skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There are dozens of papers "explaining" neural networks, using basic math, highly abstract math and even theoretical quantum physics[1] models. I don't see any of them used in constructing, improving or interpreting results of actual neural networks[0]. Moreover, while most of them have math that would take me weeks to fully understand, they rarely make concrete, testable predictions.

Most of the recent advances in ANN learning came from using more data and using different types of layers. A real theory of neural nets would explain why architecture A works better than architecture B for a particular problem. Or why a certain architecture plateaus after working with X samples, while other can learn from many more.

The way I understand it, the core problem of understanding deep learning is that it does not scale down. You can make a simple framework of 3-4 neurons and observe how it works. Then you make it bigger and it works differently. No one properly explained why this happens. People who do applications seem to just state their intuitions and then throw a couple formulas on top to make it seem scientific. There is a great essay on that by Piekniewski[2]. No research I've seen lists all the parameters/architectures/datasets they tried that didn't work.

[0] - Maybe with the exception of the paper on neural networks as ODEs.

[1] - http://neurophysics.huji.ac.il/sites/default/files/PhysRevA....

[2] - https://blog.piekniewski.info/2018/10/13/deep-learning-the-w...
GNU Health moves from MongoDB to PostgreSQL due to license change
I had a python script that was roughly:

read file, unpickle, do stuff in memory, pickle, write.

A bug in "do stuff in memory" could easily muck things up and I didn't get round to renaming the file for every edit. Yeah you could do some auto rename thing but it might be simpler to just use sqlite.
Your question is just as bad. Here’s the framing I prefer.

1. Government is necessary since some things are best run by public services and without a for-profit motive.

2. What are these things?

3. How much money should be raised to properly run these things?

4. What is the optimum tax rate/policy to achieve this goal?
not really. it started with the word "penis" for the original "campaign" but since a single word was obviously ineffective the meme improved.
How to Make Connections That Count: Advice from an SV Veteran and Introvert
Inevitably in comments about the demise of the 747 or A380, people refer to the proliferation of point to point routes. But while point to point routes have grown, hub and spoke routes have grown far more. There is an illusion of the proliferation of point to point routes caused by the proliferation of new hubs. For example, Seattle now has ~20 more direct international destinations with a year round schedule than it did 15 years ago, which makes it seem like point to point routes are more common. But careful inspection shows that every single direct international route from SEA is a hub and spoke route for the airline flying it, with either the hub in Seattle, or the hub at the destination.

When these aircraft were conceived, all industry momentum was pointed toward superhubs, and all of the superhubs were capacity constrained. Landing and takeoff slots were constrained and airports were moving to auction models to sell the slots. Terminal space was becoming more and more expensive. These planes weren't more efficient because they could move more people, they were more efficient because they didn't cost as much to land and take off and load and unload. The reality of the matter is that Boeing and Airbus didn't incorrectly forecast the decline of hub and spoke models, they incorrectly forecasted the decline of superhubs.
Except that is just state tax. Add in federal and you’re looking at a combined 50%.
Ask HN: What are some blogs/ books that gives fresh and positive life ideas?
Keep in mind that the word "talent" is used in 2 very different meanings and a group fixated on one meaning does not acknowledge the other meaning. (My previous comment about this.[0])

- definition #1: "talent" doesn't exist or it's achievable by anyone because it's just a learnable skill. Skills can be improved. This is the meaning emphasized by M Gladwell (10000 hours), D Coyle (talent doesn't exist), Carol Dweck "growth mindset", Angela Duckworth "grit", etc.

- definition #2: "talent" is a ranking. This is the meaning emphasized by most people who are "looking for the most talented". E.g. sports teams for athletes, Hollywood for actors, Google/Microsoft for PhDs in mathematics and machine learning, etc.

If you're unaware of both meanings of "talent", you will always misunderstand what the other side is talking about. As a result, people will forever be bikshedding the word "talent" and stay frustrated that they can't convince the other side to change their mind!

The blog author of this thread also leaves out the meta discussion of "talent" and is using definition #2. The blog author (Jacob Kaplan-Moss) in my previous comment uses definition #1.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16812957
There's some amount of evidence to the contrary; the group moving is self-selecting and trends conservative.

One example: https://www.newsweek.com/more-native-born-texans-voted-beto-...
It’s going to a state he doesn’t live in, I think that’s the problem.
Apparently nobody in this thread understands what a transparency report is. Also, the level of entitlement in these comments is off the charts.

It’s a report on government/law enforcement requests. This concept wasn’t started by reddit, but by Google and Microsoft.

Reddit is a private company and owes you nothing. Deal with it or visit another site. It’s one thing to suggest changes, but don’t start thinking they or any other company owes it to you to produce whatever documentation and reporting you happen to be curious about.
Do aphrodisiacs work?
> I think the interactivity you describe might be a different thing from what your parent is talking about.

