2] the Guardian contributor's response was, essentially, "it wasn't news, it was opinion" (does that remind you of some cable news channel?). For context TG is not some 4-person blog with no fact-checker, they are a 1400 employees company, and yet somehow these "mistakes" happen.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2019/jan/19/is-standup-c...

[2] https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2017/12/the-destructi...
Yes, what you said is the 'generally accepted wisdom' and the cudgel with which the type-safety folk like to use to beat on the dynamic type folk, since pretty much all projects could potentially grow at some point, why not just start with type-safe first?

I could argue, but won't, that the accepted wisdom isn't correct, and large code base management is more about code discipline and reviews rather than whether your language requires types or not.
> There is no algorithm which can produce results which were not inherent in the algorithm itself.

There are algorithms that can find tumors or Alzheimer signs on medical imagery where expert doctors can't see them.

This is not just "doing it faster", it's doing it differently in a way that we cannot do.

> The computer is merely processing all the options faster than a human could

No, it's also processing many, many more options. You know how you can keep a bunch of stuff in short term memory while working on a problem and that helps you get a good grasp of it so you can get that insight. Now imagine if you could keep thousands of concepts and ideas in your short term memory while you are pondering a problem. You are going to find solutions you wouldn't have the means to thought otherwise. It's not just speed, it's breadth of reasoning, and it let you see new horizons.
When handling tricky string issues, my first step is usually to explicitly type annotate the code (using mypy annotations). This makes string handling and tracking much simpler.
lack of ability and lack of caring are not the same.
> realistic roadmap towards such a thing.

Probably continuing with Deepmind's work shown here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-bvsJWmqlc&feature=youtu.be...

and discussed here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17313937

OK it's not at human levels but it shows networks figuring out a 3d model of their environment
It seems pretty evil to me if you laugh about murdering humans like it's some sort of game.
Here's my strongest argument in favor of type safety: if you're building a project that is intended to have a long life and be seen by many people, type safety may be a hassle for you but it'll be a blessing for the hundreds of people who will have to eventually figure out your code.
Primates have relatively few instinctive behaviours. Almost everything we do is learned to one degree or another.
As we do not possess a clear (or, at least, a generally accepted) definition of what constitutes the "true AI," it seems very likely that we will cross this "even horizon" without realizing it; we may have done it already, for all we know (or, rather, don't know - due to the fact that much of the progress is being done in secrecy).
At some point I hope the left takes back the NYT from the ideologues. This is the same trite attack on science and bullying of scientists we’ve seen before when it doesn’t comply with their social justice beliefs [1], and this time it’s more dangerous than the creationists that tried to do something similar for their beliefs because as this article shows truth is not a priority in this ideology and they control universities as well as cultural institutions like the NYT.

Another thing that is more worrying is that social justice activists are using the technicality of them not worshipping a God per se to bypass secular protections against enforcing religious beliefs institutionally. [2]

[1] https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studi...

[2] https://youtu.be/FH2WeWgcSMk
>one where the recessions have been periodic, getting deeper over time and continued cycles,

From [1], a list of US recessions:

"The National Bureau of Economic Research dates recessions on a monthly basis back to 1854; according to their chronology, from 1854 to 1919, there were 16 cycles. The average recession lasted 22 months, and the average expansion 27. From 1919 to 1945, there were six cycles; recessions lasted an average 18 months and expansions for 35. From 1945 to 2001, and 10 cycles, recessions lasted an average 10 months and expansions an average of 57 months. This has prompted some economists to declare that the business cycle has become less severe.
Many factors that may have contributed to this moderation including the establishment of deposit insurance in the form of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in 1933 and increased regulation of the banking sector. Other changes include the use of fiscal policy in the form of automatic stabilizers to alleviate cyclical volatility. The creation of the Federal Reserve System in 1913 has been disputed as a source of stability with it and its policies having mixed successes. Since the early 1980s the sources of the Great Moderation has been attributed to numerous causes including public policy, industry practices, technology, and even good luck."

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_Unit...
The manner of human "pre-programming" is so abstract that it falls outside the definition of what is normally meant by "pre-programming" in the context of AI. If you had some basic "instincts" codified into your AI that allowed for "self-perseveration" or was manifested as some type of reasoning-engine-BIOS that's one thing, but applying arbitrary training data sets onto your AI (as a pre-requisite for it to function maximally) is the type of "pre-programming" I'm getting at.
I don't get the sense that the author believes the current system is perfect, or without flaws. The author simply points out some of the flaws, as the author perceives them, in MM Theory.

Is the current system brittle, and growing more so over time? Absolutely.

