skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Honestly wouldn't surprise me with the emergence of grievance studies. We need to wake up about the truly bad ideas and stamp them out. Equality of opportunity verses equality of outcome is a real thing.
2) Unless you have no state taxes.
I wonder what the Japanese is for endless scrolling of a Kindle directory?
Exploratory Data Analysis by Example: Pandas Framework on a Kaggle Dataset
Are we witnessing the end of Udacity?
Pretty sure these arguments wouldn't change if the IRS provided a free service to submit federal taxes.

1) They could still provide free federal tax submissions
2) State taxes could still be submitted through the companies

If the companies do in fact provide a service that is valuable the IRS should not be competition for them.

Now with that said. Intuit loads up their service with tons of dark patterns, and they spend money lobbying... why would they be doing that if they provide a valuable service?
The bigger long term issues to cheap food are water and loss of arable land from salinity caused by irrigation or saltwater incursion. Even without global warming, it doesn't look good.

In terms of sustainable locally grown food, most places are not going to be eating fresh produce year round.
Another way to think about it is that if people were actually straight up buying votes on a regular basis the prices would likely be much higher. If politicians were admitting to themselves they were selling their vote, a large proportion of them would likely think about the value their vote have in a particular setting and price it accordingly.

Part of the reason it's cheap is because most of the time the politicians in question likely tell themselves they're not being bought, because they're taking donations for access etc. or other things that are sufficiently separate from a direct transfer of money that they too are pricing it based on access rather than on the value of a changed vote, as you suggest.
It's a start. How about allowing blocking all birthday and Billy Bob and Scooter have been friends for x years messages too?
My display is only 1900 wide, and it annoys me to scroll 80-character columns. Especially when they blow up to 30+ points, and I need to resize the browser window.

If WP for DOS could format multi-column pages, I can't imagine that it's that hard. Scrolling sideways is pretty intuitive. And it's become common for image slideshows. Or one could replace continuous scrolling with jumping to the next page.
If you downvoted me, then show your math. At least I put mine out there.
The 22% tax bracket goes well above the median income. Meanwhile, in 2010 less than 15% of people filed the 1040ez.
This shouldn't need to be said but companies do need some revenue model. In the end they need to make that money some way, be it your data, your CPU cycles, your attention, or your actual money (or some combination of the aforementioned). Out of those I think "your CPU cycles" is the least intrusive out of the ones that can actually be feasibly implemented in all cases.

Of course companies will always be incentivized to squeeze as much value out of you as possible, but they'll be simultaneously incentivized not to screw people over too much. Just like how abuse ads have led to widespride use of adblock, abusive use of mining scripts will just lead to people blocking them (be it on a case-by-case basis or universlaly). But while I think ads are always going to bother me no matter what they are or how many of them there are, there's a level of CPU utilization that I wouldn't mind or even notice at all.
My reaction to the post you’re replying to was different to yours, and you’ve helped me notice a subtle bias I had there. Thank you!
It’s mind blowing to me that Senate procedure still allows one party/person to control what bills even are voted on, whether that bill would gain majority vote or not. One person should not be able to say no. Let the votes speak for themselves. Even if they are just bought. This needs to change.
The enforcement of the law and the actual breakage of the law are two separate events. While you're right that it is the copyright holder who has to ask the government for enforcement. Using a copyrighted work to which you do not own the license is against the law, and the government is capable of violating the law as well.
Totally valid criticism. I think nuances like these were what Tetlock had toughest time articulating in Superforecasting and his public interviews. He chose to emphasize the big, clear points rather than subtler, more complicated issues like how questions were chosen and how they should be compared or weighted.
Creating a Beautiful CSS Card
But only 83 kwh available for use. As mentioned in the article, the battery is over-provisioned to increase its longevity and to enable faster charging. The Audi e-tron SUV can maintain a 150 kilowatt charge rate up to 80% state of charge, which no other current EV can do:

https://support.fastned.nl/hc/en-gb/articles/115015420127-17...

Not even the Tesla Model 3 on the new Tesla V3 chargers:

https://electrek.co/2019/03/07/tesla-v3-supercharger-action-...

The e-tron's main problem is that it's too heavy for the battery it has. Every version of the Tesla Model X, for example, weighs less than the e-tron.
Hmm, I'm not sure what you mean by applicable loss functions?

I'll answer what I think you're asking and you can tell me if I got it wrong:

There's been a lot of effort spent on coming up with different loss functions for GANs, but https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.10337 shows that, according to the metrics in problem 5, they don't really improve results compared to the original GAN loss function.

