skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"Assuming ballots were modified is kind of a weird stance to take, isn't it?"

No, it's perfectly sensible stance to take. The stakes are enormous and the idea that everyone's just so peachy-keen on fair play that we don't have to structure the system to be robust against hostile modification is refuted merely by stating the case. Just bring up whoever are your political bogeymen and ask yourself if they're that moral. The answer is no, obviously. They're the bad guys.

(Besides, didn't we just spend two years agreeing that the Russians were deeply involved with our elections in all sorts of nefarious ways? Now suddenly elections are all totally safe and anyone who questions it is obviously racist and just wants to keep the brown people from voting. You'll pardon me if I can't keep up with all the shifts in the Official Opinions. I'm sure no Russians have looked at our remote ballots and thought about what they could do with it. Or whomever else you like.)

In addition to the first-order security concerns around getting a fair ballot count, there's also the second-order concerns that elections must not just be fair, but have all the appearance of being fair. They don't appear fair when the ballots are filled in, and then disappear from the pipeline for arbitrary periods of time, only to re-appear somewhere else. Even if the system is stipulated to be entirely fair, when the loser (who could be the Good Guys, you know, because obviously the Bad Guys are waaay more likely to cheat than the Good Guys) says "Hey, the vote may have been manipulated!", how do you prove them right or wrong?

Personally, I have my own conspiracy theory which is that it rather suits our Powers that Be that the increasing number of absentee ballots and similar voting "options" makes the elections easier to forge, and citing "oh, what if poor suffering people don't get to vote?" is a rather convenient cudgel for them to pick up and hit anyone who wants to ensure security in voting with.
I don't have the citation, but I remember this quote:

"The easiest way to make people stupid is to limit their degrees of freedom"

Cars really only have 2 degrees of freedom: linear acceleration and radial acceleration. In traffic, these DoFs go down by a lot. You ability to de/accelerate linearly is very limited by the cars behind you and in front of you. Your turning also goes down to nearly a binary choice of 1 lane left/right.

Get people 4-wheeling and the stupid is very much still there, but just to get back to a main road, you have to use your noggin a fair bit more. Folks tend to think things through and weight choices more.
I imagine this will unshackle some people who have been wanting to use Rust within organizations.
I used a Honda Accord with a similar system and even had a similar experience to scenario 1 on the interstate (though I was set at 69). After I realized that the following distance control was the reason the car was going slower, I was initially fine with it, but then someone cut me off which then forced me to driving slower resulting in me turning off the system.

I have a feeling these systems won't really be great until all cars are using them and considering I don't see that happening, I don't see them gaining a ton of traction, unfortunately.
Many crimes are impossible to detect. That isn't a valid argument for going after crimes in a way that has a proven negative impact on democracy.

The ID laws are already challenged, but the nature of our courts means they remain in place for years while the gears of justice turn.
But what if the "insurance" files contained some dirt on every organization that might get close enough to Assange to kill him?

That way it would make sense for everyone to see to it that the files stay hidden.

Like Mutually Assured Destruction.
This argument is very common against people with fringe political beliefs. "If you don't believe in property rights, why do you have a car?"
World First Shaved Sno Ice Gola in Ahmedabad
I think it's considered homogenous because it's unfamiliar to most Americans.

In my travels talking to people from other countries, America often appears homogenous to them (e.g. all Americans have a gun, when in reality only 30-40% of households do).
I think you can fairly report on a ghost town and call it a ghost town if it is one at the time.... even if it fills later.

And I think you can question later such places later and their debt ... and not "has it out for China".

An article someone doesn't like doesn't mean they "has it out for China".
Disregarding the snark: the Chinese already do apply quotas, affirmative action and diversity initiatives in universities for example.
This is basically the opposite of the ideal solution.

The solution is to remove dangerous drivers from having control of 2-ton deathtraps, not contributing to the same behavior that is causing the problem.

