skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Leela recently won the TCEC Cup, a knockout competition of computer engines[1]. It's increasingly clear that it's a top 3/4 engine at this point, despite various setbacks and resets over the last year.

Quite apart from the chess side of things, there are many fascinating lessons to learn about how to manage and debug issues in these sorts of deep learning systems. For example, at one point there was a serious bug with underpromotion which affected millions of training games, and it was interesting to see debates about whether the system would just correct itself over time once that was fixed, or whether it would be permanently skewed.

[1] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/lczero/3uI_dTa1Ksg
Does anyone have a good alternative to Google Maps? I recently purchased a Nexus 5X and installed LineagosOS with no Google Services. The one thing that I am having trouble with is finding a good navigation application.
One of the managers I work with has a new Model 3. The window has to roll down slightly in order for the door to open, so if the window gets stuck then the door is stuck.
It would seem to ban only international or interstate created deep fakes. This appears to prop up the locally created deep fake market.

I'm only half kidding, it seems like the immediate defense would be: I made it at home or in a data center in my home state thus the statute does not apply.
Amazon: Facial recognition bias claims are 'misleading'
there was just a recently completed apartment building here which was months ahead of schedule. They tried more agile methods when doing it: daily meetings instead of weekly ones and working more in parallel. It was done by a less dinosaury company called Fira.
Entrepreneurs Who Built Billion Dollar Companies Share This One Trait
Make Smooth Appearance Animations in React Native
> are you sure it protects you from criminal liability if you label something as a deep fake, then other people redistribute it without that label?

No, I'm not sure. I said "potentially," but I don't know.

I think it may be plausible to argue that labeling a recording outside of the recording itself should be one factor in deciding whether a reasonable observer would consider it authentic.

And I think it may also be plausible to argue that doing so protects the labeler, and that (particularly if the license to redistribute requires that the disclaimer be shown in any subsequent distribution channels) only the people who distribute it without the label should be found to have violated the act.
installs != active users
The idea is to enforce equipment manufacturers to prepare uniquely identifiable IDs in all imagery/footage their equipment produces, entice all software vendors to register all operations in a blockchain and store a reference to it in metadata; then reject any footage that can't have all steps verified as "fake".

How is that any different than tracking production inputs in logistic chains using blockchain?
The discussion here is shallow and weak.

The posters assume that the awakened mind is all discerning and will be able to explain the material universe. What they dont realize is that the material universe is only a projection and is fundamentally inconsistent as is physics and math.

I see the west's obsession towards "thinking" and "intellect" very fascinating but the mind is only a fragment of the very large field of consciousness.

But who am I talking to..

- 3 points for this post please.
I am considered a great hirer, and it is because of this "one weird trick."

The most useful "question" is any generic task.

It can be as simple as

-- please put this spreadsheet in alphabetical order

-- I have misplaced your resume, could you send me another copy?

-- That sounds like an interesting article, would you send me a copy later on

Even the most trivial task will really illuminate the difference between candidates. Compared to a task, merely talking is entirely useless. Some very polished candidates will simply ignore the request and do nothing. Some will do one of two or three. Some very quiet candidates who are not "impressive" will do all the requests, thoroughly and with obvious care.

How can someone handle the request to forward an article with care? You have to see it to understand. They may remind you of the context, say a word about the article, and add another one for more context for example.
I wrote an article with some other ways to unGoogle [1]. I still intend to revisit Part II but self-hosted email kicked my ass. I'm open to suggestions though.

[1] https://www.honestrepair.net/index.php/2018/07/23/un-google-...
"Deep Fakes" in general seem to be already covered by existing libel laws, though that has some problems. Libel is generally a civil matter, and is extremely difficult to prosecute.

There is precedent, even in the US, for criminal libel laws[0]. Perhaps following that path (combined with continued work on detection and defeat of the technology) would be preferable. Since libel and defamation are well-defined and have a long history of jurisprudence, many of the constitutional and legal issues which would have to be answered in opening a new avenue of speech restriction could be contained within the existing contexts.

I'd even think leaving it in the civil arena would make sense until it became a problem worthy of criminalization. Legislating a matter before it arises is almost never a good idea, from either a prudential or principled standpoint.

[0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...
I suppose the person who removed the label would, theoretically, be the guilty party. One could argue that law enforcement is flawed, but that's true for any law.
Just stare at them until you know whether or not they're a good employee. You can tell from their face.
I’m surprised there’s no mention of the convention of using all caps for surnames. Being able to read the letters and your company name and preferred pronoun and favorite subjects and twitter handle is not worth much if I can’t even tell which is your given name.