Is MM Theory the answer? I couldn't say. But part of ascertaining whether or not MM Theory can help us is taking a look at all of its wrinkles. (We should be taking a look at all of its benefits too. Again, just intellectual honesty, and necessary to the full analysis of the idea.)
Sophia Diaz
Always rely on INTERNET DON any day any time. I and my husband went to apply for a mortgage and were surprised when our lender told us we had only a 640 credit score. This did not seem right to us since we pay our bills on time and don’t have big credit balances. When we checked our credit report, we noticed there was a very glaring error on it. It showed that one of our accounts was still open with a large balance which was overdue. We paid off this balance almost two months ago, but it has not shown up yet on our history. We have a good down payment, good income, steady jobs and a house that we want to make an offer on. I was thinking if there is any way we can fix our credit score without going through the credit bureau’s process? which I am afraid is going to take a long time Because we wanted to move fast and try to get this house. I was referred to INTERNETDON4@GMAIL.COM, that he will help me out fast. So I gave him a try and this guy just made our dream come true within a few days.
Consultants also do not get paid vacation, or paid sick leave. They also don't get any of the benefits that a lot of regular employees get. But that's part of the game, they have to account for all of that which is why they earn much more per hour. A lot of those "customer acquisition" tasks cost time and may not necessarily yield a return, but that's part of the extra risk consultants have to assume and why not everyone is willing to do it.
You are much too kind. Kurzweil is a loon, full stop. The fact he once made brilliant contributions to computer science is quite irrelevant to the essential craziness of his more recent delusions.

In 2005, Kurzweil published The Singularity Is Near and predicted this would be the state of the world in the year 2030: "Nanobot technology will provide fully immersive, totally convincing virtual reality. Nanobots will take up positions in close physical proximity to every interneuronal connection coming from our senses. If we want to experience real reality, the nanobots just stay in position (in the capillaries) and do nothing. If we want to enter virtual reality, they suppress all of the inputs coming from our actual senses and replace them with the signals that would be appropriate for the virtual environment. Your brain experiences these signals as if they came from your physical body."

That is not happening by the year 2030. It is so starkly delusional that anyone who seriously affirms a belief that it will happen probably needs psychiatric help.

It is akin to Eric Drexler's loony visions back in the 1980s that nanobots would cure all diseases and continually restore our bodies to perfect health. We were supposed to all be immortal by now.

None of this is happening, probably not ever, and certainly not in the lifetime of any human being currently living. Kurzweil is going to die, Drexler is going to die, everybody is going to die. Adopting a pseudo-scientific religion to avoid facing mortality is kind of sad.
How to convert Figma frames into Google slides (with each of their APIs)
There's one big problem with this entire idea of co2 levels affecting sleep quality or humans in general:

Even though there are cognitive effects of CO2, most often the CO2 levels in indoor rooms are simply a sign of low oxygen levels. In fact, there should be an inverse relationship between CO2 and oxygen in rooms. So an experiments would need to take this into account and supply pure oxygen to make up for the oxygen that has been used up.
Part of the issue is that the metric for "high performers" can be well out of line with skill, at least as measured as a product of profitability.
The first Iphone didn't even have 3G.
For Google, this is small. Remember when they had to pay US$500M to the US DOJ for knowingly assisting in pushing drugs?[1]

[1] https://www.wired.com/2013/05/google-pharma-whitaker-sting/
She has an idea in her head about how the world should work and she has a tome of rules and regulations that you must follow at all times. Lots of yelling and screaming when these rules are broken. There is no scale to her reactions. You walked on the floor with bare feet? Same reaction as if you broke a cherished heirloom.
+1 here. I worked at an IoT startup with a lot of gas sensors. When we tested the CO2 sensor, we immediately noticed a correlation between early-afternoon sleepiness and high CO2 levels. Opening the door to the outside world lowered levels and within 5 minutes we felt more awake. It changed how I work: I still like to be warm and cozy, but now I'll bundle up and endure changing the air rather than seal every door and window as I used to.
Goodhart's Law: When targets and metrics are bad for business
I agree 100%. The approach I like is what I call "lowest negotiated price". How it would work is that buyers (i.e. insurance companies) could still negotiate for a lower cost, but whatever that cost ends up being is the cost _everyone_ pays. This allows buyers to continue to try to get a better price if they can, while likely making sure the price that is agreed upon is fair to all.
I thought this admission/apology from NYT after the 2016 election was interesting.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/13/us/elections/to-our-reade...

we aim to rededicate ourselves to the fundamental mission of Times journalism. That is to report America and the world honestly, without fear or favor, striving always to understand and reflect all political perspectives and life experiences in the stories that we bring to you.
I love to have more of everything. I just don't get the hype.
It also took billions of years to evolve heavier than air flight, but it took technology much less time than that.