Actually no, they're not different things; both refer to the same activity of a user analyzing the information on the screen and issuing commands that refine the available information iteratively, in order to solve a problem. (I would have bought your argument had you made a distinction between "solving the problem" and "finding the right tools to solve the problem").

The thing is that the Unix shell is terribly coarse-gained in terms of what interactivity is allowed, so that the smaller refinement actions (what you call "input") must be described in terms of a formal programming language, instead of having interactive tools for those smaller trial-error steps.

There are some very limited forms of interactivity (command line history, keyboard accelerators, "man" and "-h" help), but the kind of direct manipulation that would allow the user to select commands and data iteratively, are mostly absent from the Unix shell. Emacs is way better in that sense, except for the terrible discoverability of options (based on recall over recognition).
I am not aware of any research, I've only connected the dots from my experience. I was super pale growing up, had orthostatic hypotension, dry skin, sweated insanely during puberty, and felt like I got progressively stupider as I got into my early 20s. I developed hypertension, and I drank lots of diet energy drinks from 16-20 and felt better when I did.

At some point, I got genetic testing done through 23andme, ran that info through software that revealed health info, and it showed I had a genoset that heavily affects phenylalanine processing. I started taking a stimulant and tyrosine, and I've felt better ever since.

My genetic oddity also affects NO synthesis, and will probably lead to my death through heart attack or stroke. It's gs224 if you're interested in the specifics.
Airbus has new management, as the old management was wiped out by bribery scandals and retirement. They have more to come here - their is a new Indian investigation on their practices in that country, and management is keen to break with the previous regime. John Leahy - who crusaded for the plane internally at Airbus, recently retired, and with him, anyone else who had a stake in the A380 decide. The development costs of the A380 are not paid off - the launch aid - from the European governments was to be repaid in royalties per plane on a ongoing basis. The governments will find a way to sweep what remains under the covers.

Ironically, the group most at risk with this decision is Boeing. The A380 has been a total albatross and a anchor around the neck of Airbus. If Airbus hadn't been sinking in cash left and right to the A380 program, when Boeing had it's issue with the 787, Airbus could have really punished them in the market. Instead, Airbus went with a slightly warmed over A330, until the market forced them to the A350, which still wasn't as revolutionary as what the 787 brought to bear, once it finally got over it's development hurdles.

So good application of the Sunk cost fallacy here by the new Airbus leadership, and a message to Boeing that the new leadership at Airbus isn't going to be constrained by the decisions of the past.
Object-recognition AI – How neural nets are just looking at textures
- Taking money from worldwide monsters who view mass murder as hygiene

- Taking money from taxpayer bailouts and inflating prices

- Dumping all your problems on the people who fought for you and gave you the room to get you started

- Paying lawyers to stack the deck in your favor and jail your competition

- Forcing your customers into debt by making your $2,000 products a necessity.

- Turning your great country into a place where only cheap plastic goes in, and cheap paper goes out

That's not failure.

But being 2 weeks late on a feature is.

Got it.

PS: Take a good look at how you really make money. It's the most vulgar uncultured garbage I've ever seen. Porn has more dignity.

Teach lessons. Otherwise you just race to the finish line as fast as you can, cowering to arbitrary delusions, and end up as some grotesque burden on everyone.

There are loftier ambitions than cell phones, clickbait, mailing out boxes of tomorrow's garbage, or making cartoons. These are no different than police sting. You are a fool to think power gives it up to make things better.

Aim for lofty ambitions first. Take all of creation before working for kings. And when you do, know there are poor people out there who can take them out with nothing.
The API of a unix tool _is_ it's output.
A fair point but I was working within the context of the original problem which seemed to be "there's always a _data but not always an _A". If I was trying to provide a robust generic solution, I wouldn't be code golfing it...
Seems like a miss to try and discredit the 10k hours and not mention Anders Ericsson. His work detailing deliberate practice is what spawned these 10k hours notions. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/anders-...
Just like the ACLU. Free speech is very important. If someone has something objectionable to say, let them expose themselves. Censorship solves nothing.
Perfect, ta.
> mouse(!) selection of arbitrary text that can be piped to commands and so on

E.g.:

xclip -out | ...

or do you mean something different?
Well lsof is available on a Mac if you want a command line, as is Activity Monitor. Shrug
> But again, this is only true because of the delusional rock-star fantasy which grips the tech industry. The vast, vast majority of software developers are not rock-stars. They are seen as disposable - precisely because they are - which is why mass layoffs can continue to happen as a predictable part of a development lifecycle.

This is still irrelevant because even juniors in US are paid more than seniors in EU. You don't have to be a rock start to have 6 figure salary in US. My college grad class had median $105k salary straight outta college. Sure seniors will be paid $300k and will have orders of magnitude more job security, but junior engineers are still doing pretty well.