There's something called a Wasserstein GAN https://arxiv.org/abs/1701.07875 that you may have heard about, but IMO the useful thing to take away from that paper is their 'gradient penalty' technique and not the new loss function.
Thanks, I hope you keep working toward those goals!
Really, are you arguing that Bill Gates and Steve Jobs did nothing but spin? Their companies are worth hundreds of billions of dollars decades later. If you think that's just an illusion then I hope you're smart enough to have someone else manage your money ... and possibly everything else in your life.
It’s surprisingly hard to turn many structural materials into unrecognisable “junk”.

A good illustration of this is the investigation of jet airliner wreckage. If you read into the reports a little, you’ll quickly find examples where visually unrecognisable fragments are easily identifiable by experts and they can reverse engineer the deformities into useful data about the crash. Explosive disassembly is a relatively well understood process, from little things like explosive bolts to big things like controlled demolitions of buildings, we have a pretty decent idea how explosions affect things.

To effectively destroy something so that it’s of no use to an adversary is quite challenging, last I heard the recommended process for destroying sensitive computers/electronic equipment in the field is thermite charges, the sort used to render tanks inoperable. They basically turn a smallish stack of electronics into as close to a puddle of slag as they can. Doing similar to a useful fraction of an F-35 would be extremely challenging.
Explicit consent is already given for feature changes just by using the site. How does the act of gathering scientifically valid information on those features substantively change the dynamic such that extra consent is required? It doesn't seem to me that it does.
1) Because the IRS can provide it to taxpayers for free. Of course they have the expertise. They are the ones who review the damn filings.

The IRS should really just prepare everyone's tax return for free automatically using your submitted documents, then provide you the opportunity to approve or correct your filing. This would save everyone a huge amount of money and time (aka money). It would be a, you know, "public service", the thing governments are supposed to do.
This is not true. There are tons of bread-and-butter deductions for the middle class. If you do a cross country comparison of taxes, the biggest difference between the US and Europe is not the rich. It’s the folks making $40-100k, where our low brackets plus tons of deductions (mortgage interest, child care, child credits, etc.) drive the effective tax rate way down
Oh right, protege not assistant. She was an APM at Google.
> Feature experiments are also a thing that exists. I want to deploy a new widget, and need to check that it works, and hasn't done something unexpected that drives users away. Experiments are how you do it.

Experiments and experiments on live non-consenting users are two different things.

> How about these: Are corner stores allowed to experiment with pricing? Are restaurants allowed to experiment with new menus? These are experiments involving humans. Are you just asking for poorly designed experiments?

Let a corner store charge different people different prices and let me know how far you get. The also have to deal with consequences fro their experiments, if a customer sees the price of an item has double in an experiment they're unlikely to come back, there's an asymmetry issue and not coming back is often not an option you have in an environment with lock-in and network effects.

> What you're asking for is companies to launch once and never know if it worked. And indeed, software used to be like that, and it sucked...

Yes, developers had to think through design decisions, stick to well defined HIG's and use controlled test groups, truly a dark age.
Brave's good but since it's a wrapper around Chromium, you're still supporting Google control over the Web.
> Again, im talking about consent when it comes to how your behavior is going to be used.

Why? To make a physical analogy, you're on their property. You're in their store, walking around perusing their wares, using their tools, so of course they have the complete right to watch you.

There is no way to legislate this, your only option is to raise a stink about it and hope that they'll be more transparent in the future. You can't "require" companies to tell you how they're using your data. Once you've consented to your data being collected, that's it.
> Thus from the four preceding articles [of Question 90], the definition of law may be gathered; and it is nothing else than an ordinance of reason for the common good, made by him who has care of the community, and promulgated.

- St Thomas Aquinas [1]

The key word I want to bring attention from that quote is promulgated, or made known.

If law can be copyrighted by a private entity, by definition it cannot be universally promulgated and should not be considered a valid law.
Otherwise, we will end up with private, unknown, laws that will be pulled out of nowhere when convenient.

The text of law must be universally accessible to all (at least within a jurisdiction) or the law should be deemed invalid.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treatise_on_Law
> Rather the Democratic House decided to pass a DOA bill for posturing purposes.

Are you really going to try and twist this into being the Democrats' fault?

The bill has popular support and simply returns to the rules that previously existed. It's not a drastic posturing bill. The GOP leadership could also just not be bought and paid for and do what's good for the country instead of their personal bank accounts.
Mirror: http://web.archive.org/web/20190410000033/http://7ooo.mooo.c...
If you own the phone it is a simple fix. You can:

1. Wipe the phone and restore from backup via iTunes.
2. If you have find my phone you can remote wipe the phone.
3. If you have neither you can put it in DFU mode and wipe it.