Opportunistic, unsafe behavior is exactly the reason we need autonomous vehicles, rather than human-controlled vehicles.
I am having trouble understanding how you can argue that in 2019 we can still all make fun of each other freely.

This is evidence that you are in a bubble. The world is a big, diverse, complex place.
It's trivial to find if you look for it. It's difficult to do with 100% accuracy on election day, but it's easy to find large-scale instances of it afterwards. Consider the various scenarios for the sort of voter fraud that ID requirements would prevent:

1. A person votes using the name of another registered voter. This will be detected any time the registered voter in question also casts a vote. Typically, the second person voting with the same registration will immediately be flagged and told they can't vote because they already voted. Worst case, you find it afterwards by seeing that they "voted twice." This can also be detected in cases where the registered voter didn't cast a vote by asking them whether they actually voted, and seeing who says "no" when the records say "yes."

2. A person votes using the name of a stale registration for a voter who moved away. This can be detected by seeing if the person still actually lives in the area.

3. A person votes using the name of a dead person. Detected by comparing with death records.

4. A non-citizen registers and votes using their own name. You can see who voted and check to see if they really are citizens.

Despite this, there is no evidence of any large-scale voter fraud. Known instances number in the single or at most double digits per year, nationwide. If it's happening, then it must be because nobody has ever gone looking for it. Note that the necessary evidence is all public information, so it's not just a matter of governments not looking for what they don't want to see. You'd have to propose that no university political science research group, no think tank, no public policy center, no lobbyist group, and no political party has ever gone looking for it either. And even if somehow that were true, that voter fraud is a major issue that nobody has ever gone searching for, then the best thing you can say is that these onerous and often discriminatory laws are being passed on the basis of no data, when data could be readily obtained!
So the personal life experience of a male doesn't count for anything? THAT is what I would call the actual toxic attitude. What makes women unable to have male role models, but men able to have female role models? Is there a difference between men and women, then? Is that what you are saying?

By that logic, why shouldn't I as a man say "fuck women in STEM", because apparently we will never be able to communicate about anything meaningful anyway. People who make it clear they don't care about my opinion, why should I want them in my life?

I stated my reasons why I think focusing on gendered role models is misleading and harmful. Fine, you may disagree. But calling it toxic and "mansplaining" - that's not furthering discourse, and frankly, if that is your attitude, STEM may be better off without you anyway. After all, science is about keeping an open mind, among other things.
It's especially bad because us humans supervising the cars are going to be worried about preventing human-style accidents. Maybe you're worried about it following too close or not noticing the red light - so you don't notice the warning signs in time when it veers into the concrete barrier.
GPS info might be something you can use for sanity-checking input, but AoA can only be reliably read from an actual instrument. Air moves, you can't rely on the plane's motion.

Also, MCAS isn't active with flaps extended, so "like during takeoff" isn't correct. MCAS won't be active during takeoff and landing because it's not designed to be active at those times.
I think people would be more willing to accept the bureaucracy if it delivered results. If you've ever been the customer of a government tech product (even a public-facing one like healthcare.gov) you know it does not.
Are you suggesting that Firefox is harder to download than Chrome, Fastmail is harder to sign up for than Gmail, and DDG is harder to visit than Google?
> Try to read it again, this time without assuming the least favorable interpretation you can think of.

Thank you for saying this.
No, it's bottom-up in that it's deployed at endpoints and does not require universal deployment, or root-to-branch continuity, in order to function. DNSSEC requires a global PKI, with cryptographically signed delegations from the DNS roots through TLDs run by governments all the way to every involved system; it's only been in the last 10 years that it has even been technologically possible to accomplish this (MTA-STS could have been deployed in 2005).

MTA-STS doesn't prevent non-TLS SMTP servers from functioning; all it does is ensure that if you have TLS, that attackers can't strip it.

