skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> then you might be correct

The comment I was replying to seemed to indicate that the Buzzfeed author's stance was incorrect. This is a fine point, but really important, and I think it gets lost in public discourse a lot these days: hypocricy does not invalidate an argument.
You mean steering clear of Massholes?
For both? This isn't policy, this is what you already mentioned: space is becoming rapidly more expensive downtown, and that doesn't stop with such mundane things as roads or parking spaces. These are not magically guaranteed their place, forever. This article and things like congestion charge in NYC are the natural consequence.

So the choice isn't some faux gentrification debate on optimizing roads for the strawman "cleaning lady from the suburbs" or the "downtown software developer", it's for the cleaning lady to be out of a job in 10 years because the only cars driving downtown will be worth a century of her yearly income - or taking the train...
Yes, there is a discrimination on your intelligence and charisma.
A really good way (for me anyway) was to start by using a tool like Webflow.com - It's visually designing websites, but using proper CSS concepts (flexbox, margin, padding etc.) - and so teaches the building blocks at a very accessible and productive level
Whether or not you are a hypocrite has no bearing on whether or not what you are saying is correct.
Pretty much every major Republican figure and many non-Hillary Democrats openly, publicly called for him to be treated as an unlawful enemy combatant and either killed or detained in the same manner as Taliban/al-Qaeda fighters seized on the battlefield. Even if the supposed comment whose only source seems to be Wikipedia itself actually occurred, Hillary would still be one of the more moderate American public figures on the issue of WikiLeaks and Assange outside of Trump's open praise during the 2016 campaign.
Summary:

This article suggests that the "key" to making a horrible modern job slightly less intolerable is: slacking off as much as possible (or at the very least lowering the priority of work in your life as much as you can) and being very blatant about it so that everyone else is encouraged to follow your example. ;-)
I found a "simple trick that makes all drivers around me nice".

I put a pigeon on my helmet 8 years ago[1]. Everywhere I go I see smiles. I really makes every ride fun.
One of my friends recently started also doing it, so its starting to catch on.

Pigeonriding transforms me from an awkward software engineer into an interesting person who people want to talk to. I have only had a handful of bad experiences[2] with drivers and other bikers in 8+ years that I have been riding (a few of those years I commuted on a bike year-round).

[1]:http://www.pictureboston.com/blog/2011/08/14/a-leica-camera-...

[2]:https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=1&v=2hJ_hzjlQsw
> it ignores residential patterns

I would argue that what we need to discuss more, is how do we make transit more efficient for the different residential patterns. Is driving to a parking lot, and then getting on a bike, scooter, skateboard, a more efficient option? Or transferring to a train/bus? Do we really want people driving into city centers?

> Most people can't use a bike.

I don't think you mean that exactly, I think you're extrapolating from your residential patterns comment. Most people can ride a bike, we just need to make it a better option in different areas.

> what minimizes the amount of collective time people spend getting where they need to go. Bike infrastructure might actually make that worse.

This isn't supported by my personal experience (live in a city), it's faster for me to bike somewhere, than drive and look for parking.

Here's a 538 article specifically on this: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bike-lanes-dont-cause-t...

"This is an important point: Bike lanes don’t cause a lot more congestion if you put them on the right streets. If you cut down the size of streets that are already near capacity, you’ll create severe congestion. But if you start with roads that are well under capacity, you’ll only increase the congestion a little bit. And it may not even be noticeable."
The Keck Telescope has a 10m mirror, so it can resolve roughly 1.2 * 400n / 10 radians (at 400nm wavelength)[1]. The distance to the Moon is about 384000km. If you plug things into Wolfram Alpha [2], you get about 18m for the smallest object on the Moon that can be resolved by the Keck Telescope. I suppose that there are more technical problems that further limit the resolution. It seems unlikely that you'll be able to see anything using a telescope.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_resolution#Explanation

[2] https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=tan((1.2*400nm+%2F+10m...
> "I hope you get hit!"

This, to me, signals the general attitude people have towards bicyclists in the US. The average person either doesn't care or, for some misguided reason or another, actively hates bicyclists. I've been yelled at by drivers for no apparent reason so many times I've lost count. I've had so many friends hit by cars. My partner was struck by a car last fall and broke her leg in two places. She's still recovering and frequently has to lie down for hours because her leg is so sore. Just the other day a friend of mine was struck and had to get stitches in her face.

I think the problem here is a mixture of infrastructure and attitude. The infrastructure side of things is usually what we talk about, which is obviously an important part of the discussion, but I don't think the problem with peoples' overall attitude towards bicycling gets enough attention. There are so many people out there who legitimately wish to harm bicyclists. Don't take my word for it, in 2016 a driver purposely murdered 5 bicyclists (in an area close to where I live, no less) with his vehicle and was sentenced in 2018[1]. Although most are likely accidents, there are other examples of drivers purposefully striking bicyclists with their vehicles if you look.

