skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
We provide a server-to-server API service that allows HTML rendering sans JavaScript. However, the unethical part of using scripts is not in the fact that scripts are used, but what those scripts include. Yes, there must be trust between parties. This is why we are 100% open source. This is why we ensure that no 3rd party scripts are included alongside ours.

I’m sorry, but I do not believe you can get more ethical than that. I stand behind our mission and our reputation.
My favorite part of that is the fact that the perception of the hollow mask rotates in the opposite direction as the actual hollow mask does.
Same, with Gusto. Don’t even have to click anything as Gusto has an auto-payroll option.
Thank you for the info, and good luck with your search.

(I got far away from blockchain several years ago. :)
NodeJS/ExpressJS Video Crash Course
And some other people are not suitable as partners. As in, there are people dating who is profoundly bad idea.

And then there are people who are not in position to have partner, because they work long hours and/or lack privacy. In particular, 80 hours a week working dude in startup with nearly males only employees has zero chance to find a girl, altrough he may be nice and cool dude.

Through, I noticed gender difference in how people talk and think about it all too.
> I'm curious about why the filename for the PDF is "Pretend-Paper.pdf"?

I've googled the paper and the authors, and I've scoured the UTexas Law site, and turned up nothing. So, my best guess: perhaps it's wordplay: pretend < Latin pre- "before" + tendo "I stretch out; I reach for; I pitch; I offer" vs. foregive (now a homophone of forgive but originally having a slightly different meaning[1]). Thus "pretend paper" ≡ "foregive paper" ~ "forgive paper". It's a stretch, but it's all I can come up with...

[1]: fore- having a sense of "forward; before" whereas for-, being related to the "fro" in "to and fro", originally having a since of "away from". Now that "for" and "fore" are homophones, the two are conflated, but not for the first time in history: there were once three prefixes, which would've been fore-, for-, and fro- today had the latter two not already merged before the Anglo-Saxons even began writing. They corresponded to Latin pre-, per-, and pro-, respectively. Now there's one prefix, variously spelled, with various senses, however sometimes the senses are distinguished in writing by one spelling or another.
>How will further differentiating yourself from the masses (especially since Firefox is already a minority browser) help with privacy, tracking, and fingerprinting?

I don't think that's what fingerprinting is about. Whether you're 1 in 50k or 1 in 500k - it's not usable from a marketing/data perspective. Stuff like cookie retention & IP addr seem much more dangerous on this front than browser choice - both of those are more like 1 in 1 or 1 in say 20 depending on NAT.
Your parent could be forgiven, given that Jacob Rees Mogg does appear to hail from his father’s era!
Definitely head facing. If I'm anticipating a collision, I generally turn my head slightly in the direction I'm going even if I don't move my eyes. I think of it like my nose is pointing to the side I'm going.
Orbits in such heights (400km) are quite stable no matter the direction of small perturbation from the circular orbit. The body will be following an ellipse in all cases. Only after a long time, the rare atmosphere friction will bring you down.
I don't know much about phone tech, are the basebands really doing math or just instrumenting? My assumption would be that there is just some sensor writing to a buffer at a high frequency but that whatever processes that buffer operates at a lower frequency.
Why does this feel (in a fun and positively humorous way) like something pulled straight out of Douglas Coupland's "J-Pod"?
I think if it were delayed, it would still come up from time to time in tech blogs, giving them bad PR, kinda like Duke Nukem Forever. If they announce that it’s cancelled, they take a bad hit now, but they also have indefinite time to work on the product with no PR penalty on delays. The announcement leaves the door open on a future wireless product release anyway, with zero promises.

If they end up releasing the product, say, a year from now, nobody’s going to say “but you cancelled it before!!! how dare you!!”
Its only a safety hazard if people are around it right? If the warehouse is fully automated it is only a hazard to other robots right?
What is the point of having a projection in the first place if Earth is already flat?
Frexit? Italeave? After watching Brexit, other European countries say no thanks
> Money is morally neutral. It does not, in and of itself, make you a bad person.

Money is opportunities, in the Bible Jesus says to invest our talents, and to give away our money.

Having money is having opportunities, wasting that and not making something of it couldn't that be morally reprehensible?

I'm no saint, and I'm certainly guilty of hording more money than I need (even if I'm far from super rich). But I'm not under some illusion that I couldn't help more than I do. Or that not giving away money is a neutral choice.

Note. I did give away around 5% of income after taxes last year (I'm just a regular overpaid nerd, so not comparable to the author -- but still privileged like most people here).
My cousin taunted me a few years that the Bible says you should pay 10% to charity after taxes and living expenses. I don't think I'm quite there, well, maybe if you do some creative a accounting, hehe :)

For me picking a number to donate was mostly about ensuring that it was high enough that I felt like I had said it like I meant it!