How long did it take evolution to build a structure taller than 100 m?

Technology just moves on different timescales, with different methods and different objectives. Evolution is slow and dumb, and not goal oriented.

In some domains, technology might never catch up to biology. In others we've beaten it soundly.
Compliance is easy. Make the default "no tracking, no ad customization". Only trying to evade that makes it hard.
Can confirm most of these points, but still believe TypeScript is a net positive for productivity, when you consider things like refactoring tools (VS Code). And on top of that add increased safety, less bugs and improved code quality because if you encounter something problematic you will actually dare improve it, because things are much less likely to break.
> 2. I want to have more than one version of a package in a distribution.

> APT answer: Handwave! You don't need it. You can just have multiple distributions! It is because of how we sign things - we sign collections!

This is not true at all. If you need to distribute multiple versions of the same package then all you need to do is provide multiple versions of the same package. Just get your act straight, learn how to package software, create your packages so that you can deploy them simultaneously without breaking downstream software, and you're set.
> But we do know there must be algorithms capable of solving the Turing test, since there are only finite questions you could ask and only finite answers you could get back

Only if the algorithm itself encodes the entirety of those finite questions and answers. You might as well say that pi (or any irrational number) is intelligent, since every sentence ever spoken by any human is encoded therein somewhere.

The problem is that intelligently selecting the index of pi to use at a given time (or writing the algorithm that knows what to say in advance) is an act that itself requires a human mind's intelligence. You're only moving the problem one step back. You might as well reverse engineer every possible AES-128 output for every possible key and input (up to a certain length) and declare the cipher broken. It might be possible given infinite computing resources, but doing so wouldn't offer any insight.
I live in New Orleans (grad school). I have plenty of friends from college who work at FAANGs. The local market here consists largely of DXC, CGI and IBM paying “data scientists” $90k and junior devs $40k and laughing all the way to the bank.
It's not like doctors and actuaries don't know this.

For reasons poorly understood (though there are many theories) most people have a difficult time changing whatever lifestyle was hurting them in the first place. People also have a poor model of how health care works (most people seem to think it's like getting your car fixed: go to "mechanic" and have problem fixed). Finally the educational level that needs to be addressed is quite low (e.g. the FDA requires that medical labeling assume a fifth grade eduction; since most people take two headache tablets, most are set at a level where two is not dangerous, etc).

Thus, for example, the ADA diet advice recommends you have a "small" amount of carbs ("have a smaller slice of cake, or have an orange instead") in the hope that at least they can reduce the severity of the symptoms. Too large a goal might lead to no compliance at all.

And the actuaries at the insurance companies have figured out the lifetime cost of putting someone on maintenance therapy vs more aggressive treatment that in most cases people won't follow.

A case in point: I was diagnosed with prediabetes and my endocrinologist would only prescribe mainline treatment without additional investigation. Legally she could order any test she wanted but not only would the insurance company bounce anything nonstandard (by their standards) but the hospital management would hassle her as well. I was lucky: I had the money and the education to find and work with a different doctor and found an underlying illness. Once treated, a bunch of symptoms (of which diabetes was just one) went away. The system is not set up to help people like me (though sadly it's not clear how it could even with infinite funding).
It's a good benchmark if you are hoping the AI will succeed at a job currently done by humans. Such as,say, AI research.
Maybe 20 years back I remember reading an article describing how many generics were intentionally ineffective - missing key ingredients - and secretly created by the drug manufacturer themselves in order to increase sales. It was a big article in the New York Times if I recall.
I've been using my 15" 2017 MBP since it was released (so 1.5 years) with absolutely zero keyboard issues. And honestly, I like this keyboard much more than the previous generation. (I had a 15" Early 2013 MBP until I got my current one.)

I'm not saying that my lack of issues negates the presence of issues for other people by any means, and I think that Apple's "repair" policy of "pay us hundreds of dollars to replace the bottom half of your laptop because we made a poorly-conceived design decision" is... dumb, to say the least.

But I don't relate to people who talk about how awful this keyboard is from a usability perspective. I like practically everything about the new keyboard much better than the previous generation's, but my opinion seems to be the overwhelming minority on this. What exactly is so bad about the new keyboard — leaving aside anything repair-related?
Cool! I worked at an ethylene-sensing IoT startup (fruit ripeness natch). What was the core sensor you used? (We were using off-the-shelf, but somewhat pricey, electrochemical sensors)