If you have enough faith in ICANN to vest control of Internet trust in them, that's, well, you do you.
Overpromise and underbid, there are few if any consequences. YMMV
Name and birth date is nothing. The freaky shit is that Acxiom tracks women's menstrual cycles. Advertisers tailor their campaigns depending on what will be best received at any given time in the cycle.
I think you're reversing supply and demand...
> I don't know if that matters very much. Unlike most fugitives, DOJ knew exactly where Assange is and that he'd have to come out eventually.

Sure, and that's exactly what they did. By waiting for him to come out once Ecuador dropped terminated their asylum. It absolutely matters in that they would be violating Ecuadorian sovereignty by doing anything but waiting for something like this to happen.

> But DOJ didn't wait until Ecuador dropped the asylum.

Well that's just flat out false. Here Moreno (Ecuador's president) says: "Ecuador sovereignly has decided to terminate the diplomatic asylum granted to Mr. Assange in 2012."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHVqbKgsnDw

> There was nothing preventing the indictment, there were circumstances that would prevent unsealing the indictment.

I get your point about filing and then unsealing but that's just mincing words. You can disagree with process but I don't think that makes it "political". I don't pretend to know why prosecutors decide when to file anything and I think you need to bring some proof that this would be improper if you are going to assert some wrongdoing here.
That's a ridiculous statement. All sensor data are estimates.

If the IMU and airspeed sensors are good enough to feed the artificial horizon, autopilot, etc, they're surely good enough to produce an AoA estimate that's good enough to serve as a cross-check on the physical sensor.
Some court charged an insider data thief with using the ominously named "Subversion Repository". IIRC.
The government hired us to write the RFP to purchase our software. Apparently this is common practice. Ironically, they ended up selecting a different vendor in the end.
For those less outgoing, pigeonriding will probably work even better for you. You can just ignore people who try to talk to you which will make the pigeon seem much more real.

"oh that person really has no idea that bird is on their head".
What you see in public and what people do in private are very different and always have been. I think the best public equivalent to private behavior is anonymous online behavior, as this lets people use their private persona in public with minimal consequences.
I've heard the advice "always punch up, never punch down", at least when you tell these jokes in public.
The fact that these necessary options for making the vote accessible might be exploited does not justify getting rid of them. Many, many people cannot or will not get to a polling booth, especially given how many unreasonable constraints our government puts on voting.

It's simply not acceptable to sacrifice accessibility on the altar of 'election integrity', especially when we don't have enough evidence to prove it's necessary.

I agree that making elections not only fair but visibly fair is important. If anything, lowering accessibility like this might reduce faith in elections.

I'm not arguing in favor of e-voting or un-validated ballots here. It's simply unreasonable to disenfranchise that many people on what is basically a (in all fairness to you, very plausible) conspiracy theory. We have too much of that going on in 2019 as-is.
Svrf | Mobile 3D Graphics Engineer |NYC / REMOTE | Full-time

Svrf is the first search engine for AR & VR. We make AR & VR experiences searchable and discoverable on any platform through our apps and API.

As a 3D Graphics Engineer at Svrf, you will be responsible for building publicly published developer tools that allow mobile applications to render 3D graphics. In this role, you'll be doing investigative and exploratory projects, as well as designing and building SDKs.

Apply here: https://angel.co/svrf/jobs/522190-mobile-3d-graphics-enginee... -- or -- Email: join@svrf.com
>Bicycle brings you to public transit. Problem solved

EVehicle brings you to public transit. Problem solved
OW known as Park&Ride
Autism rate rises 43 percent in New Jersey
Where can I download a copy?
It depends on your goal, and the nature of the problem. If you need to explain something in simplest terms, maybe use regularized logistic regression. If you need to make sensitive decisions, maybe a tree would be best because you have a clear sense of the variance in your answers at each node.

There’s nothing wrong with random forest. It’s a perfectly good model. But when it is someone’s only tool, it implies they both don’t know much much about the toolkit, and also how that one particular tool works.

