skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Network Cultures
How is 120MB in any way, shape or form "measly"? It is exactly this kind of thinking that delivered unto us the absolute monstrosities we see in the wild.
Vices or virtues of the article aside, what a great title.
It would be precious if this entire study were prevaricated.
> Believing that consciousness can be explained in terms of material processes is certainly a valid belief, but it is just that: a belief.

It's a belief, true, but it's kind of a privileged one, since it's so successful at explaining literally every other thing we observe about the universe. Why brains would be different?

> Believing that a certain configuration of atoms, no matter how involved, can give rise to subjective experience is not far from believing in some kind of magic.

This argument would be stronger 500 years ago, but I don't know how one can consider this "not far from believing in magic" after seeing a computer. Or, after observing brains of different animals - from insects to simians. Or, after discovering circuit-bending and realizing how similar it is to prodding a brain. There's ample evidence against the hypothesis that the human brain is the only magical object in the universe and that it somehow transcends physics.

> And before you retort that a lot of phenomena in nature are 'emergent', I will say:all those phenomena are ultimately explicable in terms of their basic atomic constituents. Consciousness is qualitatively different. You cannot start with the experience of being hungry and then somehow explain the whole process from your stomach being empty to that qualitative experience and how it feels for you.

Why? If I gave you a device that could trace the state of every molecule and charge in my brain to the extent allowed by uncertainty principle, would you still be confident in believing that? Just because we don't have a device like this doesn't mean consciousness is magic.
> Physicists increasingly suspect that there may be multiple universes beyond our own, each with their own unique laws of physics.
Use your isp for emailing out and receive email on your own server.
This is nice, but nobody is going to buy a product because of your story and ambition. People make purchasing decisions based on value.
It's commonly claimed that putting a pebble in your shoe is a good way to disrupt gait detection. (Presumably you shouldn't always use the same pebble in the same shoe!)
If the callee is meant to corrupt it then it is your fault for misusing it (unless the corruption is intentional and you plan to recalculate the length after calling it). If it wasn't meant to corrupt it then it is a bug and if it is in your code then it is your fault for not using the string functionality that you already have in place to avoid the bug in the first place. If it is not in your code, as long as you had to use it you'd have that bug regardless of what language or framework you used since it is out of your control and there isn't anything you can do about it.
Notre Dame will live on–that won't be the case for all our cultural landmarks
There's aspects of Flutter I don't like, but the cross-platform seems to strike a fairly compelling middle ground vs. what you've probably had experience with. It's almost like the C approach. There's the common stuff abstracted that's not particularly platform-specific (here's how you draw a red box, here's how you load a jpeg, etc...), and then all the really platform-specific things, like theming, is handled by just a handful of basically #ifdefs

So much so that you literally have platform-specific widget implementations to go along with the platform-specific themes. Which sounds worse than it is, but defining new widgets is super easy.

Not a write-once-run-everywhere but more like a write-1.2x-to-support-2-platforms type of thing. It risks being uncanny-valley at times, and implementation can drift from platform needing re-alignment, but it should let you do those really platform-specific stuff in sane enough ways.
Isn't the language a setting in the OS somewhere? I don't think you need any ML to figure out what language a user's phone is currently using.
This is a simple articulation around something I've wondered for a while.

From a regulatory perspective should we be less concerned with regulating the content on the platform (e.g. a single post, copywrited material) and more concerned with regulating the broadcast effect/technology now inherent in all the non-chronological feeds across ad supported social giants (e.g. instagram now put my post in everyone's feed, or trending).

There seems to be more than enough precedent in the US around regulating control over broadcast, pre-internet: Limiting TV and newspaper ownership shares, limiting advertising to children and smoking ads, equal time, decency standards -not advocating, just calling out that these things have happened.

Some of this I think stems from content being carried on lines deemed "common carrier" (I'm no expert), but the gist seems to be the same here. No one said you couldn't make a movie that included a line with the word "Fuck", but you couldn't broadcast that movie into every American home before the 8 o'clock news.
I've had whiteboard interviews where the interviewer stays silent while taking notes.

I failed 100% of them with various, strangely random feedback by HR/recruiter.

I've come to conclude it's the hiring mechanism of social incompetents / unempathetic sciency types. And it was always a dev from another group than the one I was applying for.

No thanks.
No Silver Bullets
Did you read the article?

The article claims that inflammation is both a symptom of other problems (when in reasonable ranges of signalling) and a causer of problems (when signalling too much).

I know the title of the article itself is a bit sensationalist, but I would assume that any tests aiming to determine if inflammation is the cause of a problem in specific would also check to make sure that the inflammation was in the "starting to cause harm" range rather than merely in the "signalling" range.
> The problem with that line of reasoning is you're assuming the brain is a computer, or that it merely computes.

