skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
To its credit, HN actually has systems in place to deliberately discourage tit-for-tat commenting. First, it deliberately has no inbox to notify you of replies to your own comments, so you're much more likely to neglect to discover that someone has replied to your comment. Secondly, it disables the inline "reply" button for comments whose age is below a certain threshold, so that only power users who understand the workaround can actually reply to young comments. Thirdly, it has no support for navigating deep comments into dedicated subthreads like Reddit has, so instead successive comments will become narrower and narrower until eventually becoming literally unreadable (not actually sure if this one is deliberate, it could also be laziness, but the effect is the same).

As for bump-ordering, I lost most of my youth to phpbb-like forums, and I'd say they foster a mindset of even more obsessive interaction because not only do non-nested threads become impossible to follow if you're away for long enough, but keeping your preferred topics on the front page requires frequent monitoring and carefully-timed comments.
While many valid points, they put GPUs in the specialized processor category to seal their argument. It is technically true, however the trend in GPUs is and has always been toward more general computing, and most computers have GPUs in them. I expect to see commercially viable CPUs with SIMD units (Intel tried and bailed, maybe they’ll try again...) as well as GPUs with virtual & shared memory any day now.
> "Do you want to be forced to watch an advert you have no interest in?"

In general, yes, because then I might learn something new about the world. I'm not a business owner, but I saw a few B2B untargeted ads during the Super Bowl. Now I know stuff like those companies exist.

It's like asking a school kid if they want to be forced to read a textbook, or if they would rather read something targeted to them specifically like a comic book.
> It visually obfuscates the point

Or, it shows that the point is incorrect.

> Logarithmic would mess up the clear visual that Ireland is pulling away from everyone else.

No, if you don't see Ireland pulling away from everyone else in a logarithmic chart then they are not pulling away.

If you only see that signal in a linear graph then you are misleading yourself by thinking that they are doing so.

> Nor is it difficult to see just how large the output gap has become between Ireland and the rest.

Exactly. The "large output gap" you see clearly does not exist if you don't see it on a logarithmic chart!

Please post it, let the data speak for itself. If there is a large gap we will see it, if not, we won't.
Re: companies that claim to have a fully equivalent technical track: What I've found is that is mostly lip service. Yes, they publish salaries and requirements for the highest levels of engineering, and those salaries are equivalent to high levels of management as far as pay goes. But if you look a little deeper you see the problem.

At Google and Amazon and Facebook, a Distinguished Engineer is equivalent to a Vice President in pay. But how many of those engineers do they have? I'll bet you could name most of them, because they are world famous experts in their fields. How many VPs do they have? Can you name more than a few?

The ratio of DE to VP is about 1 to 100. To be a DE, you need to basically be the best in the world at what you do. To be a VP, you have to be a great manager. In other words, while they may claim to have an equivalent engineering ladder, if you actually want to have a chance of moving up to those levels of pay, you had better go into people management, unless you think you're the best in the world at what you do.
"I apologize, it wasn't directed at you so much as the many critics of Hughes who accused him of causing his wife's suicide for almost the entirety of his life after that event."

Of course, if the criticism is baseless and it causes harm to the target of the criticism during their life, that's wrong.

But that's very different from merely trying to find out more about a person's life -- especially once they're dead and can no longer be harmed.

"The other point is that certain details seem better unknown. I mean, why should we even know that he burnt any part of her diary?"

