skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Honest question and I don't have super strong opinions on the subject, but is product placement really that big of a negative? If I open someone's fridge, I don't see a bunch of stuff with the labels conveniently turned backwards or removed, I see Coca-Cola and Sunny-D and Hellman's Mayo and Heinz ketchup. If I walk through a college classroom I don't see a bunch of laptops with featureless lids, I see Apple logos and Dell logos and HP logos. If I'm driving down the road, I don't see a bunch of de-badged cars, I see Chevy logos and Ford logos and VW logos.

Is it really detracting from a movie to have a bottle of Pepsi sitting on the table at dinner while they're eating their Pizza Hut pizza? Isn't that how the real world actually exists?

Basically: aren't we all exposed to a metric assload of product placement all day anyway?
This makes me wonder, what is the difference between apps and websites, really?
> and most suppliers do FBA which tacks on a more expensive shipping charge than you would have otherwise with USPS.

That assumes equivalent costs in other parts of your operation. But with FBA, isn't Amazon doing your stock-keeping for you? You can avoid paying for warehouse space if Amazon is your warehouse.
This is a great point -- you could potentially solve this using --cache-from which makes the layer cache explicit, and not something that varies between dev / CI / new devs.
To be clear, I have no insight into the specific topic of the article (and I probably can’t comment on it if I did). I’m simply defending the process of segmenting experiences by user agent, which the original comment suggested could have been the cause, and also suggested that it was never best practice to do so. I think I’ve made a pretty good case that the original response from the server ought to be informed by the user agent string in an environment like YouTube, mainly for latency reasons.

As for whether or not this particular issue is best solved by whitelisting and testing the new edge UA for this experience, or adding feature detection and testing that behavior with the new edge, isn’t really the same topic. And if this is what is happening, I’m not sure this method is “broken” here, it’s serving a working page to users with a preview browser.
I read the English and German Wikipedia articles about the disaster after I watched the first episode and was quite impressed how accurate it was.
And during plant collection lots of animals die:

- rodents die in wheat field during harvest

- recently there was an article on HN of olive harvests killing hundreds of birds

- entire forests are destroyed with wildlife by burning to grow palms for palm oil
Tell HN: The comment tree collapser [-] is too small for mobile users
Changing to an em or even an en-dash would be a significant improvement.
Clojure Made Simple (2015)
But... Wouldn't the end result just be that your tax dollars get spent responding to bogus requests that waste a lot of time?

If you are dissatisfied with a government agency, it seems counterproductive to deliberately make them operate less efficiently. This attitude seems like it would just reinforce an endless cycle of inefficiency and dissatisfaction
The whole point of "these alternative solutions" is to compensate long term costs by increasing short term costs.
I view this as a major failing of our payments infrastructure. I have no way to send a few cents to a business digitally.
Agreed, and also in terms of evidence-based conclusions: if this was published and widely read starting in 1967, that means a good chunk of Gen X would have been parented along these lines. Given what a bunch of slacker fuckups we all are I'm not sure that's evidence in favor of this being a good approach. ;)
Smoking is closely linked to some forms of breast cancer.

I'm not trying to push hard on a particular argument here.
That seems like an unreasonably optimistic viewpoint, based on the history of advertising, and indeed, mass market product of anything.

Optimistically: determine exactly what products they are looking for but aren't yet aware of,

Realistically: determine what high-margin products you could possible convince them of, and show those products in as intrusive a manner possible

The Internet seems to have made us all aware that the depths of human dishonesty and unethicality have no bottom.
I don't think the "light side" exists. Advertising is fundamentally about convincing the consumer to buy your product, when they otherwise wouldn't have. That goes regardless of whether it's good for them. Sure, it might be good for them, but that's basically irrelevant. If you're giving someone an unbiased opinion about a product or service, that's not advertising - it's a review.

At its core, marketing is all about creating information asymmetry. You're not informing the customer, you're persuading them. They're opposites.
On a related note, here's a mobile-formatted PDF called "How a Saint corrected children"

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wEdBKMA2VZtz0BzOsZEOGc5X7HJ...