The brain can compute. That's extraordinary. I say one type of thing does that, computers. You say no, two things, computers and then also brains. But when pressed to explain what is a brain if not a computer you'll just sputter (probably at length) without offering any substance.

In a sense that's the wrong way up to explain it. Church-Turing intuitively defines computation (the things computers can do) in terms of what our brains can do, so the match is not a coincidence but it also isn't there for the reason you probably expect. Because it's an intuition Church-Turing isn't provable, but you may notice that we subsequently built an _entire world-changing industry_ upon it in a lifetime.

You pointed to a review, others have written entire books, always they can be summarised as simply arguments from incredulity. "What? Nonsense, the brain can't be a computer, I simply won't believe that". It's unfortunate that we have woken such people from their daydreaming, I have no doubt that if similarly aroused they'd give the mathematicians what for too, "What? Nonsense, how can there be numbers which aren't ratios of whole numbers, I simply won't believe it".
Another good writing task for programming is to write down a recipe (properly). However, to do it off-the-cuff would mean you need to know how to cook - so maybe not the best example.

Something that could be done is describing the task of making coffee, or a sandwich, or describing your entire morning routine.

Focus on teaching the details - let the students try it first without any prompting other than telling them to try it. Then select one at random and go over it showing where certain details are missing.

For instance, they might say "I brush my teeth, then I get in the shower" - but what they really did was "brush my teeth, turn on shower, wait for a particular temp, until that temp continue brushing teeth, when temp is reached, stop brushing and get into shower".

Of course, even that isn't detailed enough (do they still have their clothes on? maybe those should be removed before getting into the shower?) - but it would show how you have to think in such extreme detail for programming, plus the whole "control logic" and "logic flow" of such a description.

Recipes are like this too, but knowing how to properly write one does require cooking knowledge, which many people don't have. But everyone (usually) has the experience of "getting ready for work" or something similar...
> as exactly zero other things in the universe that we studied since the dawn of humanity turned out to be magic.

Rather, the things that seem somehow magical to us we either explain scientifically, or we ignore. I don't know about you, but several of my acquaintances have reported phenomena and experiences that I have no reason to doubt, that are not solely 'in their mind' (because of the external consequences of what happened), and that cannot be explained by mechanistic laws because they involve 'backwards' transfer of information and so on. These are datapoints, they're just unfortunately not datapoints that can be used for scientific inquiry. But then again, there is no a priori reason to believe science can answer all questions we have.

Regardless of this, there is a reason to assume a big metaphysical mystery, simply because consciousness and subjectivity is unlike anything else in the world and bridging the qualitative gap between subjective experience and the mechanistical world is a completely different task than explaining, say, what makes a stone roll the way it does.
Copied from another comment on of mine so you see it:

ReactXP (https://microsoft.github.io/reactxp/) uses TypeScript and targets mobile and desktop platforms using native controls, not emulated controls.
While Flutter doesn't work yet for desktop or web, ReactXP already works for these environments, and is used in the new Skype for Web.

Windows support is done and targets W10, Xbox, and Windows Mixed Reality. MacOS support is experimental, but mostly working. Linux currently needs an Electron wrapper.
The notion of bullshitters needs to be brought to the front of our industry's consciousness. Our industry is one where the impostor complex is rife and anyone who sounds confident must know what they're talking about, since even the PhD's aren't half as confident in their field of expertise as a bullshitter is at anything.

The tech industry is increasingly inundated with these types of people who manage to get placed high in management hierarchies despite knowing nothing about the technologies they claim to be experts in.

They're are the 'Agile coaches' who have never done actual scrum. The 'enterprise architects' who couldn't write fizzbuzz if their life depended on it. The 'thought leaders' who read a couple blogs about blockchain.

They are a cancer to the entire industry. I don't expect C level leadership to be savvy enough to call them out for another 5-10 years, but something needs to be done about these types of people. They actively cause damage to the course of any business by setting unrealistic expectations about what technology can do, how much it costs, and how long it takes.
The flagged question asked if I worked for the government or something to that effect. I’ve noticed a bit of a correlation where conservatives tend to be more supportive of government surveillance. I should have clarified.
Is there any evidence of that? Google selects people based on entirely different criteria, and promotes them for moving a button in Gmail from an inconvenient location to an even less convenient one.
> "Improvements" is a buzzword for "let's change everything and give it a facelift and make all of our users waste time relearning how to use their device". No thanks. Actually, not even thanks. Just no.