To satisfy one's curiosity seems like a good enough reason to me. Curiosity is a big part of why I read literature in general. I want to find out about how people who are very different from me or who lived in very different circumstances or times lived. It's the next best thing to being able to live multiple lives myself. I say, why not?
Commit to your lock-in
Yup, and I think it's actually a completely rigorous definition – all rings are commutative groups under one operation (often referred to as "addition"), plus another operation ("multiplication"), plus rules for how they interact.
Is it not possible to run an older version of macOS in an emulator?
I have no idea what TensorFlow is (other than the basics) but I enjoyed reading that entire document because it did such a wonderful job of explaining a complex and potentially contentious decision. It’s fascinating to see Swift feature so strongly in a pragmatic analysis that doesn’t explicitly favour Apple platform interop.
Software is so big and complex today that very little is built as a sole engineer. You may not realize it yet, but you will always be managing people even if you're not their manager. How you convey your ideas, accept their ideas, and work together to solve hard problems is often more important than raw technical knowledge after a certain level.
> but it's a zero-information statement until they describe what they know that I don't

I don't think it's a zero-information statement at all. If S. Weinberg tells me that my physical arguments are wrong but he doesn't have the time to say how/why, then it's certainly a non-zero information statement and I'll scrutinize my line of thoughts thoroughly after that. Dismissing this as a zero information statement would be pretentious from my part. The same goes for you against the expert in political finances.

It seems that there's an underlying assumption in your argument that we're all equal and equally capable of having opinions on anything unless someone comes to us, and spends time thoroughly showing us why we are wrong. Or that we are all correct until proven wrong. This is problematic because 1/ we're not all equal, and acknowledging that we dont know everything is important, 2/ it's unlikely that there's always an expert around willing to spend time educating us everytime we feel the need of commenting on things we dont know, and 3/ we may not comprehend why we are wrong by lack of proper education.
> RHEL/CentOS are server distros, not gaming oriented by any means. Fedora is more like it in such cases.

That's why I ended by saying I know that parent comment and site was about gaming, but I wanted to add a bit of extra context. And these 'server' distros are the primary workstation hosts, both bare bones and PCoIP for pretty much the entire CG industry.

> It does, as confirmed by many users who choose AMD for their next upgrades.

It doesn't at all. This graph only shows a very generic view at best. If you wanted to see a shift, you would need a graph of users changing their profiles from NVIDIA hardware to AMD hardware and a separate graph of new users coming in with AMD gear. This is just a conglomerate of information in a single graph, there are way to many inferences that can be made that simultaneously can't be proven without more specific data.

> Not from what I've heard. AMD is better for GPGPU due to real asynchronous compute which Nvidia lacks. If anything, AMD hardware is more compute oriented, and Nvidia one is more gaming oriented.

Source? Working over in CG/VFX myself, NVIDIA is pretty much the only hardware to choose. For rendering, everything is CUDA based. Application support for AMD, not stellar. NVIDIA offers the most stable platform for our use cases so far. Release notes of software literally point out that AMD support is not as extensive as NVIDIA and subject to being unstable.

> You might refer to CUDA lock-in, and some higher end libraries for AI being CUDA only. That's surely a problem, but not with hardware itself.

There doesn't have to be a problem with the hardware, adoption will be zero as long as alternative OpenCL/Vulkan compute based libraries don't exist. I know there's been a long term project of getting OpenCL as an engine for TensorFlow, been a bit since I checked its progress. The OpenCL stack for AMD also doesn't have a stellar reputation for producing consistently competitive results. Phoronix released a strict OpenCL comparison adding the Radeon VII to the mix with ROCm 2.0 and as a developer, it wouldn't give me confidence that compared to CUDA I'm going to be getting the results I'm looking for. NVIDIA has a very mature stack and support with CUDA and its associated libraries. AMD is going to need to be able to supply that for people to ween themselves off of the green train.

Granted for more AI based work, one might look towards the Instinct lineup.

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=radeon-v...
You'll see this in server hardware as well...

1U servers, 2U servers..
Cool! Thanks for correcting me.
It seems like this is an unsafe and also leaky way of wrapping the API? Copying an URIWithoutFinalise seems to allocate a new C pointer and never free it, and it seems the URI type can be copied without creating a new pointer, leading to double frees! Maybe I'm misunderstanding D here, but shouldn't the new/copy/free all happen in a single object similar to the C++ rule-of-three?

