skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I doubt this will reach the same level of popularity in cities/countries with great public transit, highly walkable streets,

I hope you are right. The littering / parking isn't the biggest problem or nuisance. It's the fact that the riders of these "e-scooters" almost always ride on the sidewalks / footpaths and cause safety hazard to pedestrians. Forget the fact that it's illegal[1] in most states to ride a motorized vehicle (other than disability vehicles) on the sidewalks, almost all of these lyme, scoot, bird riders ignore it and routinely cause collisions in San Francisco.

[1] https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/scooters

> A motorized scooter may be operated on a bicycle path, trail or bikeway, but not on a sidewalk.

Related: Reminder: It Is Illegal to Ride Scooters On City Sidewalks => https://sf.curbed.com/2016/6/1/11831080/scooters-sidewalks-i...
Google allows you to limit our of office messages to within the company as well.
Thanks you for the suggestions and for pointing to a more realistic point about addiction. As I see - and I've been living in this for many years - addiction has nothing to do with the chemical.
Johann Hari has some very good thoughts on the topic. The first time I heard about him was this talk: https://www.ted.com/talks/johann_hari_everything_you_think_y...

His books worth checking out too. As someone who struggled with addiction since childhood it is something I can very much relate to.
Explainable isn't the same as justifiable. An expert system may be able to readily explain that it determined the chance of recidivism is high due to factors x, y, and z. However, there is no guarantee that those factors correlate with recidivism at all since expert systems were simply built to emulate (human) expert decisions.

While it's very easy to do machine learning _incorrectly_ it is also possible to reasonably attribute factors to outcomes based on large quantities of data. You can also look a LIME/SHAP and other factor contribution metrics. This seems like a significant improvement over expert systems.
Events are the cornerstone of product analytics. If you want to understand what your users are doing on your platform, and to look for opportunities to improve the user experience, events are a big part of that.
It's very hard for a cyclist to hit and run. On a bicycle, even when it's not your mistake, a mistake will usually end up killing or hurting the cyclist. It's not like a car where you can kill a non-trivial amount of people and see zero repercussions.
> You don't think desktop Linux users use pip or npm?

Most won't, only developers. Even there I'd say linux has an advantage because many of the dependencies in tools like that can be included by the distro itself. It hasn't worked well in practice so far but in theory it's a better solution.

This is also identical across operating systems so it's hardly an example of one being superior to the other.

> Also, speaking as a distro packager, we don't do as much vetting as Apple does and we certainly don't do as much sandboxing.

I'm sure the vetting could be much stricter, but so far in practice it has not been an issue so I continue to trust responsible distros (debian, redhat, not arch). I'd also hope some distros like redhat are doing a lot more vetting.
Hmm, wow... I played original Deus Ex a few times and do not recall it. Is it part of the recently released "Revision" uplift? :-\
Ask HN: How to practice sales without making it a career
Hey all, I’m interested in getting good at sales but not making a career out of it. I love software engineering and could see myself committing to this field for a long time but I would love to get better at “sales-y” skills such as understanding customers, identifying needs, handling objections because they are skills that are useful in any career.
One of the things I enjoy most about HN is learning the idiomatic language of other cultures, even if I have to look a word up.

I don’t think that asking people to use bland, lowest common denominator language is an incentive for smart people to participate. This isn’t the Simplified English version of Wikipedia.
I’m confused as to who actually owns the patents. The title says “Ford stole tech [...] from MIT, professors say”, but the lawsuit is “Ethanol Boosting Systems LLC v. Ford Motor Co.”.