Which can be a traumatic experience for non-technical people, like my mother or my niece, the end result being them learning to automatically refusing any kind of update, out of fear of change.

I really don't get this unhealthy obsession of the tech industry wit change for change sake, what most people want and need, is stability, so they can take of their lives.
> The right is also more likely to conflate free speech with some kind of "unchallenge privilege" - the idea that people using their speech to complain about your speech is somehow bad. The giveaway for this is people going on television and writing in the national newspapers to complain about how they are "silenced".

Are you sure you didn't you mean "left" here? Though I don't think either party has a monopoly on this behavior.

Specifically the "using their speech to complain about your speech is somehow bad". The left seems to constantly describe opposing speech as violence/bigoted/racist/hateful and claims any criticism is "silencing" them, while asserting anyone who isn't in the intersectionality disadvantaged groups has no right to speak on those issues.

For example, when Chelsea Clinton (on the left) criticized Ilhan Omar's statements about Israel, others on the left accused her of anti-muslim sentiment, and said she was responsible for the New Zealand terrorist attacks. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/03/16/new-...

Similarly, when Ilhan Omar made her recent comments that included describing 9/11 as "some people did something" (yes, that wasn't her main point, etc.) and was roundly criticized by the right for minimizing the terrorist attack, the left rallied 'round to defend her, saying anyone who criticized her comment was driven by anti-muslim bigotry.

Rashida Tlaib even invoked the complaint about being silenced by not being defended enough - so the Democrats are silencing these prominent new minority congresswomen by not defending them enough:

"They put us in photos when they want to show our party is diverse. However, when we ask to be at the table, or speak up about issues that impact who we are, what we fight for & why we ran in the first place, we are ignored. To truly honor our diversity is to never silence us."

Read all about it in the national press...

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/16/us/politics/ilhan-omar-de...
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/rashida-tlaib-democrats-silen...
This actually predates emoji (and was mentioned in the article). In the early 00's we got the ability to use unicode characters in a domain name. The example I always like was Unicode Snowman ;-)

http://xn--n3h.com/ (Funny enough HN is stripping the Unicode Snowman glyph, so using the puny code version)

Was a great way to break websites. JavaScript used for client-side validation usually allowed it, but backend code often didn't understand unicode for URLs, and would usually choke somewhere and (fingers crossed) give you a lovely J2EE or ASP.NET error page with some helpful stack traces and version numbers
I was aware since I just made that exact point. You want an "App drawer" folder that has a hard limit of 135. Not to mention the terrible UX of folders at that scale.
Immigrants scored higher on the bullshit scale(survival tactic?) and accordingly countries with high immigration rates scored higher as well.
Xerox Alto [1] had GUI, Smalltalk 72 dev env and TCP/IP networking in 1973. How much real progress has there been in software technology since then?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Alto
Clearly not if only half of management are bullshitters. It's also not exclusive to management: I've met plenty of rank-and-file developers who specialize in talking shite.
Yes of course they do. They just don't employ that many people to do it. With the kind of materials they handle there's not much for humans to do except run machines and more and more of that becomes automated at time goes on. Highly automated production like that is one of the few kinds of manufacturing it still makes sense to do in the first world because getting factory set up here is still cheaper than doing it half way around the world and if you're highly automated the downside (high labor costs) is not an issue. Of course they product stuff in China, India, etc. as well. They're a global company with a diverse portfolio so they have the ability to locate different things in different places in whichever way makes the most sense.

Whether they have their engineering in the US is a different story (though I'm sure some of it is).
Vitamin D3 is said to help with metabolic syndrome. Also, intermittent fasting (eating within the same 8-hour window) and keto. Estrogen, DHEA, vitamin K2 MK-4, etc.

https://vitamindwiki.com/Overview+Metabolic+Syndrome+and+vit...
Of course, this only helps against foreign letters, you still have people squatting or putting phishing on common typos of pure asci urls with basically the same result.

Meanwhile, almost all of humanity still can't get decent urls in their native language :(
DepHell – Project Management for Python
I ship nontrivial PyQt apps. PyQt can basically do anything Qt can do. Multiple inheritance of QWidgets can be dicey, but desired results can usually be achieved by defining mixins that don't subclass QWidget. It works brilliantly, far from "the point of uselessness". For me, cross platform GUIs are a solved problem, and I really can't wrap my head around all the noise to the contrary, or the claims that electron is what saved us.
Great economic analysis, but economic arguments (by themselves) shouldn't be submitted as "Show HN".
Unfortunately no. As soon as the image is rotated slightly to one side it disables the adversary print out. You can see this in the original paper with the final image.