If that's not possible, isn't it typical to give the pointers an "identity" (store them in a class) to provide a GC-language with safety when wrapping a C API that seems to use a more affine/linear ownership system?

It seems to be undermining D's claims of safety if the "official" (widely published on the official blog) way to wrap C APIs is unsafe.

(Plus, at least the example code listings for the mixins, failure (returning NULL) of the C calls isn't checked.)
The reinvention of JS for use in serious projects is only about 10 years old however. A lot of these folks were early career and using a language that's not been historically strict.
"As someone who spent most my life producing them" - I can only assume you were escorted from the premises..

I'm more pragmatic.
I earn and spend money.
Given that I'm going to spend money, I'd like to spend it wisely.
That's why I might use amazon to check out the reviews for say a "sliding mitre saw" - I know some are better than others. I go to amazon as they have a load of reviews - and have all the sliding mitre saws, they don't care which one I buy - as long as I buy one.
So makes sense for amazon to know what I want to buy, know which is going to make me happiest, and just shove up a "here's a saw for £x, that has 4.7 from a thousand people".
The traditional advert wants to sell me something I don't need/want. The perfect modern advert tells me what I actually (probably) need - and removes the friction.
I think this is more along the lines of, show me Skiing Ads in an Skiing Enthusiast magazine/website.

Don't show me ads on the brand of tampons I'm considering that you gleaned from a conversation you picked up from my Echo or Microphone.
Also, if you ask people if they want targeted ads or pay some money to visit the same sites (because untargeted ads pay less) then most people will choose free browsing with targeted ads.

People don't want to pay if they don't have to, and most people don't care about targeted ads.
Yes, it stands for units.

"CubeSats are built to standard dimensions (Units or “U”)"

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cubesats/overview
As an example, I recently got offered a Senior Software Engineer position with 6 months experience @ Zendesk.
Obviously not, but even many physicists are suggesting that the 20 billion could be spend better.
Yeah, I'm sympathetic to the Ubuntu maintainers - at this point there are teams/companies which have built some server application/service on Ubuntu 18.04, and expect no backwards-incompatible changes for 5 years (the classic stable distro objective), but if openjdk-11 is updated from openjdk 10.x to 11.x then some stuff will stop working. I'm curious how they'll resolve it (and I think an additional half-year past the openjdk-11 release is reasonable, in the overall 5-year timeframe).

(Meanwhile, apparently, some users have come to expect an upstream release to get into ubuntu stable updates within 2 days ?!)
> It's because drivers can and will reject orders with $0 tips.

That's what I said ;)

Drivers can see the tip (or lack thereof) and NOT take the order. So the end result for a customer who likes to pay a cash tip AFTER service is rendered, always gets horrible service.

I'm not complaining about the drivers, it's the company.
It’s not “just sugar.” It’s mostly fructose, the worst sugar, known to stress the liver like alcohol. And unlike most other calories it does a poor job of triggering satiation.

Fruit juice is evil.
"Multiple people" were left with nothing better to which to attribute maintainer decisions. See the dysfunction there? Don't address the problem, or the proposed solution; just leave it to fester and create discontent.

That's not how well run projects function.
Wow, HN is awesome. Activating now, thanks for letting me know.
Before internet became what it is today, Bill Hicks said it best:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaD8y-CGhMw

(2mn clip)

/s ...( or is it? )

--edit for context.
> It doesn't at all.

If you didn't follow this, it doesn't to you. It does, to those who pay attention and constantly see people switching to AMD and commenting about their reasons. And these reasons are quite obvious really. Nvidia did nothing to improve their integration with Linux (the meain issue is their unwillingness to upstream their kernel driver), while AMD did a lot to improve their drivers. It's only natural to expect Nvidia Linux gaming usage to continuously drop as a result of the above.

> Source?

https://www.techpowerup.com/215663/lack-of-async-compute-on-...

AMD hardware is known to be better for GPGPU for a long time already.