Hello ... Mr. Brian?
Xaiomi mi 9 live pix on microbloging site launch next month
Being a part of the Apple ecosystem is, in large part, paying into a future vision. Without this vision, what's the point of spending top dollar to be a part of something utterly uncertain?

Linux is a much much lower cost of entry - there's no grand vision expectation.
> I personally find it more useful — it tells me whether I should look up breaking changes or not.

It doesn't though, does it? It's a contract, sure, but there's no guarantee that the producer of the software you're depending on is actually adhering to that contract. It's the same for "romantic versioning" or whatever – regardless of what the version identifier looks like, it's your responsibility as a consumer to actually determine whether the new version fits.

I think the point of the article is that trying to mechanize the meaning of the version identifier is pointless, unless it's also properly enforced. It's just an id, no better or worse than a commit hash really. Thus, you may as well design version identifiers for humans, rather than potentially robots.
At my work I only work in Firefox, another Dev only works in Chrome, etc. By each developer only working in one browser all the time we get pretty good cross browser testing. This has led me to only using Firefox at home too since it works really really well.
Most cars are just parked on the side of the road. At least in the UK. Not really "designated parking spaces". Sure now they accept it and draw white lines sometimes, but I bet it wasn't like that when cars were first introduced.
1. This is easily done, both on free and gsuite (paid) depending on how you want to implement it. I have multiple Gmail accounts with dozens of emails attached to each. Multiple configuration options.

2. I've never used a calendar outside of Google, and avoid it where possible, but find Google's calendar easy.

3. I think this is a great feature. I use it to collaborate on tons of things, with the understanding that it's not 100% secure, and acting accordingly. Maybe it doesn't suit your particular use case... and that's fine. It doesn't mean it doesn't work great for other uses.

^ all of that considered, I still agree fully with the original article. I've taken a few steps to have working backups and have fallback plans but having an account closed would still be disastrous.
In the games against Stockfish: AlphaZero also played sacrifices that were considered unusual but helped to win the game in the end.
Should you consider GraphQL for your next Application?
Attorneys General in Six States Are Now Investigating Facebook's Data Practices
You can call help on anything. Here I am asking for help on something I have no clue about:

>>> from server.db import db
>>> help(db)
help on Client in module google.cloud.firestore_v1beta1.client object:

class Client(google.cloud.client.ClientWithProject)
| Client(project=None, credentials=None, database='(default)')
|
| Client for interacting with Google Cloud Firestore API.
|
| .. note::
|
| Since the Cloud Firestore API requires the gRPC transport, no
| ``_http`` argument is accepted by this class.
...
Not just hyperdsaline, but more toxix as well, as concentrations move from trace, to dabgerous. Desalination is a suprisingly dirty proccess at scale.
Of course, Google Maps has a problem in that it gives people the wrong eircode if I put in my mailing address (I currently live in a building with several apartments - haven't moved yet). Perhaps Google maps can't handle multiple postcodes per building?
This is also a neat related tool (removes BGs from images of humans using machine learning):
https://remove.bg
Technically it was the "Trident" engine
Top Subscription ECommerce Platforms for 2019
Random Search for Hyper-Parameter Optimization (2012) [pdf]
Luxury and story-driven brands moving in, middle-class retail moving out
> That's not the question. I'm not asking why humans tend to do something.

I suspect that you are ... or you are indeed asking a nonsense question. But let's see ...

> I'm asking why should one person's suffering or one person's life be intrinsically important to another---not why it often is.

OK. I'm still not sure what exactly you mean by that question, though.

> To get to the point another way. To decide how to act you need some kind of ethical system.

Sure, that seems sensible to me.

> Let's say you pick utilitarianism.

OK.

> Utilitarianism says that the suffering and happiness of each individual counts equally.

I am not sure it necessarily does, but I guess that doesn't matter for the point that you are trying to make, so let's assume it does ...

> The obvious question is: "Why is that so?"

Which is a "how" question in disguise, isn't it? "How did it come that philosophers chose to define utilitarianism this way?" That certainly sounds like a very much empirical question to me!?

> A possible answer is that, this is the premise that leads to the optimal outcome of maximum total happiness.

That might well be a justification given by some philosopher, sure!?

> Which leads to the next question: "Why is maximum total happiness the optimal outcome?"

Which is another "how" question in disguise, isn't it? It's again asking for how it came to be that this was considered the optimal outcome, isn't it?

> It's never ending. There is always another why question. Going deeper and deeper into that rabbit hole can be maddening and it's not always useful, but sometime it is. Ands it's almost always useful to ask a few whys.

Well, if they are "how" questions in disguise, yeah, sure ... but you might as well directly ask the "how" questions in order to avoid the confusion? If you really don't mean a "how" question by those (be it exactly the ones I suggested above, or possibly slightly different ones), though, I don't really understand what your question is here either.