All of these prevent access to your data which is why you have the lock out feature in the first place.
This only works up to a point. Nation State adversaries are able to muster the resources to salvage things from the ocean floor. Case in point, the whole Glomar Explorer Soviet submarine salvage cover up.
> Another way to think about it is that if people were actually straight up buying votes on a regular basis the prices would likely be much higher

And as I said earlier, the campaign contributions are window dressing for the rest of it and I gave a concrete example. Families like the Clintons have made massive amounts of money cashing out after office, and secured lucrative sinecures for their daughter while in it.

These people and their families are insanely well off as a result of their work in government, and its not because they legislated or governed in the public interest.
Someone on the machine learning reddit asked me this:

> Question: How does copyright work for GAN output? If I input 300,000 copyright protected photos of celebrities and generate images of new celebrities that do not exist, are the generated images public domain or would there be copyright issues?

AFAIK, this is not a settled issue, but I'd be really interested hear what an actual lawyer thinks about this?
Most pages these days are like web apps in that they do partial refreshes rather than navigating to a completely new page (with most of the same markup) as you click around. From user's perspective, this looks like a new page, and logically it is. They don't care about how it is actually achieved.

For example, on GitHub, when you're browsing some source repo, and you open a folder there, do you expect the Back button to go to the previous folder, or to leave GitHub altogether?
Here's a company using similar tech in a commercial product: https://www.haloneuro.com
I'm interested in using GAN as a method to make authorship attribution more robust.

Using complex NN models (let's say, LSTM) doesn't give much better results than simple neurons with deep layers. Seems that the model extraction (how to represent some author style) is the only point that matters, and it then easily forged (i.e., not hard to reproduce the desired style on purpose).

I'm trying to use GAN as a mean of desconstruction, of removal of the ease patterns to see if some NN can use subtle characteristics to identify the author.
that anecdote fills me with an insatiable sense of envy.
For some reason I can do more artistic drawings if drawing from fantasy (I still don't "see it") or sight than from memory. I think that is largely because when drawing from fantasy I don't need to painstakingly recall the spatial relationships as much, even if there's an extent of recalling an archetype of what I'm drawing...

And the closest I get to auditory recall is internally humming the music - I can recall e.g. operatic arias that I have no hope in hell of reproducing with any accuracy out loud, but I can hum them out internally with a lot greater precision, but I can't hear them in any other voice than my own (and I can sense muscles around my mouth twitching as if I'm vocalizing while doing so)
> If people were able to budget for it then, why not now?

A failing public education system and increasingly consumerist culture that encourages bad spending habits using psychological advertising tricks, to start. Go look at how little savings Americans have currently as well, which has been covered ad nauseam by most news outlets in the past few years.

> Without the painful transparency, it becomes too easy for the government to nearly invisibly turn up the tax rate on individuals to pay for whatever boondoggle or foreign war they see fit.

Given that it directly affects take-home pay, any significant change is pretty noticeable. Heck, even Trump's very small changes for the middle class were noticed on paychecks slightly, though there was also an unequal decrease in witholding that made people's refunds smaller.
I’m curious as well. I imagine the definition of “derivative work” might be an interesting sub-problem to resolve while trying to answer the original question.
Maybe language does not matter that much in many cases. Modern languages have become so good that I don't find myself wrestling with them very often. When it comes to the point that I do need to fight my programming languages, well, let's just say there are way more serious stuff for me to worry about first, like system designs, algorithms, underlying platforms, ecosystems, and team dynamics. Really, language is the least concern at certain point of your career.

Or maybe great engineers just pick whatever that suits their job, and create amazing things. After all, Guido uses Python, Katz uses Ruby, Linus uses C, Odersky uses Scala, Jeff Dean uses C++, and the list goes on.
Most of it works. Social Security, Medicare, Defense, ...

There is the same sort of corruption and inefficiency in a corporation as well.
Great browser. It has really been improved over the last months.

I think that extension portability is needed in order to compete with the chromium family.

Why firefox? It is the next major browser (after chrome) in desktop. Promoving the use of another may lead to the parity in the very long term.
So you are worried that your existing attribution method is too focused on 'obvious' attributes and you want to see if you can make it focus on less obvious things?

IIUC, that's something that's been looked at in the ML Fairness literature.
See this paper for example: http://www.aies-conference.com/wp-content/papers/main/AIES_2...
>Facebook only shows some posts algorithmically, and emotionally, they were probably more or less neutral.

I'm assuming you mean in aggregate?

> They chose to expose some people to predominantly sad and depressing posts, which is not "what they're already being exposed to"

Can you source your "predominantly" here?

If their algorithm is operating randomly, it stands to reason that some amount of people will get a "predominantly" negative feed from time to time. So in this sense, some people were unwittingly being exposed to a predominately negative feed. So it seems reasonable to understand the results of this.