I’m not certain how IP rights works at MIT, but if the patents are owned by MIT, wouldn’t MIT be the party that needs to sue? If so, why is it instead “Ethanol Boosting Systems”? Does MIT feel that MIT IP was stolen?
Is There a Fourth Neutrino Out There in the Universe?
Volumetric additive manufacturing via tomographic reconstruction
To be fair, Kearns did represent himself for most of that legal battle. I sure the cases would have been settled much more quickly had he been backed by MIT's lawyers.
> there are absolutely regulations governing loans in margin accounts and using securities as collateral for leverage

No, there are not for institutional investors. Rentech fell into an interesting dispute (tigger with Deutsche Bank) with the IRS regarding long-term capital gains. If I want to lever my institution 10,000:1, and can find a lender who will lend against it, there is no law prohibiting me from doing so.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice.
I've heard comic groupies also referred to as "Chucklesluts"
I fail to see how being out of office and not responding to work email has any relevance to a person not recognizing when their bank accounts are being zeroed. I also fail to see the vector by which someone being out of office gives an attacker access to their bank accounts.
You say people can always choose and on the next phrase argue for limiting that choice...

I don’t know to which front page you’re referring but honestly the comments from the CBC head quoted in the article sound like those of a bureaucrat who’s seeing her power to influence what Canadians should watch being diminished by Netflix’s presence, and being angry about it.
I know a country in the East which feels the same way about American companies.
The most obvious phishing email I ever received was from some random domain informing me I had not take the required anti-phishing tracking and to please click the link to take it. Like a good employee, I sent the email to our spam@ account and didn't give it any more thought. A month later, my manager comes in and informs me that the anti-phishing training is not optional and I had a week to complete it.
Better: Say what you're going to say regardless and cite to these studies, knowing that people will agree with what you're saying because Kids These Days and That Newfangled Technology are both evil by definition, so they won't bother to read the studies, and/or will read the studies such that they agree with you.
You can't know the busy beaver number without solving the halting problem.
From the article:

>The professors transferred ownership of their creations to MIT, one of the premier U.S. research universities, which then granted exclusive patent-licensing rights to a small company the three men founded, Ethanol Boosting Systems LLC. EBS offered to license patents on the enhancements to Ford in 2014, but the company declined.

If EBS doesn't get paid, then MIT doesn't get paid.
SHAP is more recent and does work with (just about) any ML model: https://github.com/slundberg/shap

There's still more work to do in interpretability but models are rarely opaque black boxes with no way to see inside.
Because many users of VPNs are doing so to bypass country detection.

I regularly jump between UK, US and France in my VPN app.
Yes, but the point of human progress is not that we don't have to survive like our ancestors, but rather can thrive. Cases where the former occurs are not due to inherent necessity but rather due to faults of the dominant economic system.
I think you meant "neckbeard" or "basement dweller" as opposed to "incel."
The past few years there's probably one front-page article a week on Event Sourcing / CQRS.
Absolutely couldn’t agree more.
Monks working diligently copying books (which were easily destroyed or lost for a few thousand years, so every copy was additional safety from being lost forever) are the only reason we have so many ancient texts.

I think the sum of monks probably provided more value than the hikikomori, especially if you consider second order effects (preserved texts allowed the Florentine re-discovery of classical Greek/Roman philosophy, starting the Renaissance period)
University research divisions are usually spun out as commercial entities around a technology that was developed. Ethanol Boosting Systems LLC is owned by MIT.
I'm saying that I can read skewed/bending pages easily, but I'm having a super hard time getting tesseract to play nice with such images. I almost always need to rescan.

Tesseract is incredibly good... as long as your lines of words are straight.
For people like me who are not familiar with what line buffering is, I found a good short explanation here https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Buffering...
I think the best way to limit the effectiveness of such campaigns is to have well-educated people. Of course, having critically thinking, sceptic population is very unwieldy.
Impose a Speed Limit on the Autobahn? Not So Fast, Many Germans Say
Note this only supports Nvidia GPUs. Doesn't mention it in a single word.
To expand on that comment, the goal is to de-risk any expensive effort, by front loading on cheap effort that might help rule out the nightmare scenarios (like the process of making any big decision in life). Doing studies, talking to potential customers, finding a niche to open into, etc. follow in this paradigm. If anyone desires specific suggestions elaborating along these lines, the following book might be worth checking out:
If you build it, will they come? By Rob Adams
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7876406-if-you-build-it-...
Important to keep in mind that security is always balanced with convenience. Individuals need to just judge how much "risk" they want
Seed of moon's first sprout: Chinese scientists' endeavor
It's very hard for a cyclist to hit and run

Actually, in most SF bike-pedestrian collisions resulting in pedestrian injury, the cyclist flees.