> Without asking the whys, you have no justification for any of your beliefs, and thus no way of knowing which beliefs to hold on to.

Well, yes, again, if you actually mean disguised "how" questions. I mean, just asking the question doesn't give you a justification, right? Rather, it's the first step towards potentially finding an answer, which then can serve as a justification. It's just that "why" questions that are not "how" questions in disguise don't have answers, which is why they are useless for the purpose, or if they have "answers", then that's only because the answer is assumed in the question, which obviously doesn't make for a good justification for anything.

I am still curious though what exactly it is that you mean by "I'm asking why should one person's suffering or one person's life be intrinsically important to another"!
It's interesting that french employees working for american company was fired for complaining (or boycotting) about said company on website which belongs to another american company.

Sign of the times...
Congratulations! This is xkcd #783.

There's no need to remove addresses from places that already have them, and a system like [Plus codes](https://plus.codes/) could identify physical locations without an address.
With respect to the U.S. Congress, I don't think there is sufficient language to make something like this sufficient without also being overly broad. I'm looking at this, specifically:

10 ‘‘(2) the term ‘deep fake’ means an audiovisual
11 record created or altered in a manner that the
12 record would falsely appear to a reasonable observer
13 to be an authentic record of the actual speech or
14 conduct of an individual; and

If that's the case, any sort of creative editing, even just quick cuts, could fall under this (see: any primetime or cable news, any TV campaign ad, the quick cuts of Obama where it looks like he's singing Never Gonna Give You Up, etc). And, not to get on the US politics slant, but a law like this could be weaponized against political foes—basically, label everything you don't like as "fake news" and prosecute it under this law.

Additionally, if you look at this and just say "well, we all know what a deep fake is, so your point is moot," I will say, somewhat at the risk of contradicting myself, that maybe the language needs to be forward-thinking to cover whatever the next "deep fake" is.

In my opinion, the sort of clause above would be better written like:

The term "Computer-generated audiovisual impersonation" means an
audiovisual record created or altered by computer generation in
a manner that the record would falsely appear to a reasonable
observer to be an authentic record of the actual speech or conduct
of an individual;
This is great to hear! I forget exactly where it was posted but a journalist attempted to do this and she was not as successful as you.

I started the process, but it’s going very slowly. Mostly because I didn’t want to leave Gmail. But since you mentioned the 1Password truck, I will try that. Great post!
If it were only the drunks, then I wouldn't mind (no getting around self destructive behavior). Those drunks might have had families that depended on those food stamps, and that definitely crosses the line in my mind away from righteous in any sense of the word.
A new predictive model for more accurate electrical grid mapping
Ah, that's a lot more reasonable then.
Cyware is a garbage site that copies articles from actual news outlets. If you read coverage on other sites, they all say he faces up to 8 years in jail. He's been barely charged.

Source: https://hungarytoday.hu/ethical-hacker-faces-8-years-in-pris...
Truth is Truth. Learn to face it.
I don't understand how not writing your own physics engine automatically negates what I said.

If a developer has implemented a third-party physics engine, they should refer to that engine's documentation.
Smart Steps to Take to Grow Your Startup and Take It to the Max
1) true, so they bought and created big supermarkets, factories and kept the salaries low, this did not help people on building wealth anywhere...
2) Privatisation is true - so you agree with me.
3) And?
4) New business? You mean old police informants with capital, investing in what was interesting for them...
I would put it after R help function and, even better, F1 key to get the full documentation of any thing in Rstudio.
QR code on the back as he suggests seems a perfectly fine place for it. In fact, that makes it slightly less likely that I'm going to get irrelevant spam after the conference from someone scanning my badge when I didn't intend to permit it.
I was practicing at a medtech company in high school and the team really wanted to conduct tests in China, since the best product testing would be to shoot live pigs from a cannon into a concrete wall for treatment with the device afterward.

To my knowledge it never happened, because adhering to local ethics requirements would be better for seeking investments. But I also think the company went under because of lacking real world results in the limited trials that could be done.
Plenty of people in Austin seem happy to oblige by parking them in the street. I wonder how many people have popped their car tires or destroyed their mufflers by driving over these things at night.
No, explicitly. Last sentence in first paragraph for rule 5:

> Also it’s nice to allow your attendees the option to add pronouns to their badge.
One of the issues with a lot of those plastic sleeves with one lanyard attachment point is that it's relatively easy to tear the plastic with a thin metal clasp.

For pricey conferences that are very strict about replacing lost badges, I do want something that's solid. (which should probably be another badge best practice if you won't readily replace for free.)
I don't know the details of this Clinton-uranium-$$ story, but I can think of a few questions to ask...