If their experiment resulted in people seeing negativity far beyond what is a possible outcome from their algorithm, then you might have a point about it being unethical.
The cell phone company doesn't have guns or regulate my property rights. Your argument is weak. Turbotax is better than government software will ever be, and it's close enough to free that no one is out in the cold on it.
There are thousands of Einsteins or Thomas Edisons that were never born because someone had a headache that evening. Should countries be tripping over themselves to encourage more babies? Is there some reason that you think an asylum seeker is more likely to be a Fields Medal Winner then a regular citizen? What about the country these people come from do you think we should strip theses countries of their brain power? Do you support regime change wars if the powers that be give you a good story about wanting "freedom" for there people while taking action that will likely kill maybe a hundred thousand people?

Say a small city has about 50 new job opening per year at there current growth rate and already has about 100 people looking for work. Do you believe, because your intentions and character are good and you mean well that somehow a magic fairy is going to come down and create more jobs just because more people show up? Do believe in type of job theory where if the wealthy are allowed to keep wages low, because of competition, that we all will be better off in the long run because of some "trickle down theory of labor"?
Yeah, but then it's just a fact and nobody clicks on it.

Personally, I'd love a website (or browser plugin or something) that reduced long articles down to a few sentences. That way I could choose whether the actual subject was interesting enough to spend the time reading the whole thing.
Our presidents are alreay paid millions, typically billions. They just don't get it until after they leave office. Just look at the Obama's net worth. And of course Bill & Hillary pulling down 6 figures for giving a speech (that somebody else writes for them). I'd say they are paid pretty well already
I did a CS undergrad and skipped compilers, O.S., DBs, and many others cause I just took as many crosslisted math/CS electives as possible (at least a theorems or math heavy course like automata if I couldn’t do better), then the minimum CS requirements to graduate
I think your response makes sense (neutrinos are another example where the theory predicted an as yet undetected particle and it was eventually found).

But the other reply to your comment is good too - at what point, after failing to detect any OTHER signs of these invisible elephants, do you wonder if there’s other explanations? What it would take to falsify dark matter, given that you can invent it in whatever distribution you like to fit the data?

There’s nothing that logically compels us to assume the existing model of gravity is correct, and its discrepancy with observation is explained by assuming the inputs aren’t what we can observe. It is also logical to consider that the existing model of gravity isn’t quite right. Of course any tweaks to gravity have to be compatible with a lot of other observations but it would be wrong to rule out the possibility of an alternate model.
Which parts do you consider overly complex?
I'm blaming this on all most federal politicians. As I said, republicans do this same thing. The D's passed a bill without compromise, knowing it is dead in the upper chambers. It's also the fault of the GOP not looking to compromise.

If either side was interested in actually passing something useful here, they would work together. The problem is that the federal house and senate have long been hard divided and stopped working together.
Pointless cash grabs are an affordance. Would you rather have a competent government? That's only useful if you depend on them more than they depend on you.
Industry groups blast EU Parliament ahead of connected car vote
I definitely don't believe it's fair. Just that it's important to appreciate the problem that wealth can hire genuine persuasion, and that problem is distinct from bribery.
They do provide free federal tax submissions. Everytime I see this stuff come up, I'm in disbelief.

I used Free File for over a decade when I had a lower income and 1040 type employment.

You seriously click a button here:
https://www.irs.gov/filing/free-file-do-your-federal-taxes-f...
Pick a provider and fill out the form. It doesn't even take more than 5 minutes. 10 if you're slow.

How is it on a site full of highly intelligent and educated individuals, there is one single comment about Free File and how simple it is. And it has been around for many years.

There are tons of comments in this thread about how income tax is not automated and free in the US, when it is actually almost automated(fill out name and address and income and the software does the rest) and free for 70% of people in the US. How? How are this many people commenting and no one appears to be aware that almost all of the comments in this thread are incorrect?

On the state level, the federal government, for obvious reasons, cannot control that, but you will be happy to know that many states also support forms of Free File, although are often more restrictive. But with that said, many state taxes are just percentages of what your federal tax liability is so they are often half a page long forms for most people.

And regardless of all of that, and regardless of income, if you have a typical 1040ez income, you can go down to the public library, get the form which is literally two pages and fill it out and mail it in. It also takes about 15 minutes and in 100% absolutely free. Well, you have to purchase a stamp.

Seriously, do you not realize this has been the case forever? Are you located in the US?

And if you make over $66k a year? Come on, you can afford $50.
Good question, IANAL but how is a human artist drawing a face (based on their learned reality of what a face looks like) any different than a GAN drawing a face (based on the GAN learned reality)?
Not everything needs to be a 'compromise'. Sometimes you can just judge a bill on its merits.