It's really sad, I think it's a symptom of something a lot more sinister happening to the hearts and minds of people in this country, and it's why I no longer ride my bike in the city anymore.

[1] https://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/2018/05/charles_pickett...
Looks like Snowden deleted the tweet is he next or url was bad?
It's not that the police wouldn't arrest him if they could. It's just that he repeatedly claimed he was getting kicked out of the embassy and it didn't happen... until now.
My general practice is to assume that the engineers in a highly regulated field are competent and have good reasons for the things they do/don't do. If there isn't a guard, then it's likely that having one would cause more problems that leaving it off or it would be ineffective. e.g., hitting a bird at 100+ kts would damage both the guard and the sensor anyway, rendering the guard useless.
This seems to vary greatly by location.

In the Boston metro area, my anecdotal experience is that cars in Needham will stop to allow pedestrians/bikers to cross a 40mph main road at a non-crosswalk location (though to be fair there are no crosswalks). _Especially_ if there are any kids involved.

If you move just slightly further in, to Brookline, good luck getting people to yield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk, like the signage says they should. I don't know whether it's the slightly higher population density, some difference in the demographics of the drivers or what, but the difference is pretty stark.
Defensive driving allows me to counter most bad drivers.

If we're talking about removing dangerous drivers from the road, I'm all for it. It should be next to impossible to get a license for most people, if what we really care about is safety.
The probe came to a conclusion, which means it did not fail.

What that conclusion was, we may never know.
>Imho a lot of this is the direct result of the deep learning hype cycle.

I'm right there with you. The first round was just 'web connected'. Uber - we're going to do taxis, but with the internet. For example.

Now we've moved to stage 2 - machine learning. Auto-Uber - we're going to do taxis, and uber, but with machines!

It makes for nice headlines.
Just work with discrete state spaces and otherwise be less concerned with measure theory. E.g., in stochastic control problems, don't sweat measurable selection!
From the article:

"But Dr Bouman, ...insisted the team that helped her deserves equal credit."
I know & use three of those four addons, what's Unlock?
> Most people can't use a bike.

Huh? What kind of people are you referring to? In my simple observation, most people can indeed use a bike. And in some countries, like Denmark, or China, it is my impression that most people do use a bike.
Interesting that you did not post this critical comment on the parent I replied to, who began the ideological and nationalistic battle.

I would hazard a guess that you agree with his ideology and euro-nationalism and disagree with mine, so when he BEGAN this discussion, you had nothing to say, but when I defend the liberal democracies of the west against attack and invasion, THEN it becomes a problem.

Just an interesting observation as to WHICH ideology you chose to chastise (the one replying) and which you did not (the genesis of the discussion).
The expertise scale level question is bogus. You'll get people with low expertise who believe their level is high because they think that's all there is to know about a technology (advanced beginners), while experienced people would rate themselves lower because they realize how much they don't know yet. And also there will be those who correctly estimate their level as average. Everybody's scale is different. You can't reliably distinguish those groups.
Wikileaks does not back particular candidates, their mission is to uncover corruption wherever it lies. Trump undoubtedly knows that Wikileaks helped him get elected. Trump's public statements have nothing to do with actual reality and how he might feel towards Assange personally.

Also, Assange is an imperfect human being like all of us. He clearly is a bit of a narcissist and spotlight seeker. Like Gore Vidal, the message of the person is often in conflict (or undermined) with their personal issues.
Using Occam's razor like that is essentially a logical fallacy.
Good riddance- Oracle cannot die fast enough.
Is there any actual scientific research on human / animal health risks that has been repeated or is it just FUD?
I work for a Danish municipality, we’ve bought a few SaaS products in recent years. The fastest implement was two days, and we had a working product before we were even done with the contract. We bought it from a local software house, that knows how political organisations operate, they host in AWS, but they could have hosted it in Azure for all we care. (We would prefer Azure because they are better in Europe, but AWS is fine).

So government operations and contracts can work fast. Until you meet a certain amount of cost that is. We have laws that govern how we buy software, and once they kick in, the process is long, tiresome and really, really, ineffective.

Because often the company who wins a bidding war, underbids, and end up delivering a lot less than promised unless you pay ridiculous extra money, and nothing in those laws protect us from this, not really.

The big issue is that government isn’t similar, so you have to govern in for the lowest common denominator. My ciry has technical competences on staff, this allows us to actually utilise SaaS products that require integration into our business processes and 300 existing systems. Our neighbouring municipality doesn’t, and as a result, they don’t even really know what the word SaaS means. The government has to write laws that work for both of us.