> Yes, but what people are (rightly, and increasingly) concerned about is how well the employees of those industries are doing. The fact that US tech makes more money than EU tech is largely irrelevant to the discussion of whether and how those employees should unionise (they should).

No it is not irrelevant, my entire point is the better you pay your engineers, the better product you'll have so the more money you'll make. If Blizzard fires their engineers cause they felt like it, this is their problem. I don't think I would say employees should unionize -- I don't believe in moral arguments -- but I have nothing against unions. My point is that the framework around this discussion is way off; it's irrelevant whether your engineers are unionized or not, if you want to make tons of money in US tech industry you simply cannot do anything other than paying your engineers well and making them happy.
I started reading signal Vs noise blog by Basecamp and their books too and I have started enjoying it due to it's novel and different take on business.

Are there any similar blogs and books?
I see now. I was focusing on not being too upset at 13% being taken in one scenario but not being upset if taken in another scenario.
How is that not impressive for vast majority of developers?

For the past couple decades, the only other even remotely mainstream place where you could get a comparable experience was a Lisp REPL. And maaaybe Matlab, later on. Recently, projects like R, Jupyer, and (AFAIK) Julia have been introducing people to interactive development, but those are specific to scientific computing. For general programming, this approach is pretty much unknown outside of Lisp and Unix shell worlds.
Salsify,hiring senior software engineers
No evidence playing violent video games leads to aggressive behaviour in teens
I'm an economist and a mathematician by training, dual citizen of Italy and the United Kingdom. Despite my penchant for mathematics I went into the family business (a medium-sized chemical manufacturing firm).

That preamble is necessary as my comments on this must be taken in context with my viewpoint on things.

I am constantly horrified by the sheer brutality and unfairness of thinly regulated capitalism in the era of globalisation. Multinational corporate capitalism truly is showing itself to be a force that, in an anti-Robin Hood fashion, takes from the poor to give to the few. Offshoring of labour has gutted the middle classes and forced the lower classes to compete with foreign populations that, starting from a much lower base, are hopelessly competitive. All that is left is service sector jobs and an impossibly high bar to cross into intellectual-work echelons.

I used to be very much in favour of globalisation but I am finding that my enthusiasm was very much misplaced. These people are reduced to debt slaves.
This is the essence of most business writing, especially in academia where this writer is from: qualification and hedging of one's arguments to the point of basic incomprehensibility.
Dismissing the complaint that the author might be inaccurate or not as trustworthy as otherwise as simply the genetic fallacy is an instance of the fallacy fallacy, isn't it? Consider a poor news source such as the Daily Mail - I'd say it's justified to at least be more skeptical of the claims presented in any given Daily Mail article based on their history.
I cancelled and deleted my Spotify account because of that. Now any site that asks me to fill a Google recaptcha is met with a swift click on the Back button.
Sometimes you can practice the wrong things, so I prefer:

Practice makes permanent.
You repeatedly cite video hosting, when the amount and types of content Google lifts is so much more expansive than just video. YouTube is harmful, yes, but there are plenty of other examples. For instance, Google killing CelebrityNetWorth, by leaving them the impossible choice to either let Google steal all of their value and ad revenue by putting their content in Knowledge Graph, or blocking Google entirely and removing themselves from search: https://theoutline.com/post/1399/how-google-ate-celebritynet...

There is no "link tax", the law does not require that you pay to link to someone. One of the most incredible marketing angles here is that big tech has managed to rebrand the laws with their own preferred, and loaded terminology, and push that to the point that conversations around the law define it by the term they chose.

However, if you want to steal their value entirely, as Google Search often does with increasing frequency, Google is going to have to pay for it.
I have been thinking of a similar idea, but for warrant canaries.
HTTP-API Integration with React Lifecycle Methods and Hooks
thank you! as someone who replaced ~100g/day of hfcs with ~450mg of aspartame by switching from coke to dietcoke I'm alway interested in what I should be specifically watching for as the downside of this tradeoff. thanks to your links i now know an answer to that is "phe >120 <360, 600+ is a real problem".

by any chance is that number a standard part of a yearly blood test, or do you have to ask for it?
You actually see that going both ways - people who have not contributed before to a project suggesting a code of conduct to be added and people who have not contributed before opposing it.

> to try and force their point of view

What if they only wish for a discussion on the issue in order for the right decision to be taken?
Is that distinction really relevant to this debate? The advocates in #1, as best I can tell, would endorse the claims that you can improve by definition #2, except perhaps in pathological cases (like where everyone in the world is practicing at the same skill).

And anyone who disagrees with the claim in #1 would also disagree you can improve talent by #2.