And similarly, the "Salesian Preventive System":

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LsfGlh0MiOMOLoYco9IAlxjqWgW...

(Taken from http://salesianfamily.org/pedagogy/preventive-system and formatted via LaTeX.)
If there were no explicit advertising, companies would use other, hidden means to reach customers' minds. Today in the press we have a more or less clear distinction between advertising and content, and I think if we banned advertising it would create an unintended incentive that could lead to the destruction of unbiased journalism as we know it today.
High-risk is something that private industry rarely to never does (except on vanity projects). All of the venture capital in Silicon Valley is really chasing medium-risk, not high-risk.

Beyond big tickets like fusion, I would direct you to things like initial drug investigations (almost all done in University labs with government grants), or rocket development (almost all done under government grants). In all of these cases the initial development of things that are unlikely to work out are done on public funds, and once it looks like it is just down to the details (still a big undertaking) then private funding steps in. The pattern here is almost always: socialize costs/risks, privatize gains.
Show HN: Orbital Index, a brief/technical/curated newsletter
Amazon is a decaying strip mall surrounded by market stalls. There is a big-box store in there somewhere, where the "Amazon Basics" products come from.
And what makes you think these other business models will have only net positive contributions on human happiness?
Moxie isn't known for bullshiting about stuff like that he's done a fair few things "normal" people would think fairly crazy.
That is a fallacious argument.

If we pick a hypothetical where a human fails and an AI doesn't, does that mean self-driving cars are ready?

Do you think human drivers are faultless drivers?

Is their a fair cost-benefit analysis for not wasting enormous amounts of collective time driving? (Driving is a very unproductive activity).
USPS has increased its shipping prices quite a bit in the last several years, enough that I can (unfortunately) easily see it costing $9.99 or even more to send a box set of DVDs. Try checking the USPS shipping calculator, you might be surprised at the results.
They're certainly enough to survive, which is why they're provided in prison. The argument wasn't that these are the only things you should ever have in life, but rather that these are the only things you need in life, and everything else is a luxury.

The punishment of prison isn't free food and shelter, it's a lack of luxuries. And people survive for decades in prison, so obviously what they're getting is, by definition, enough.
I do not know anything about these chemicals in particular, but this framing:

> It may sound odd, but in America, your loaf of bread can contain ingredients with industrial applications – additives that also appear in things like yoga mats, pesticides, hair straighteners, explosives and petroleum products.

always bugs the hell out of me.

Water has numerous industrial applications. Linseed oil and NaCl have numerous industrial applications. Acting like any chemical which can be used in an industrial context is automatically poison is just straight-up fear-mongering.
It's a commentary on the study, it also states:

"Whatever the final explanation for the increases, the KiKK study and its implications raise many questions, including whether vulnerable people, such as pregnant women and women of child-bearing age, should be advised on possible risks of living near nuclear power stations."

and:

"It is recommended that US regulatory agencies should establish a KiKK-style epidemiological study of cancer incidences near all US nuclear power stations with precise distances being measured between cancer cases and nuclear reactors."

The point here is that our understanding of these impacts is obviously not as complete as many people like to pretend.
I saw that. I still think it's small. 3% is 3%, even if their measure shows marriage being 6%.

Changing peoples minds about their self worth is still changing their mind.
You usually have cores doing what the specs requires and then a processor running your software gluing it all together.
That makes perfect sense. I'd like something similar especially if I'm overseas and don't want my requests going all the way to the USA and back and don't want to deal with the overhead of spinning up instances of my pi-hole in different countries. Do you have a link to the project?
https://github.com/srsLTE/srsLTE
I mean, I get that. But if you're a business or even an individual who was an interest in how the internet is being shaped you have to either pay a ton of money or somehow get them to invite you.

WHATWG seems to have found a way to manage the noise of allowing essentially anyone in to comment and contribute.
This is a bit political; but relevant - vote for Universal Healthcare (Medicare for All), and this won’t even be a thought for you.