I think the real issue is lack of technical competences in the public sector, and the reason is really beyond me. Sure I have a vested interest, but I think I can defend it by my ability to write software in a few weeks that would cost us half a million on the private market. That’s not the primary importance of technical staff though, I don’t think we should build all those 300 systems ourselves, but we need to know how to cooperate with the private sector, and we need to build an enterprise architecture to support that, and to do that, we need technical staff.

The fact that this isn’t obvious in the political command structure in 2019 is just silly. Especially in Denmark where we’re competing with Estonia for having the most digitised public sector in the world. But to add some numbers to it, we have 7000 employees, they use a digital device or a computer for an average of 5 hours a day. We have 245 physical locations with network (schools, libraries, child care institutions and so on). We have more than 300 different systems, some major some minor. We’re expected to operate this with 5 people in operations, two people in development and architecture and 3 people in support.

I think I know why though. We don’t have a single elected official in my entire country who knows how to program.
I'm from Alabama. I'm pretty familiar with regionalism in the US. But it for the most part stops at social situations. I've never once heard of a large nationwide company filtering out candidates from the Heart of Dixie just on principle, like, for example, Meituan was apparently doing with people from Henan. This is a whole new level of regionalism.

Now when you get to the interview and they hear the traces of the accent that you still manage to retain despite your best efforts, well, there's no helping that.
So, like everywhere in the world? This China bashing is getting stupid.
Interesting.. I would actually think garbage trucks would be one of the last vehicles that are automated. They have to do some insane navigating in small spaces. It seems like the absolute hardest thing to automate that I can think of.
Classic reverse causation there.
For serious users, The Android version of The vOICe also runs on smart glasses from Vuzix (Vuzix Blade, M300) https://www.vuzix.com/appstore/app/the-voice-for-android, EPSON (Moverio BT-300) https://moverio.epson.com/jsp/pc/pc_application_detail.jsp?p... as well as on sub-$200 VISION-800 smart glasses https://www.seeingwithsound.com/android-glasses.htm

Also try the experimental visual object recognition under Options | Say object names.
I like your reading better than my own. I've re-read a few times and it's still written in an ambiguous way, so I don't feel completely silly.
During the Depression, there was discrimination against internal migrants, famously the "Okies" moving from Oklahoma to western states. They were the subject of all kinds of negative stereotypes, and were sometimes turned away at the border or put into labor camps.

I don't think serious discrimination on the scale described in the article has recently happened to US citizens in the continental US, however.
The line between the two terms is blurry, but race is certainly not strictly about skin color. Here is the definition of race in my computer's dictionary:

> Each of the major divisions of humankind, having distinct physical characteristics.

Then, further down:

> a group of people sharing the same culture, history, language, etc.; an ethnic group
Why are you assuming no one would own self-driving cars? It's likely they'll simply be sold the way any other kind of car is nowadays, and be far more expensive than typical cars.

Also, commuters will still have the same commutes whether they or their car is doing the driving. The deployment of self-driving cars is not going to magically transform a multi-hour commute into ten minutes.
I think this is what most social news sites get wrong about their points systems. Someone who submits an article gets points for each vote it gets. But the few heroes that waded through the submissions to initially upvote them get nothing. Even though they likely did a lot more work than the submitter.

I'd think a better algorithm would be that if you upvote an article in the "new" section that eventually makes it to the main page, you'd get at least as many points as the submitter.
Can you recommend textbook on these topic?
I don’t think it’s fair to put pilot training and systematic design right next to each other.

If the design in itself, and the subsequent factors of safety are at fault, pilots can’t recover from that fast enough. Why put them in a dangerous situation and expect them to recover. How long could this go on even if we didn’t have these two plane crashes. The pilots/airlines could be at fault for not training too much but the bigger issue is the system in the question.

It’s like saying the drivers don’t know how to drive because the manufacturer didnt put it front and center on the driver’s manual that the car suddenly swerves right. As ic drivers should always have their hands tight on the wheels and be ready for situations like that. It’s not fair.
If anyone deserves a Moonshot award, it has to be them.
Not me. Humble student pilot and aviation enthusiast.

Not sure if you caught this post https://philip.greenspun.com/blog/2019/04/08/boeing-737-max-... which I think is basically the same idea as you are suggesting.

From all outward appearance it appears they failed to do any kind of range check On the data. Although people were quick to point out that AF447 had a situation where the airspeed decreased to such a low level that the warnings stopped (because it was outside of any normal flying range) which was implicated as a source of confusion.
No, can do continuous time discrete state space theory -- the jumps in the discrete state space are at the arrival times of the Poisson process -- that works out easily enough, especially if using Monte-Carlo. See my other post here on Red/Blue stuff.
I don't think I've ever seen anyone 'rolling coal' in Cambridge. I can't imagine the cops around here would let anybody blow out that kind of smog under any circumstances without giving them a ticket.
That's a great reference too for the geometric intuitions!
As I do hacky work on the web I sometimes wonder why specific UI elements don't exist yet instead of people being forced to hack other elements to do things the web doesn't support. I can't remember a good example off the top of my head currently sadly.
Go Dependency Injection with Wire
I think I still have somewhere a pile of paper booklets that came with old motherboards that have similarly unhelpful descriptions of various settings.
Not true.