I don't see how clarifying terms would make anyone think they were talking past each other.
"that also depends if you have something to hide" was said of every police state and censorship scheme.
Developers Teach You How to Give a Coding Talk
Welcome to all of nutrition science. As a field it is characterized by a dearth of studies which are actually capable of demonstrating causation. Almost every study is simply a measurement of correlation. And then you get these moronic interpretations of the studies, sometimes by the study authors themselves.
Like those moments where we cured previously incurable genetic diseases, and understood evolution as one of the most important advances in biology?
Welp, here it is -- the study that slams the book shut on the whole thing. Hardly worth discussing now, as it's settled science. Back to work, everyone.
Hmm interesting, in the well-known book Neural Networks and Deep Learning [1] by Michael Nielsen, it is shown that neural networks can approximate any function [2].

This leaves the question: are neural networks able to produce more functions than simple polynomials? Apparently the answer of the summary of the mentioned paper is no (I didn't read the actual paper, only the summary).

I simply only know the basics of neural networks (I fully understand chapter 1 and 2 of [1]), so I wouldn't know understand why the two are practically equivalent. I mean, I can imagine why but I'd be making the fallacy of simply understanding that a neural net is able to approximate any polynomial and then think "yup, that's it, no clue how to generate counter examples, QED for all I care O:)"

So with this in mind is anyone able to argue why neural nets are essentially only polynomial regression?

[1] http://neuralnetworksanddeeplearning.com/

[2] http://neuralnetworksanddeeplearning.com/chap4.html
>Supporting renewable energy is important, and I get spending a little more to help the planet. But a for-profit company like Sunrun wasn’t my idea of the right place to do it.

That's a pretty strange sentiment. 20 years ago, solar was decidedly more expensive than it is now. A fair price would be higher than grid power. For the installation to have occurred at all, the up front capital cost had to be amortized by a for-profit company in an attractive way. This appears to have been crafted as a payment schedule that's slightly back-heavy. Seems to me that the author just didn't want to be left holding the bag, but still wanted to pay lip service and feel like a good environmentalist.
Critics will often point at hub and spoke versus point to point as the primary reason for Airbus's debacle, the problem is basically much simpler - not a single United States airline orders the A380. At the time of the A380's introduction, more then half of world wide airlift was located in the United States. The numbers are less now, but it's still the largest seat market by a insane margin world wide. The US carriers were almost wiped out by the irrational exuberance when the initial 747 came out. They were always skeptical about their ability to fill consistently a A380, given market dynamics. It doesn't matter how much more efficient you are with a bigger plane, if you can't fill a seat, economically it simply spoills - you take all the cost of the airplane, the fuel, the pilots, etc (CASM) but none of the revenue (RASM). I've flown on enough empty upper decks on the A380 to know this is a huge issue.
Zsh one liner (probably works in Bash too):

for a in {0001..0500}; do [[ ! -f ${a}_A.csv ]] && echo $((10#${a})); done

The only trick I'm using is base transformation to remove padding in the echo...
Anything can be taken to extremes. Ultimately one cannot deny the reality that genetics really do actually matter.
Bit of a straw-man argument. Ericsson's original research didn't claim that 10,000 hours of practice made you an expert. It was that no-one became an expert (in his studied domain of violin playing) without about 10,000 hours of practice.

The 10,000 hours of practice was a sine-qua-non to becoming an expert, but he never claimed it was necessarily sufficient.
I haven't read the paper, but how can that be true when the polynomials produced by polynomial regression always converge at the "edges" (taking x far left or far right) to either positive or negative infinity (unless the polynomial is a constant), while DNNs can be built to have a sigmoid (or gaussian) function at the output, which doesn't have the same problem (it constrains the output to a range)?

Polynomials (without "activation functions" at the end) make for poor classifiers.

(This is a practical problem I've actually had when trying to replace DNNs with polynomial regression.)
Open source web application for distributed geospatial data exploration (2019)
On January 11, 2017, Newsweek published a list of "13 things that don't add up" in the dossier, writing that it was a "strange mix of the amateur and the insightful" and stating that it "contains lots of Kremlin-related gossip that could indeed be, as the author claims, from deep insiders—or equally gleaned" from Russian newspapers and blogs.[177] Former UK ambassador to Russia Sir Tony Brenton stated that certain aspects of the dossier were inconsistent with British intelligence's understanding of how the Kremlin works, commenting: "I've seen quite a lot of intelligence on Russia, and there are some things in [the dossier] which look pretty shaky."
'It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature.' Trite–or Just Right?
> Good luck finding a high-paying job there.

Kansas has the lowest cost of living in the country. You don't need to have a high paying job to be living like a king.

I remember having a two bedroom apartment to myself and paying around $500/month. My two friends who settled there found 3 bedroom, 3 bathroom houses for under $300K. They were able to put down around $40K and had a monthly mortgage of around 1K.

They were both in the tech sector there and were making around 80K each which is pretty low compared to SV or other states, but because the cost of living was so low, they were living rather comfortable.