I’m from Australia and don’t need to ever worry about health care costs; and you’d never in my life get me to vote to have a system like yours here.

I say this not to rant, but to hope in my heart that America can deliver this level of care to its citizens, and free you and your family from this burden.
Out of couriosity, does the WHATWG have any commitment to keep the "review drafts" meaningful (e.g., by orienting the things that are actually supported by browsers along them)?

Will it mean anything if one of them becomes a W3C Recommendation?

If the W3C sends a draft back with requests for corrections, will anyone from WHATWG actually be motivated to make those corrections?

Or is this more of a "pick any commit you like and we can declare it the 'review draft' if that makes you happy" kind of thing?

Also, by this agreement, does the W3C have any avenues to influence HTML/DOM design work that exceed those of an average volunteer an the WHATWG mailing list?
I assume brand advertising to be specific is the real culprit here. As a huge fan of Mad Men some of Don Draper's (main character) quotes are illuminatung here.

"Advertising is based on one thing, happiness. And you know what happiness is? Happiness is the smell of a new car. It's freedom from fear. It's a billboard on the side of the road that screams reassurance that whatever you are doing is okay. You are okay."
Wouldn't be a problem if we didn't let telecomms fuck us in the ass so badly that we need this.
Up and Running with Gatsby #2: Starting a New Gatsby Project [video]
Spotting satellites can be fun, but seeing dozens of them at all times (which is what the article claims) would be rather unpleasant.
sK1 vector editor and Uniconvertor library 2.0RC4 released
If I were allowed to optimize my life around minimizing personal hassle (to any meaningful degree), my life would look a lot different.
I'm on mobile, but https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https:/... is a great place to start. It summarizes hundreds of academic sources and includes them in the footnote. Certainly better research than the main study we're discussing, for reasons I've commented on elsewhere in this thread.
Yup software will always break. The key is whether you can fix it quickly (fix meaning land commits AND get it in prod) and test for the issue in an automated way in the future.
Is this only for software engineering roles, or could it be appropriate for roles for YC's other styled companies (synthetic biology, nuclear reactors, etc.)?
It's been really fun diving into some of the more technical space news each week. A longtime friend and I are writing it and we'd love feedback and/or good submissions (esp, interesting independent blog/Medium/other sources).
> The family from the article is unlikely to be wealthy.

You argue that $50,000/yr is above the poverty line and therefore "not poor" and yet you also argue that $150,000 to $250,000 is not wealthy. You also go from estimating for 12 kids down to 3 kids. That is moving the goalposts. The author is wealthy, full stop. I think the biggest place where we do not see eye to eye is that for most of the world, including America, a salary of $150,000 to $250,000 per year is considered extremely wealthy.
> straight-up fear-mongering

The unofficial Guardian tagline

EDIT: Downvoters, from the linked page:

> Toxic America: Is modern life poisoning us?
Weedkiller in your breakfast cereal. Contaminated drinking water. Carcinogenic chemicals in your furniture.
Americans are routinely exposed to dangerous chemicals that have long been banned in countries such as the UK, Germany and France. Of the 40,000 chemicals used in consumer products in the US, according to the EPA, only one percent have been tested for human safety.
Why do we put Netflix in there anyway? Seems eBay is actually a better fit with the crowd.
> If we're living in a capitalist society, expression is going to require middle-men of one sort or another so suppressing these is going to be effectively suppressing free expression.

Only because of this naive bare-minimum protocol stack of HTTP/DNS, which discourages users from owning their own identities, pushing all traffic to centralizing servers. A decade old phone has enough computing power to serve the majority of users' personal communication needs.

Ultimately centralized "social media" can only turn out to be yet another populist dumpster fire, ending up in the same state as the nightly newses, nytimes, etc - overwhelming sources of straight up government propaganda . The revolution will not be televised, and this still applies even when the TV has become a javascript browser.