Now, that doesn’t mean that a camouflage couldn’t be created that more generally avoids detection from these algorithms.
I see a human behind the wheel of the car.

"Self-driving 99.9% of the time" sounds very close to full self driving, but in order to have fully driverless Uber cars where you don't have to pay the driver, they'd have to not have a "safety" driver. That's the thing that's further away than people want to admit.
Caps lock remapped to esc is definitely a great solution - I have been using it for years
Your right, I did find that searching the web. We make a simple online video editing platform called veed.io. I not sure I know what ingredients are in our Sauce yet... Whats Adobe's Secret Sauce?
Does the buyer have any way to tell if an item is commingled, and if the seller they selected does not commingle? The pressure to get the buy box on competitive items means missing out on sales if you don't commingle.
Can't agree with this enough. The most consistent finding in industrial psychology is that general cognitive ability is by far the best predictor of job performance in virtually every role ever tested.

Even jobs that don't seem cognitively demanding, like janitors or infantry. Higher IQ candidates almost universally do better, even if they start with much less experience.

The takeaway as it applies to modern software hiring, is that skillset is way overemphasized. It's quite common to see job ads that heavily focus on the company's specific tech stack. ("Must have experience with Rails, React, Travis, and AWS")

It's much better to cast a much wider net, and try to find the smartest people anywhere. High IQ people can easily re-tool their specific skillset. What's interesting is this is much closer to how the most successful tech firms, like Google, tend to hire.
Well... not in the sense that these things apparently exceed not just our own aircrafts' capabilities, but seem to use propulsion technologies that don't obey the known laws of physics. Enemy states have drones, for sure. But enemy states having drones that use super fast non-air-burning engines would be staggering.
I think Typescript is going to obliterate Dart... it's really amazing.

I love working with it more than any other languages I've worked with.

Python, Java, Go, Javascript, Lisp...

I think there's some combination between it being typesafe, amazingly expressive, dynamic and also productive because you're on the web platform.

Generics might be a bit much for some Javascript people because it's like a whole language in and of itself but it's worth it IMO.
> Yeah, language without ... decent comprehensive library

I'm sorry, did you just say C doesn't have a comprehensive library?! I agree with your other points (but posit that they are not always negative; some of the 'flexibility' is useful in the domains where C dominates. Most of the shortfall can be covered by tooling, linting and standards.

It's been almost a decade since I last used C, but I think the complaints are overblown. Some tools have sharper edges than others, but there are there to accomplish a goal.
I am not suggesting that harassment ceases to exist in the real world, I'm saying that it's simply not so cut-and-dry as the parent's comment suggests. An individual's behavior can drastically alter between the physical and virtual world, where social norms and filters can easily be tossed aside.
The precedent for regulating content on broadcast networks is based mainly on scarcity of radio spectrum; something that does not apply to the Internet. See for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Lion_Broadcasting_Co._v._F...
Just don't do anything with the leaves! My parents used to have some rhubarb in the garden when I was young, and I had it drummed into me how poisonous the leaves were (not that I was the sort to go around eating random plants). Looks like "a 65 kg adult would need to eat 4 to 8 kg (9 to 18 lbs) [of leaves] to obtain a lethal dose"[0], although I guess you could still get pretty ill with much less.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhubarb
I imagine a good bullshitter would also be a good antibullshitter (wait for a situation where one could conceivably bullshit, and, if someone tries, press them in a way that will reveal what they’re doing if they are bullshitting, and be harmless if they aren’t)
Someone should buy http://forcedrhubarb.com ... I'd buy some :p
India’s water crisis is already here.Climate change will compound it
I'm 17 pages in and I am wondering if the paper itself is bullshit and that's the joke.
(Fwiw, lots of Android phones (like my moto) have finger print unlock.)
That's slightly interesting. But it doesn't change the fact that some programs fail to run on the open implementations. And why is that? Presumably it's a secret. This unknown difference in behavior is significant, even if the actual difference is small. It means one can intentionally write a program the only runs on proprietary implementations.
Exactly. There's GUIs and there's GUIs.

When I've looked at libraries, I always consider how you'd implement the Visual Studio interface with them.
Do they get to set their price for the transaction, make a counter offer? Can they individually amend the work contact? They can only be open to accepting clients they cannot pick which clients to make a bid for like any independent contractor.
Well, no, we don't have it yet. Still in progress, no announced ship date.
Robotic arm inspired by the Elephant trunk
If bullshitters rise to the top with very little work or knowledge, then perhaps being a bullshitter is the smart choice for people of a certain disposition.
You can use catchall addresses for this. Any ol email @ that domain that doesn't have an associated account gets routed to the catchall account. Protonmail supports this if you pay, as do a few others.