> There doesn't have to be a problem with the hardware, adoption will be zero as long as alternative OpenCL/Vulkan compute based libraries don't exist.

If developers are using some closed source libraries, they are at mercy of those vendors who might be in the pocket of Nvidia. And no one stops open source libraries from not being CUDA only and from using Vulkan and OpenCL for compute needs. Given Vulkan is still rather new, it can take time for libraries to pick it up though for compute scenarios. But it will happen either way. Overall, I don't see good future for CUDA, if it will remain Nvidia only. Same as with gaming, open solutions will catch up, and Nvidia lock-in will crumble.
Not as puzzling as to why would one want to let "the internet" control their HVAC in the first place.
Do either of these, say, shut off the nervous system from the lungs or the stomach?

Deadlocking the brain should appear in the underlying autonomous nervous system, but it doesn't. That's very odd.
The patch author is doing the work. Telling them “no” isn’t going to make them focus instead on the project leadership’s other priorities like it would in a corporate team.
Or when the proprietary Broadcom driver was replaced by open source version, although it was still lacking in features and we had to use LAN cable for about 6 months until it reached feature parity.
Ok thanks ?!
What about the Alzehemiers link to HPV virus that formes plaques in the brain? How is that related to transmitable peptiods?

What is it with the cell membranes size of these viruses that can travel up and form plaques in the brain?

Alzhemiers hpv link
sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081207134109.htm
That is a fair point about the DMCA, but doesn’t the reduction of piracy caused by both the rise of new upstart streaming services like Netflix or Steam, and the entrenched major players relenting and offering their own services and allowing their properties to be streamed, refute that legislation had a dampening effect on innovation?

Not to mention, while some p2p tech companies were sued out of existence, others that went legit (like Napster) or toed the line (like BitTorrent) were not.

Yes, regulation will lead to some losers. But it’s questionable that consumers will be among them.
Update 2019:
Median annual pay for Software Engineers in Switzerland: 111,000 USD (up from 104,000 in 2014)

And this website shows actual job offers for developers with salary brackets: http://swissdevjobs.ch
If a group is allowed to have sufficient knowledge of an individual through pervasive surveillance, then they can weaponize that by shifting the individual's Overton window through micro-messaging.

An altered perspective is the objective of propaganda and targeted advertising and radicalization. Their methods and objectives are the same: make someone believe what we want them to believe without their awareness of the effort.

This activity is underhanded and deceptive. It's neither persuasion nor debate, intentionally so.
Authority certainly helps. It's not everything but without authority you almost have no chance.
Honestly, I don't really care about all of that. If it's horrible service I can complain and most likely get a refund of some sort.

I care that I want hot food, delivered in a reasonable time, and that I can pay a tip AFTER service is rendered (based upon the actual service I get).
The point of the category-theoretical definition is to explain how these "rules for how they interact" might arise, and in what sense these might be understood as 'minimal' rules. These are not "equivalent" definitions in any real sense, and to think of them as such is arguably missing the whole point of how category theory can be useful here.
I was answering GP's questions phrased "do you want...?". Of course there is a huge difference. I find tracking across sites immoral as it makes inferences from information I have not willingly, or knowingly shared. Often very dubious inferences. Adtech as a whole seems like an industry free of ethics, happy to use every dark pattern and dubious trick (like ignoring DNT, or worse using as fingerprint), to get data anyway regardless of user wish.

In every other scenario aside from online, I can decline to answer or decline the loyalty card etc. If I have attracted enough interest of the authorities to gain a real-life surveillance tail ads are the least of my worries. :)
You're living two cities over from where you work. What did you expect? This is not a normal "commute".

If you drove that during rush hour, you wouldn't be travelling at max speed the whole time, and likely would also take two hours to travel, potentially more (Google predicts up to 2 hours and 40 minutes).
Kind of funny that they didn't just call it a liter, which is exactly that volume.
Well, 'models', or concepts in general, have been seen as flawed for many centuries when it comes to apprehending reality. Sadly, there's no other game in town.