This entire issue is essentially just debating between supporting a rock or a hard place, wherein actually they both suck. We're in this position purely because we the people allowed the surveillance companies way too much trust, and the only way out is to move past them.
I think this link answers it:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5072224

This is pretty good, too:

http://www.byrnehobart.com/blog/why-are-middlebrow-dismissal...
https://outline.com/R7vGvk is an outline version of the very good (from 1996...) Wired article, "Mother Board Mother Earth" https://www.wired.com/1996/12/ffglass/
1. Software piracy

2. Keeping software projects as a going concern well beyond the lifetime of any single architecture or platform. We routinely run FLOSS code from the 1980s (~30 to 40 years ago!) on modern platforms, which would be altogether impossible if that code was proprietary!

3. An emerging problem: spyware software that "phones home" for user-hostile purposes.
Ah that's great, thanks. I can't read Russian so not a big deal (though Google Translate exists, of course! haha) . Cheers! :)
why is running as root in the docker a problem? Isn't the whole point of containers to isolate the container? So what is the difference in a container running root or a user? If there is, wouldn't that be more of a docker bug?
That seems to be what this proposal is already working toward, eg with the discussion of also supporting .match.

keyword EXPR MAYBEBODY <=> EXPR.keyword MAYBEBODY
Doesn't it simply come down to the EU applying the precautionary principle for all safety regulation, including food additives, whilst the US does not?
Mixing it up with excess bleach will certainly eat up all the active ingredients within a few hours. Best done outside in fresh air
That's only true in very extreme cases of "original message", and advertisers only act if there's demonstrable proof that a large percentage of the audience of the toxic message will bail out on their particular product.
Probably doesn't matter, but with rhel eol is virtually nonexistent, you put enough money in their face and they will support you forever. We have a few machines running very old rhel versions because we put enough money in front of them and they couldn't say no.
> I'm curious how to use the SIMD-compute model to evaluate chess positions, but it doesn't seem like very much research exists on the subject.

I disagree very strongly with this statement. Evaluation heuristics have been studied extensively, but the overwhelming consensus is that the simpler the heuristic, the better. If you make your heuristic worse, but fast enough to give you +1 on your search depth, you will almost always be better. So our evaluation heuristics are almost trivial because thirty years of research has demonstrated that the trivial heuristics are the best ones.

SIMD doesn't help us for a few reasons. First, because bitboards are extremely sparse. You'll have at most 8 pawns in your pawn bitboards, 1 king in your king bitboards, and only under exceedingly rare circumstances will you have more than 2 pieces in your other 8 bitboards. Under no circumstances will you have more than 32 1s in your twelve bitboards, a density of one 1 per 24 zeroes.

Second, you have a lot of loops with depths determined at runtime. You won't know how many squares your bishop can move until you're evaluating the position. SIMD isn't very good at that.

> I really think MCTS is the superior search tree algorithm. The only issue is the evaluation function.

The issue is move ordering. In minimax + alpha-beta pruning + PVS + hash table move cache, you don't need a near-perfect heuristic to tell you which order to evaluate moves. If there are 20 legal moves, it's fine if the best move is the 4th-8th move you search, although alpha-beta is faster if you search the best move first, which is why PVS+hash table is such a strong improvement.

MCTS requires a good heuristic. If you have 20 legal moves, MCTS will evaluate maybe 2 of them, and if they're the 4-8th best moves, your AI will always be terrible, always. PVS+hash tables can't help you, because the only thing they can tell you was what move was good in the past.

There isn't a good way to sit down and get a human to write a good heuristic. NNs are really good at it though. IMHO, if you want MCTS, you either need NNs or something like it. There's no way to jury-rig classical evaluation functions into it. (by "classical evaluation functions" I mean everything from Deep Blue to Stockfish) Replacing NNs in this context will likely mean replacing NNs in every other context. This would be a good thing, a great thing even, but it would require a new paradigm in the AI/ML world, not just something unique to chess.