But maybe my savings could be smaller maybe I could help more people -- hording money certainly doesn't seem like a morally neutral thing to do.
Perhaps I am missing something but they claim that the solution is encrypting the RF signal but wouldn't this have an impact on device battery life?

Assuming that patients need surgery everytime a battery is replaced this seems like they are hand-waving a major lifetime design implication.
Actually, what's in the demo already includes pruning (through sparse matrices) and indeed, it does keep just 1/10 of the weights as non-zero. In practice it's not quite a 10x speedup because the network has to be a bit bigger to get the same performance. It's still a pretty significant improvement. Of course, the weights are pruned by 16x1 blocks to avoid hurting vectorization (see the first LPCNet paper and the WaveRNN paper for details).
The lyrics of the song are 1200 characters long, so this version of the song only takes up twenty times more space than the written lyrics.
the law also targets male Jews and Sikhs, though, so the idea that it’s about liberating women doesn’t make much sense.
So maybe this line of work will mean more spectrum available in the future.
>or professional capacity

what does that mean legally? it seems very vague.
HN is not wikipedia but I don't have any citation to prove it.
I run dnsmasq at home talking to Google DNS via DoH. I’ve been thinking about running my own recursive resolver but that theoretically lets my ISP see all my DNS lookups.

I think as a compromise I’ll run my own recursive DNS on a digital ocean droplet and point my local dnsmasq instance at that.
“The roboticization of manufacturing is mostly finished“ -huh? 95% of the factories I go to don’t have the stuff at Promat. I was just at a UR beginner training class with engineers from fortune 50 companies. The robotic tools out there cover a vast majority of the processes but pricing, integration, and reusability still leave some huge holes in the market.
You claim not to be angry, but you are engaging in a very bad-faith version of a discussion. You generate straw-men in each discussion and read everything in the worst possible way. There is literally no point in me continuing to discuss the substantive issues here because you will insist on reading everything I write without nuance, and it is boring and cumbersome to write in a way that forestalls your attacks.

I am only even making this reply on the off chance that you honestly believe that you've tried to have a level headed conversation. If that's true, I write this only to tell you that the way you've engaged does not meet that goal. Have a good day.
Thanks! It was a good filter for me too :)
> I only know about Facebook's 80% preemptively blocked rate but to be frank, that figure is impressive.

I read an article the other day about the Australian response to the New Zealand shooting, which had this choice gem:

'He said it remained online for 69 minutes. "That is a totally unreasonable period of time and represents a complete failure of Facebook's own systems," he said.' [0]

That was a very senior government minister and they are about to start legislating on the subject. That has to be one of the more breathtaking expectations out there - this is asking a media company to judge what the community standard is and deploy widespread containment measures in under 60 minutes. That is comparable to the response time of our emergency services (~10 minutes) in a life-or-death situation.

I can't really grasp what it is people think that Facebook is doing wrong here that requires a response of that precision; accidentally watching a video simply isn't comparable to having a heart attack or being on fire. I was hopeful that the response time would be something out of the ordinary and measured in hours or days, I'm doubly impressed that Facebook managed to respond in 70 minutes and surprised at how well developed filtering mechanism to control communication on their platform.

[0] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-29/social-media-executiv...
Thanks for the comment! I'm wondering specifically about transferring to Carta, as that is what my lawyer prefers using. My concern is it will be more involved than `captable.io export data to csv` followed by `carta import data from csv` -- i.e. it will take a long time and expensive lawyer hours to setup Carta.
Space debris warning after India destroys satellite
> The innovative pressure produced by inequality is something that should not be unappreciated

Citation needed. Find me 10 famous scientists that were trying to get rich.
Church attendance is hovering around 4% and the absolute majority are old women. While a lot of people consider themselves "culturally christian", religion doesn't play a significant role in common people's lives
Jail time, billions in fines under Australian crackdown on social media giants
Atari VCS Structural Improvements and Feature Adjustments
That is a truly "magical" example of "courage". To promise (on stage!), a magical multi-charger, then continue to promise it for 2 years, and then cancel it without any explanation.
You asked me a question and because I answered it, that’s a problem? I was trying to be polite, and you could do the same by respecting my choice and not using your (I assumed) honest question as bait.
Probably my favorite trick, in terms of not lying to the audience, is a trick Teller does (The Red Ball) which Penn introduces simply as "Now, here's a trick that's done with a piece of thread". And AFAIK that's the truth, and the trick is spectacular because of the things Teller is able to do with just an invisible piece of thread. I only skimmed this article about it but it matches up with what I recall reading before: https://lasvegasweekly.com/news/2008/nov/20/man-ball-hoop-be...
Ask HN: What's the latest on that “Big Hack” story by Bloomberg?
The Big Hack [1] caused quite a stir. Apple and Amazon completely denied it. And then the whole thing seemed to fizzle out. Did Bloomberg, Apple, Amazon, et al. just decide to drop the whole thing?