I rarely use anything but linear models, trees and forests fwiw.
India’s Reliance Jio launches lowcost JioNews app with magazines and TV channels
When I mean early I am talking a system that stops working every 60 seconds or so. The constant failure instilled a fair amount of paranoia, and did not give enough time to cause boredom.

Google’s cars are in that middle ground, but Google has also not released their system. Presumably they are going to wait until it’s as safe as the average driver before releasing it.
The US has 5 million car crashes a year. Vehicular terrorism is not even visible on the chart.
Folks, those evil trackers set and collect cookies.

Act accordingly.
Hey bud. Instead of sending $8 a month to have information that is already accessible to you regurgitated to you with pretty UI try this instead...

Do you walk? If you don't, start there.

A study of sedentary, overweight men and women (aged 40 to 65 years) showed they lost body fat and weight when they walked or ran 12 miles a week during an 8-month study, without changing their diet. A control group of non-exercisers all gained weight and fat during the 8-month study."

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullar...

Do you sit at a desk a lot? You probably have poor posture associated with it. Do any yoga, at all. Literally any program.

Here's one from my favorite online yogi - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAUf7aajBWE

Do you want to lift weights? For $8, one time, you can order Starting Strength by Mark Rippetoe.
- https://www.amazon.com/Starting-Strength-Basic-Barbell-Train...

This book will teach you how to lift the weights, as well as how to program the lifts, which is twice as much as this app is claiming to do. At 1/12th the price for the first year, 1/24th the second, and 1/36th the third, etc..
The number naturally has to be adjusted when trying to define 'ghost town' in America or anywhere else because relatively few places are built to be as dense as 10k/km^2.
Biking is a very contentious issue in Cambridge. It was one of the most discussed topics during the last council elections and the split, at least how I saw it, was quite generational.

There have been a few deadly incidents as well, adding fuel to the mix.
Unknown human relative discovered in Philippine cave
I visited the city last year, out of curiosity.

Binhai is far from being exceptional from other abandoned "new areas." Even in 20m people Shenzhen, a lot of new skyscrapers are empty.

A girl I tried to date last year was running a chemical company in Ningbo's "new area." I went there too. It blew my mind that her company was occupying a whole floor in a 30 storey building, and was one of only two tenants. And that was only after the local government gave them a $3m endorsement.

The girl latter tearfully admitted to misspelling her age in Tinder by a whopping 3 years, and I moved on :)

What the article underlines well, and say what other don't is that there is a positive feedback loop:

1. Banks are given political directives to dish out loans to all those "new areas"

2. Developers than rent extremely overpriced land from municipalities, and build similarly overpriced highrises/elite hotels/luxury malls

3. A great lot of that real estate is then unloaded, and leased away to no-name municipality's own asset management companies at laughably low rate.

4. Whatever money that was not banged away immediately, ends up in same banks after a few years.

5. On the paper, the value of those skyscrapers goes up!

6. Read Marx and profit...

In essence, the state cashed out a substantial portion of the People Bank of China without anybody noticing as sum on their balance sheet was seemingly not influenced.

The problem of China 20 years ago - a lot of underused rural land

The problem of China now - a lot of underused prime rib real estate
This is 100% spot on in my experience.
Wow, that still happens? Not the first accident caused by incorrectly covering and uncovering probes during maintenance. I think once the Pitot tubes were still covered with their caps.
I apologize for being inaccurate, your final point is the argument I was trying to make. There are examples, but they are double digits. Effectively a rounding error.
I said the work was protected by US copyright law, not that US copyright law would necessarily be used in the case. That the opera is a US work can be relevant to jurisdiction rather than the case in chief.

Copyright would probably not be an issue. This looks like a simple contract dispute, a debate re whether one party is abiding a term in a licensing agreement.
Given my experience in Austin, it's necessary to highlight the difference between a good bike lane and a bad bike lane. Politicians usually don't know the difference. In practice it seems you typically get bad bike lanes.