Example:

https://patch.com/california/san-francisco/pedestrians-hospi...
Next time a little comment would go a long way confronting with HN guidelines.
I can't agree with the primary message that gives tech a pass as virtually harmless towards kids' development.

I've yet to see anything that is used in excess that is harmless. The use of tech these days reminds me of television watching in the past. It has been impossible to determine TV's impact on society but it has had an impact but we can't tell if it's been good or bad.

I also think that one study can't possibly test the whole impact of tech on kids' development.

A generation from now there will be an impact but we won't know whether it's been good or bad. What I do know is that there is an opportunity cost by tech on a whole generation. Time that could have been used on other activities but yet it would have been used on apps.

I think it's up to parents to make sure their kids use their time effectively and it's not lost in front of a useless app.
I think Event Sourcing is neatly defined as an algebraic group and provides a nice abstraction to reason with. Perhaps the problem is not recognizing this notion and not proving the correctness of a system before implementing it?
They're solving the wrong problem. Instead of writing "an AI that determines guilt" (e.g. a classifier) they should be trying to write "an AI that compiles a list of evidence against the accused".

This list of evidence would then be subjected to the same scrutiny that a list of evidence from a department of human police officers would be subjected to. If the AI cannot make the case against somebody in a way that's persuasive to a human prosecutor, then the case goes nowhere.

If the AI cannot provide rational clear and understandable justification for it's assertion, then it's not ready to replace humans who can be expected to provide justifications for their beliefs. Police officers are expected to write police reports, and so should any AI that's meant to do their job. Right now they've just got the AI equivalent of a cop who says "I feel in my gut that he's guilty, and I'm not going to explain why." But because it's "AI" I guess some politicians thought that was good enough.

Of course doing it right is probably harder.
> If I'm Ford, I surely would have triple checked every IP angle before putting a new technology in every single vehicle I make.

Perhaps they should have known in this particular case. Maybe they did and moved forward anyway.

But in the more general case it turns out that this is pretty much impossible to do, in practice.

How could you possibly be sure that you didn't infringe on any patents when there are hundreds of thousands granted every year in the US alone, and they are deliberately written in the most vague and obscure language possible?

What companies do instead is build a library of their own patents, which they can use against any other entity that sues them for patent infringement. The Apple vs. Samsung patent wars are a good example of this. This strategy generally works if the other party actually makes some sort of thing and is not a patent troll.

This is one of the many reasons that the patent system isn't really a net positive for society. Instead, it can be considered a tax on anyone who participates in it, and society as a whole.

Except for patent attorneys, they make tons and tons of money off it. Everyone else loses.
>Not even Close to the extent China is persecuting today

You might want to look that up. America has the highest incarceration rate in the world, even after you factor in the worst estimates for the Uyghur reeducation camps.
Rewriting the same incongruent phrase in pseudo-code does nothing to help your case.

The phrase doesn't make sense logically. You don't have to be an avid consumer of technology to be affected by gradual technology change.
Getting Started with Python 1, Hemant Sharma, EBook – Amazon.com
I was referring specifically to the Big Dig, as was the parent comment.
I want separate blocking strategies by IP range. I.e. one for the entire house (just basically block all ads), and different blocking levels for "kids" devices per age group. Right now the only way to do this seems to be to set up several pi-holes (which is not a problem per se, but cumbersome to maintain and monitor).
Greg Young was wondering in one of his talks about Event Sourcing why people try to connect CQRS/Event Sourcing with .NET
>China is one example of that and there are several others in Asia.