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-10-04/the-big-hack-how-china-used-a-tiny-chip-to-infiltrate-america-s-top-companies
In the user mode piece, a single thread can get told "these 10K descriptors are ready for you to call read(2) upon them", then that thread can read them all using the same buffer. [In practice you might allocate more depending on what's going on, but this is a crude example.] In the IOCP model you need to allocate space for all read requests upfront, even if they're not writing you any data currently.

Kernel mode would have its own buffers, so memory cost per client is not small in this example... except in terms of user-mode buffers.
In my book too.
What is the differentiator for the $39 silicone iPhone cases?
Nitpick: recumbents are faster.
> I'm in favor of independent voluntary certifications (and testing labs, and similar) that encompass a large number of associated features and properties.

Got any suggestions to make that actually happen? The benefit per sale is small enough that it's really hard to get the demand together on a per-product basis. Consumers don't have the time to learn every minor certification body either. But making the decision in bulk, as a society, is a lot more feasible.

Also, there isn't an infinite variety of products. The more dimensions you have to filter by, the worse your result gets per dollar. The free market can't solve everything at the same time.

> I don't want to prohibit the equivalent of "This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY".

That is again not a sale. And you can have triple your $0 back if it breaks.

> I'm also talking about "crowdfunded, we made 6,473 of them, but we're not a big company". Or "here are some schematics to build a piece of hardware, I'm not making any promises about the result". Or any number of other situations in which the choice is not "write and provide a repair manual or not", it's "develop the product or not".

A small crowdfunded operation can do this more easily than a big company. They can have a designer spend two days getting the final schematics together and writing a short document. It's such a miniscule cost that it will almost never be the difference between producing and not producing, and that tiny risk is worth the benefits.

And a schematic documents itself pretty well. But if you really don't want to make any promises then maybe don't charge money for the design.
Using the rule of 72, every home turns over every 24 years.
This is an opportunity to look at the problem from a different perspective.

Currently, in all mechanical designs bearing losses are small, because if they were not the design would probably be unworkable or unfeasible. But consider, maybe there are new things that could come into existence which are not feasible today because of bearing losses.

The internet, for example, didn't make it newly possible to send mail to people, but it made it so much easier that it changed what it meant to send mail.
The GB version is the definitive version for me, I’ve never been able to find a modern version on any device that feels the same.

It was the only game I had for my GB, I played the crap out of that game to the point I’d dream about it or see the tiles when I closed my eyes.
I wonder if some of this is the moderate climate. I live in Utah and my house has 2x6 walls with lots of insulation. I suspect that's all about keeping me warm in the winter and cool in the summer. In CA the temp changes less so you need less of that insulation. That doesn't excuse the expense, of course.
The rubber gloves at the supermarket are way too small for man hands. So there.
The ThinkPad 770X had a 1280x1024 display option.

https://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/Category:770X
Indeed, someone probably triggered a production deploy too early.
I'm pointing out that you're the bad actor here. You're parachuting into a conversation and saying "don't listen to one side, they're all trolls!". Then plugging your ears with your fingers and repeating it.
The claim is poorly phrased in the headline. From the article (https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.181393), you are exposed to around 2000 bits of language-related information each day, which apparently adds up to about 1.5 Mb by the time you turn 18 (an entirely arbitrary cutoff in the world of studying language acquisition).

This has some interesting interplay with the idea that your brain has a lot of the necessary machinery for learning language built-in from birth. We aren't exposed to that much data before we get reasonably good at language (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_of_the_stimulus). That helps account for the fact that you are exposed to so little (around a flop-disk's worth, according to the authors) data, but learn so quickly. Most linguists (but not all) subscribe to this idea, known as UG (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_grammar).

What's interesting is that most UG people argue that your brain encodes morphosyntactic stuff via UG, and the authors of this paper state that most of the data they're counting in their 1.5 Mb figure is lexical semantic info.
William Blair's 72 page take on changes in the database software market [pdf]
I'm getting a 404 on this
You're probably thinking of the "Random Generator" which is used by the Tetris Company for new Tetris games around 2001 or so. Previous Tetris games did not necessarily use this system (I know the NES and Gameboy versions certainly did not) and the other popular variant, Tetris Grand Master, has its own system. Sources below:

https://tetris.wiki/Tetris_Guideline#See_also

https://tetris.wiki/Random_Generator

https://tetris.wiki/TGM_randomizer
Is it my understanding that induction rings can't overlap?

You can't just plonk a phone, watch and AirPods case anywhere on a charging pad and expect them to start charging right?

The coil in each device needs to be fairly well aligned with the coil in the Qi charging pad. The proper way to do this is to have three individual coils with visual location targets for each device to charge.