1. If you were going to give somebody an illegal bribe, would you write "bribe" in the For: line on the check? (no, you would hide or disguise your bribe)

2. What plausible, legitimate reasons are there for Russia to donate to the Clinton Foundation?

3. Is charitable giving to anybody, especially in quantities exceeding $25-50 million, normal for Russia?

Cthulhu_ and arcticfox are definitely both right that charities are used by many rich people to avoid taxes and just because it's a charity doesn't mean the owner isn't benefiting from it.

I'd appreciate hearing your response. Not saying it happened one way or the other, just making some observations based on the tiny bit I've heard about this.

Edit:

Regarding #2, a quick search turned up [1]. I don't know anything about the Borgen Project, but a quick glance at the page doesn't look too suspicious. So, assuming that page is correct and that Russia donated similar quantities in 2013 as they did the same year the uranium incident happened, they donated over 50% to the Clinton Foundation. If those assumptions are fair and that actually is the case, it sure sounds suspicious to me.

[1]: https://borgenproject.org/russias-charitable-giving/
It is true in the sense that there is a legal concept called "duty of loyalty"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_of_loyalty

It should be pretty obvious you can't compete with your employer. If you want to compete then quit. You can't steal their trade secrets even if it's off duty. There's lots of other things covered by the duty of loyalty concept and if you explore them they almost all make perfect sense. It easy to see how the world wouldn't function without it.
> Time shifting ones commute either has severe financial repercussions for the
> employer (lost productivity) or the employees (a decrease in effective wages).

What do you mean repercussions? Less traffic jams means spending less time stuck in traffic. Traffic jams cost the economy a lot of money. Time-shifting just means people start and end their work day earlier or later than the average.

As for widening roads, that's what's been the Dutch solution to traffic congestion for over 30 years now (congestion pricing is a major taboo with the largest government party), and traffic jams are worse than ever. Traffic seems to always grow to fill the available space and then some, unless you give it a reason not to.

That congestion pricing will reduce CO2 emissions is an added bonus, but not really the reason why it's considered necessary.
> Should we try to build a society that optimizes for per capita happiness

Are you aware of the hedonic treadmill?

> Our modern concept of egalitarianism is mostly a product of religious thinking

You must be kidding. Religions promote the most brutal form of inequality ever. Study up on "dalits" in India.
Yes if you've written about it and I've read the work. My field is pretty small so both things are usually true for people I meet who want to talk to me about technical things.
Americans actually have something to protest about, French is comparatively speaking a social mecca. I am missing out any sort of realism from these yellow vests. Climate change is coming, organizing months of protests about your car fuel costs is shortsighted to say the least.
Holy shit dude.
Some details that as it appeared (in Hungarian) on the Civil Liberties Union blog ( jelenti.blog.hu/2019/01/25/igy_kert_bortont_etikus_hacker_vedencunkre_az_ugyesz ):

(it was translated to English by me, sorry for any mistakes):

- he was invited to visit Telekom's office (the expenses was on him), and wanted to give them the details

- he was not convinced by the meeting that they'll solve it (close the doors): tried again, successfully (yep, that's a bit grey hat).

There are several issues not with the hacking, according to the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union:

- the prosecutors used a way too generic accusation which missed several important details, like [regarding the crime] when, how, etc.

- the accusation claimed that the hack was done by using the Internet (seriously).

- they (the prosecutors) offered a deal of "admit the crime == free to leave" but when the guy denied they asked for more prison.

- the prosecutor stated: "we are not IT people but we know from the media (!) that with Internet and certain competence he could have hidden more of his digital footprints". And the prosecutors didn't asked for expert advisory for more than one an a half year long.

- they asked for 8 years because the hacker should have been able to disturb a public interest service, though the company claimed that this server/service was not affected any of their customers.
Relying on browser translation will make you sound or what you read unnatural in a lot of languages
CTRL-F pronoun:

"Also it’s nice to allow your attendees the option to add pronouns to their badge."
I suspect this limitation is because the supreme Court has traditionally held the federal government to such limitations in many areas.
Part of my job includes data recovery, and I find customers aren't usually psyched when their baby photos come out looking like this.
Boeing should face some major fines for this, and additional regulation is going to be needed to make sure this doesn't happen in the future.

This all seems to come down to the fact they wanted to avoid having to retrain pilots ($$$), so these automation changes were kept in the dark.

The crew before them dealt with this same problem but they successfully cut out the trim system. They got lucky and they should have been more vocal in expressing the fault outside of just a post-flight note about it.

The fact that the 737 can auto-trim itself beyond manual elevator authority, due to a SINGLE faulty AOA sensor, is mind-boggling and scary.