But buzzfeed, so handily dismissed.
Those people weren't secretary of state at the time, ie. one of the people that can in fact authorize drone strikes.
The Black Hornet Nano would like a word with you.

I know it's a small drone, but I own lots of small drones and none of them are that quiet, and the tech will likely be applied to larger drones over time.
A counter example: If I was a pack-a-day smoker and tell you smoking is bad for you, and that you shouldn't do it as it's bad for your health based off XYZ studies, that doesn't mean my statement is poor.
CVE-2019-9193: Not a Security Vulnerability
Substack.com
All the promise and hype that accompanied Facebook and Twitter in their earlier days have turned into something quite different: platforms for hate and group-think at its worst.
Do people think that Substack.com will be destined for the same or worse fate? Does anyone know if substack.com has put in controls/monitoring for this kind of thing?
What they're talking about I think is the usual statement that self driving cars only need to be slightly better than the status quo (in deaths per mile driven) to make sense because then anyone moving from driving to using a self driving car decreases the number of deaths. From a raw statistics POV this makes sense, if a self driving car is even just a little bit better than the average driver on average anyone switching to an autocar will decrease the number of injuries.

What they're saying (and I agree) is that human nature means people won't be willing to get into a car that's 'just a little better than average.' There's a couple reasons I think that will be true: 1) people generally think they're better than they are at driving 2) moving from people to autopilot moves the responsibility from generic 'bad drivers' causing accidents to a single system. Going from a diffuse responsibility to a more concentrated liability on the part of the manufacturer will probably mean they'll be blamed much more for the failures of their cars.
She was also tortured[1]. So there's that.

[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/mar/12/bradley-mannin...
You would think then a cooperative system between human and robot would be therefore be the best option. The human prevents the robot from driving into a river and the robot prevents the human from t-boning someone else. Except most people on HN seem to be completely against this type of cooperative system and would only support self driving tech when it gets to level 4 or even level 5 autonomy.
Insurers don't care all that much if you rear end someone or get in some other "normal" accident. That happens enough that they have figured out how to cover the cost at scale. They don't take that much of a hit anyway because of your increased premium over time. They'd obviously prefer you do it less but so long as their slice of the population doesn't to it any more than their competitor's slice it's not a big deal because they come out even. That's why they offer $10 and $20 discounts for safety and security features. It's not a big deal to the insurer since they know exactly what the "value" of each of those features is at scale but of course they want the cheaper to ensure customers so they'll toss them a small perk, a fraction of the money that feature statistically saves them.

What insurers are really scared of is when your 16yo kid and four of his/her friends drunkenly go off a cliff on their way to prom. That's hard to assess the risk of and it costs them big bucks. These kinds of oddball high dollar edge case accidents are exactly the kind that self driving cars seem to be getting into. A Tesla killing someone by driving into a barrier or semi truck sends chills down the insurer's spine because it's only a little bit of bad luck (from the insurer's point of view) away from a not so dead customer that's maxes out their collision and medical coverage.

If I were an insurer I would not be offering any automation discounts until we have more data.
Sort of like how Facebook stored plain text passwords for eons.
Fully-Automated Hydroponic Cannabis Home Grow System
Having to get a new type certificate would likely kill the MAX. I work in aircraft certification, and I know it would be a very long and slow process on the order of years.
It’s sad to me that I immediately knew the crossing in Austin you were talking about and it made me shudder. Thankfully I’ve never had to use it as a cyclist. However I do live near a “protected lane” in Austin that puts both bike lanes on one side of street. All that ends up doing is ensuring drivers never check the bike lane when they turn through it. It’s awful.
Science first, but the biggest economic driver will be tourism and sports. Moonball will be the biggest sporting event broadcast on Earth. Jumping 20 feet for the dunk? Yes please.

But before team sports, dirtbiking will be a special once-in-a-lifetime moon tourist experience.

Going forward, there will be special culinary options due to the excessively large moonfruits that can be grown in low gravity.

The trip will only take a day of travel. Plenty of living room in those enormous natural moon caves (lava tubes). Let's have some fun up there.
Just building protected bikelanes is not enough for cities that were build over decades with a car-centric layout. You need to drastically reduce parking and increase the density. This is a process that will take a long time. Changing cities is hard.
Or maybe Tesla’s valuation catching up with its capacity to produce and sell cars at scale.