I wonder if Apple was trying to make it a bit too magical (judging by the pre-render shots) allowing the user to throw a device onto the pad anywhere and expect them to charge.

Do the laws of physics apply here?
OK. You're still ignoring the problem that China pollutes way more. Us not buying their plastic crap doesn't change that.
WPF is a lot closer to an abstraction over Direct2D than Win32. If you use both of those APIs a lot, you start to realize they have a lot of classes with the same name that do the same thing.
A 737 Max costs over $120,000,000 and that’s essentially a flying bus. The F-35 is the most advanced fighter in the air.

Gun violence has little connection to budget. That’s a straw man. Dangerous water is a failure of local governments (such as Flint;) the vast majority of American water is perfectly fine. As far as government workers being “paycheck to paycheck” — that’s a problem with financial literacy. Government jobs generally have great benefits and aren’t minimum wage. Americans need more Dave Ramsey and not necessarily more Bernie Sanders.
The issue with AirPower was the mat generating too much heat. Supposedly. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/17/airpower-delay-due-to-overhe...

The issue with the Apple Watch not charging on all Qi pads is Apple locking it down to only approved devices.
Nice post, I think that languages not only shape our reality but transform how we act or think
Global expansion ‘fatal’, says boss of collapsed Wow Air
> If so, then even the offshore teams are vulnerable to the tsunami change coming with devops, SRE, elastic infrastructure, etc.

IT/DevOps/SRE/Testing are all commonly off-shored these days. These are the classic "cost-centers".
There's something I don't understand, perhaps someone knows and can explain.

Why have the chosen to build it with only two wheels? It's clearly unstable and has to constantly adjust it's position and counterweight to stay balanced. Sure, it's super clever and I think it looks amazing. But surely it would have been far cheaper and easier to build it with three of four wheels so it naturally stable. It would have looked less cool, but I feel like that can't be the only reason.
Notes from My 2012 Interview with Lyft Co-Founder, Logan Green
While I share similar frustrations with the system, your apprehension simply because of lack of accreditation status may be overblown. https://www.biggerpockets.com/forums/311/topics/366202-quest...
See you're still trying to be condescending. You don't know me and you made all those lurching assumptions. You asked insulting questions and tried talking down to me. Enjoy your feeling of superiority.
Designed by Apple in Cupertino

Made in China
Many times a recommendation system is opaque and not adjustable because the people who made it don't know how it make it transparent and adjustable. A good example of such a system was given in Andrew Ng's old machine learning MOOC. I'll describe it below.

Suppose we want to do a movie recommendation system, and we have a bunch of data consisting of anonymous user identifiers and for each user a list of movies they have seen and their rating of that movie.

Imagine that we had a list of movie attributes that we thought might be relevant to whether or not someone would like the movie. This might be things like running time, if it is funny, if it has car chases, if it has romance, if there are horses in it, if there is profanity, and so on. Let's say we've got 50 of these attributes.

Now suppose we had for each movie a vector of length 50 whose components were how well the movie fit each of those attributes, on a -1 to 1 scale.

If we had that movie attribute data, then what we could try is modeling the users as if each user had a 50 component vector telling how important each attribute is for that user, and for each user we could go over the list of movie ratings and try to find a set of weights for the components of that user's vector such that the dot product of their vector with a given movie's attribute vector correlates with that user's rating.

That works pretty well, but there are two practical problems. First, we need to come up with that attribute list for the movies. Second, once we've got our attributes someone has to go through each movie and figure out the vector.

So forget about that approach for a moment. Suppose instead we came up with a list of attributes, somehow, but instead of figuring them out for the movies and then inferring the user weights, suppose we told the users the attributes, and asked them how important each was, and assumed that the users are actually right about what is important to them?

Then maybe we could take all the movies, and try to assign attribute weights to them that lead to consistent predictions of user scores!

It turns out that works, but we still have the problem of guessing what attributes matter, and depend on the users actually somewhat knowing what makes them like a movie.

So...if we knew the movie attribute weights we could infer the user preference weights, and if we knew the user preference weights we could infer the movie attribute weights.

The brilliant solution is to get rid of the attribute labels. All we decide on is the number of attributes! So we might decide that there are going to be 50 attributes, and we can assign the movies random weights for all those attributes. We can assign the users random preferences for the attributes.

Then you can go through an iterative processes where you tune the movie attribute weights to better predict user scores, and you tune the user preferences to better match the movies. This ends up converging to a set of movie attribute weights and user preference weights that do a good job of reproducing the user's scores for the movies, and makes good recommendations...

...and you have no idea when it is done what the attributes mean!
Gather as we witness a coup d'état in the making, as Engineering rises up against Design. Who will end up on top? Find out next time, on Dragon Ball Z!
Whether or not you agree with the direction in which they are taking their product, making a keyboard so thin that types as well as it does is quite difficult. The problem they have is literally because of stray dust specks.