It's also really questionable if another game could make logical sense. Kant's stuff on speculative reason comes to mind.
Interest can be inferred from context instead of your history and contextual targeting is in fact more efficient and doesn’t violate anyone’s privacy.

For example most ads shown by Google Search are based on the search keywords, since that’s what most advertisers bid on and not a user profile. Google’s great advantage in this space is that a search shows clear intent, clear need.

I once worked on a platform for serving ads in mobile apps. The apps themselves can be pretty clear signals of intent. A weight loss app for example can serve ads for gym or diet-friendly restaurants with great success. Similarly for publications. I can imagine articles on politics don’t have valuable context, unless the elections are coming, however howto articles or articles on home and garden or various hobbies have great context.

Btw, I never click on ads. If personalization was meant to save costs you’d think these ads companies would have learned to not serve me any ads.

Truth of the matter is that personalization has less to do with cost savings and more to do with optimizing the message for better conversions. And that’s what I find unethical ... the use of personal data to personalize a message in order to make me buy a product that I normally don’t want to buy.
Why did you switch away from XMonad? (Curious b/c it’s the only tiling we I’ve used)
Not if it's cash ;) Hence my point.
Nobody "wants" to be forced to do anything.
But, it's a transaction. That youtube video is free to you, the guy who made it deserves some compensation (plus the hosting from google isn't free) blah blah.
Nothing works unless you provide something of value in exchange - your eyeball for that advert.
No eyeball - no content.
So unless you've pressed the stop button at this point, the goal is to put the least offensive thing to you on that screen for 10 seconds, with the highest click-through.
My point is that there is a win-win to be had here - but they need to know about you to provide it.
It is, for bacteria and viruses. Prions are neither.
100% of online advertisers and publishers that use online ad networks believe ad-blockers and tracker blockers are immoral.

Online ads are cross-site attacks directed against viewers/users. They are visual or textual hacks that strive to cause targeted users to take actions they might not otherwise take.

edit: speaking generally about online ad networks, real-time bidding providers, campaign aggregators, and so on.
It may be a bad idea for a vote so important that it happens only once every 5 years and citizens have no recourse in the periods between.

But if we want to scale Democracy to the modern world, where today tens of thousands of important decisions are taken without any citizen input during those 5 years, electronic voting is a necessity.
Geocentric vs heliocentric universe issue is an interesting example, because the geocentric version is not actually wrong, the whole point of the general relativity principle is that it geocentric an equally valid viewpoint.

The trick was understanding that circles+epicycles around earth are in fact equivalent earth and everything else rotating around some other point. Which is a relatively easy insight with analytical geometry, but is hard to see without it, and people noticed it only after they had more detailed data, and had to describe epicycles for ellipses instead of simple circles.

So if this teaches us something, it is that most likely we already have all the data that we need, we just need to look at it differently. But to look at things differently we need more math, and more experiments.
>That blog keeps rambling on about the same old thing over and over. Maybe the author is crazy. What is being proposed here, to abandon all physics research because it has become hard? And in the end constant nagging is not fruitful to anything, unless the author can reasonably argue for a new line of research.

she did just that in the NYT piece that is also linked to in the blog post.

"And there are other avenues to pursue. For example, the astrophysical observations pointing toward dark matter should be explored further; better understanding those observations would help us make more reliable predictions about whether a larger collider can produce the dark matter particle — if it even is a particle.

There are also medium-scale experiments that tend to fall off the table because giant projects eat up money. One important medium-scale project is the interface between the quantum realm and gravity, which is now accessible to experimental testing. Another place where discoveries could be waiting is in the foundations of quantum mechanics. These could have major technological impacts."

There really is no argument in favour of why building a new, extremely expensive accelerator is reasonable. We don't expect to find anything at those energy levels, it is pure guesswork.