Keep in mind that China has a heavy incentive to lie about their prison population and/or play games with the definition of "prison population"; after all, it's important that a harmonious society has few people who break laws (implying a low prison population). Eastern Europe under Communism faced a similar cost/benefit structure.

Therefore, as they have an incentive to cover that up, it's safe to make the assumption that the real numbers are likely significantly higher.
Waybackify: Rewrite the Links in an HTML File to Point to the Wayback Machine
I dunno.. kids raised on the bold and the beautiful would probably have a wide range of interpersonal skills. They may be narcissists and not nice to their neighbors but I'd bet they'd climb the corporate ladder.
Synchronize your threading.
Ask HN: Why are the cloud providers misrepresenting blockchain technology?
Well, startups too are misrepresenting blockchain tech. But cloud providers doing this seems strange.

Have a look at the following offerings:

1. AWS Blockchain - https://aws.amazon.com/blockchain/
An excerpt from the page - "Blockchain technologies are often used to solve two types of customer needs. In the first case, multiple parties work with a centralized, trusted authority to maintain a complete and verifiable record of transactions." - WHAT, REALLY?!

2. Azure Blockchain - https://azure.microsoft.com/en-in/solutions/blockchain/

What are they really selling? - A 2018 post by Consensys comes to mind - https://media.consensys.net/blockchain-vs-distributed-ledger-technologies-1e0289a87b16 - this neatly distinguishes b/w blockchain and other distributed ledger technologies (DLT) - Corda & Hyperledger & discusses each's capabilities and limitations.

AWS & Azure blockchain offerings basically allow you to setup Corda, Hyperledger & other DLTs in the cloud. It's not hard to see why they want you to do this - basically just like every other application, DLTs require compute, network and lots of storage. Not to forget cross-selling analytics services. But does it really require the biggest cloud providers to misrepresent blockchain tech?

R3's Corda uses intermediaries called notaries to establish trust and the notary service provides consensus as a pluggable component. Hyperledger's orderer service provides consensus as a pluggable component too.

Now most business use cases listed with the aforementioned cloud offerings could easily be powered with Crash fault tolerance (CFT) consensus (like Raft) and Byzantine fault tolerance (BFT) consensus (like PoW) would be an overkill. And if I'm only using their cloud offering in a DLT with CFT consensus configuration, I'd be better off using a more mature distributed database technology instead. So what's the point of all this AWS/Azure blockchain hoo-ha anyway?

Am I missing something here?
> Except they were not.

99% of the streets for miles and miles around me were built after the invention of the car for near-dedicated use by automobiles, and those that were not were converted to that design.

> Cars are just too dangerous to have anywhere near people. They should be banned from cities and suburbs.

You say that, but I'd like to see you move your family to new house without using an automobile to move your stuff.
This is exactly what I was thinking, and it's a little scary. The officials are smart enough to know why this kind of system is dangerous and refuse to be subject to it, yet they'll forge full steam ahead whilst applying it to the general populace. I hope they recognize the danger of this.
In the US a lot of questionable filtering is done because of religious or common concepts that are not very sensible but do influence the amount of money a company can make.

For example, a christian religious group might take offence to software containing other religions, and if that group is big enough, they might consider not buying anything from a company until a change is made. This basically goes for any subject and any group, but in the case of the USA, a lot of normal things are considered taboo by many groups of people (i.e. sex ed / sex health / pictures of bodies / alcohol / everything that is not american). Because some of those groups can be very large and very influential, 'normal' things get banned or ignored by those groups and as a result less money is to be made.
Combining technologies can be tricky and it is usually worthwhile to look a little deeper when you are doing it at what the patent is claiming.
Have you been to rural India? Many people don't even have reliable power. Industrial automation trajectories are so far removed from their reality as to be fairy tales.
>most time spent online is done via mobile devices, with the greatest portion of that time spent on social media

A lot of people in Phils seem to have a FB-connected mobile plan where they can chat on FB but not see the pictures on there, although you can send them pictures in the chat. And it only seems to connect them to FB, not the whole internet. Just a messenger app I guess. (Most of my close friends are in the Philippines, we chat on FB.)
I'm not sure there's much evidence that it works though. Probably more effective is having employees use yubikeys or something.
You think they're going to sell the car to you?
> Pretty sure they distribute these appliances to ISPs...