When you have "protected" bike lanes with no protection against turning vehicles that are constantly full of debris (e.g., the "chipseal" finishing technique they use on the roads here makes the bike lane basically gravel in many places), it's easy to see what a bad bike lane looks like.

The protected bike lanes I used in Baltimore were only better in the sense that they tended to have a smoother finish and much less debris. (Yes, the road quality in Austin is worse than Baltimore.) I still had many problems with turning drivers not checking the bike lane.

Anyhow, I might take you up on your offer sometime. :-)
I wonder how much it has to do with ambitious real-estate / encouraging growth ... and maybe a little communist legacy of building massive blocks of apartments for housing.

Granted when I think of block after block of cookie cutter buildings I think of my travels in eastern Europe, maybe China had that tradition too?
What you're describing is a car that eschews defensive driving in favor of offensive driving. Speeding up to keep people from cutting in front of you only works until the other driver doesn't see (or doesn't care) and now you're in a crash. Or traffic suddenly slows as you're speeding up to close the gap, and now you can't respond quickly enough and now you're in a crash. Letting someone cut you off and slowing to return to a safe following distance is by far the safer option.

There's a reason it's called a safe following distance. Anything closer and you cannot stop in time. Even temporarily. Especially when autonomous cars in front of you may be suddenly braking as well.
They can change the construction zones on any given day - adjust the lane changes, move the barriers a foot over, or add a new fence where there wasn't one yesterday.
It's an (admittedly somewhat low-value) homage to the classic Onion article.[0]

[0] https://www.theonion.com/133-dead-as-delta-cancels-flight-in...
to bankers (yes w/ no racial connotations), and frat boys (yes)

Bankers can get racial connotations. It just depends on if it's the correct race to bash on in the current crowd. Same goes for frat boys.

That said, all of that is horrible and wrong. (But I will fight for your right to say it all the same.)
It's in all likelihood already safer than that status quo by an order of magnitude. Not that they are that good but the status quo is really that bad.

But it's the devil we know, It's fine that we average 3,287 fatalities a day[0].

We also have more empty homes than homeless, more food than starving people, crippling homelessness and 1:4 malnourished children in the US alone. I expect nothing from humanity yet I am still disappointed.

[0]https://www.asirt.org/safe-travel/road-safety-facts/
No suprises there
Even though the active risks appear greater, statistically it's still safer to ride a bike than to be in a car (plenty of localized exceptions, of course).

One of the best ways to increase the safety for everyone, and to make drivers less nervous, is just to slow the cars down. Speed is a major factor in crashes, injuries, and fatalities. If the cars and bikes are traveling at similar speeds, they are able to co-operate much more in their use of the road.

Traffic calming works wonders, that's how the Netherlands for example moved from a car-centric road system similar to the USA to the bike-heaven it is today, just a slow, steady stream of infrastructure changes to slow down drivers and improve the safety of people riding bikes.

e-bikes are also changing the game when it comes to cycling longer distances. They are still far, far cheaper than owning a car. I always find it strange when economically disadvantaged people are brought up as a reason to favor cars, they are the people that can least afford them.
While true that breaking with the front tires would be more effective. In a BEV the weight distribution is closer to 50:50 so rear breaking is more effective than in a normal ICE car with the engine in the front.

This gives regenerative braking more than enough grip for normal braking but probably not emergency braking which would require more braking power. So what it comes down to is that if the rear tires are not breaking loose and the car isn't using friction brakes then the car is recovering as much energy as it can with regenerative breaking.
I think insurance companies can affect this behavior. If self driving cars are safer, then the insurance companies could lower rates for those cars, creating some economic incentive to override the irrational human brain.
We are really waiting for it in Prisma and might need to start working with the unstable soon until it lands.
Another Taj Mahal (Between Tokyo and Yokohama)