I actually agree with you about the elegance of MCTS and bitboards, and the inelegance of NNs and minimax. (and all of minimax's accompanying optimizations) But there's not really a good way forward.
The financial industry was huge (it reached 8% of US GDP, and 40% of corporate profits [1]), sucked up many bright students, and made many of its practitioners rich, while arguably not creating much value.

It really seems to me that the same holds, more and more, for advertisement (Google, Facebook). (Well, banks created the ATM, as Volcker famously remarked, and Google a better search engine, so there's that.)

[1] https://www.fa-mag.com/news/how-finance-took-over-the-econom...
It is the same as the ordering in the metadata file. (Python.md).

I like the release date suggestion, will implement.
I don't think you understood what the parent commenter's point. Nothing has been excluded. Those brands will just turn around and sell on Amazon themselves. All the same products will be available. The products will just now be listed as sold by by their manufacturer, and "Fulfilled By Amazon"; rather than being sold by Amazon.

It's the difference between a chain coffee shop in a bookstore being staffed by employees of the bookstore, or being staffed by corporate employees of the coffee-shop chain. Either way, you can go into the bookstore and get coffee. It's just a matter of who's getting the profit margin and dictating sales deals.

Also, most big-ticket name-brand items on Amazon are already sold by their manufacturer, because that's a better deal for the manufacturer. For example, iPhones on Amazon are sold by Apple, because not even Amazon has enough bargaining power to get wholesale prices from Apple. This has always been the case. It's only the medium-sized businesses, large enough to matter to Amazon's bottom line, but small enough for Amazon to bully, that Amazon was acting as a middle-man for. They're giving some of that up, because the profit margin they were capturing as a middle-man, which was previously enticing to them, is now too slim to matter to them.
I can't tell if you're serious, but it almost sounds plausible.
I could not agree more. I have gone out of my way to teach my children that advertising is lies. Literally. That's what I told them, and demonstrated to them.

I also use uBlock Origin, Privacy Badger, and NoScript in browsers I control, plus my own DNS-based advertising domain blocklist.
Yes. It was your outliner I was thinking of, not a validator but weren't you involved with the original http://validator.w3.org/nu/ at least in part?

I, too, served my web pages as "real" xhtml 10 years ago and loved it :)
I suspect the root of the problem is with the way we view our economy. Instead of measuring happiness we use e.g. GDP as a metric, but I wouldn't be surprised if a high GDP correlates with and causes unhappiness and on top of that it certainly also negatively impacts the environment.

Also, capitalism/the free market seems like a very unfair system (no need to provide examples I hope), and unfairness is also a known cause of unhappiness.

But meanwhile, instead of addressing these problems, our brightest minds are trying to make people click more ads ...
I mean, that's like.. The price of a pound of bananas right?. /s
Some people are delusional.
Google Thought I Was a Man (2017)
As a non-native speaker: do you care to elaborate why you think this word is incorrect here?
To be fair they actually listed themselves as an offender:

>IPhone apps I discovered tracking me by passing information to third parties — just while I was asleep — include Microsoft OneDrive, Intuit’s Mint, Nike, Spotify, The Washington Post and IBM’s the Weather Channel.

>The Post said its trackers were used to make sure ads work.

I think they understand that they are hypocritical in a sense, but the article is more focused around Apple's new privacy campaign, which does feel a bit disingenuous from Apple.
Amazon does make you pay to use the warehouse space. If your inventory is not selling, they start charging you for housing the inventory. Their ideal scenario is to force sellers to send inventory that matches sales so warehousing is optimized.
If the FDA is broken, I wonder if some private entity couldn't audit brands and/or grocery chains and publicize a consumer health rating.

"But private auditing can't work because for-profit incentives!"

Well, there are plenty of cases in which for-profit auditing works just fine and TFA is dunking on the FDA for being a broken public regulator, so...
Thanks, that is helpful feedback. I changed the first sentence to make it more clear that this reflects an investor's go / no-go model.
Best suggestion of the thread.
Preying on the weak is dishonorable.