They co-locate them at ISP as a form of extremely distributed peering. Netflix, however, owns the boxes.

In the context of licenses such as the GPLv2, distribution happens when software transfers from one party to another. This doesn't happen: the software always stays on Netflix owned devices.
There's solution for that:
"Decentraleyes - Local CDN Emulation" https://decentraleyes.org/
I wouldn't think it's novel enough. Toyota and Subaru have been using it for years. I had no idea Ford was doing this as well. It's a good idea. The port injection prevents carbon buildup on the valves and ports.
> [I]nstead of obsessing over “What’s the matter with those software folks who didn’t deliver on the schedule we gave them?” we need to ask instead “Why did we ever kick off a project with such marginal expected value?
A SaaS can fail... if you're the solo dev on it -- nothing you build is ever a failure. Most other business ventures - like someone mentioned 'info products' -- none of those has inherent value unless it's a success and you make money.

The value in ALL side projects is that as long as it's 'live', it's something you can use on your portfolio, and worst case scenario -- open source that baby -- and now you're an OSS maintainer.
Hopefully the law would prevent such a thing :/. People in power have proposed such restrictions, but yes we'll see what we get.
Timestamp in the UUID will make sense if these are generated by one computing node. Even if the nodes are off by a nano second in a cluster, we lose the accuracy.
Wind turbine manufacturing. It takes ~500 workers to build a wind turbine. Close enough to the Midwest and East Coast (Ohio for inland, Michigan is on the Great Lakes if you want to ship out the Intercoastal for offshore wind on the East Coast) for transportation ease. Transition out anyone on the manufacturing line to PMs or turbine techs who want to get outside or relocate.

To power all of the US with wind alone would take ~4 million turbines, not to mention repowering existing wind farms over time. That’s a lot of manufacturing left to be done, and it isn’t going out of style anytime soon.
Isn't it Chinese censorship - as reflected by Apple App store in China vs USA?
A 1x1 convolution is such an edge case of convolution that it's really not worth discussing its inclusion as related to the success of the Transformer. Calling the Transformer "convolutions with attention" demonstrates a new-complete misunderstanding of the architecture.

There's a reason Transformer's original paper is entitled "Attention is All You Need", because it throw out all the previous structures people assumed were necessarily to solving these problems (recurrence from RNNs, local-transformations for convolutions) and just threw multiple layers of large multi-headed attentions at the problem and got even better results.
Everything You Wanted to Know About Modern Monetary Theory
This is an interesting discussion. I can see the author's point - maybe, as a thought experiment, an attacker could latch onto the fact that someone is out of the office and use that as a wedge.

Along the lines of "John and I had a payment planned, but he's out of the office, can you send it to [fake destination]?"

But, like other people have noted, you also have to weigh the chance of that happening in real life. It seems like the amount of planning on the attacker's part would be significant enough that if they could pull it off, they would have found easier targets by then.
> It's the fact that the riders of these "e-scooters" almost always ride on the sidewalks / footpaths and cause safety hazard to pedestrians.

It's more dangerous to ride them on streets, even on bike paths. Who cares if it's illegal? I'd rather ride on the sidewalk then get hit by a car trying to pass me at 45 mph.
Is it really unpopular in Sweden? I gave a conference talk there and everybody I spoke with liked their system, and said that all the coverage in the US criticizing it wasn't true. They were all laughing at me (when they weren't feeling sorry for me - since by their standards I live in a primitive pre-Renaissance society.)