skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't think this is fair for several reasons. First, cancer treatment drugs are tested heavily in-vitro first, where the only significant metric is reduction of tumor mass. Clinical trials for cancer treatments are different from other drugs, as you don't generally do double-blind trials (would you want to get a placebo if you had a terminal cancer? No, probably not).

So many cancer treatments go into clinical trials with only the evidence that it shrinks tumors, and tends to kill tumors faster than it kills the rest of your body. Side effects are expected to be severe since most cancer treatments are quite literally killing any cells that divide... tumors just divide faster and thus get hit harder. The end result is cancer treatment often has very poor quality of life.

Clinical researchers _do_ perform analysis to see if survival increases relative to other treatments. But often you don't know until you've already tried it on a cohort of patients (with their consent, obviously).

There is push-back in the medical field in areas for what you suggest. For example, colonoscopies are becoming widely recognized as causing more problems than they solve. The complications they can induce tend to lead to a poorer patient outcome than missing colon cancer because you didn't screen (e.g. survivability is not affected by finding/treating colon cancer early).

I just don't think it's fair to paint cancer treatments with the same brush strokes, since dealing with terminal diseases is a totally different ball game.

Edit: I should say, there are some parts of cancer treatment which is moving towards the dont-treat opton. For example, there is growing evidence that treating prostate cancer is not necessary, since you'll probably die of something else long before prostate cancer kills you (it is very slow growing on average)
This effect is particular prevalent in the US. As someone who moved here from the UK it was quite a cultural shock to realise that being "idle" was, for some reason, considered "bad".
> Our findings expand on the idea of readiness by showing that what children think they know, but don’t know, can boost their curiosity and motivate learning.

For adults, I expect this still requires a neutral ground context before it can work. It’s easy to find arguments where people fiercely believe untrue things because the conversation starts in a judgemental and hostile place.

Personally, I love reflecting on the fact that there are very few things I can actually say I “know” for absolutely certain, in the sense that I have verified it myself, not in the sense that I learned it or read it or have a strong belief. The number of things I’m quite certain about vastly vastly outnumber the things I can say I know for sure. I think it does help me stay curious, but mostly when I’m free to ponder and explore, not when I’m in the middle of a heated debate.
Titles can be as long as you want. We need more titles like this in all of science.
The Central Park Five
>Algorythm doesn't have to collect any data on you besides your image which is not considered private data given that you need to carry one.

The GDPR doesn't care about 'private' data (for the most part) as it only cares about personal data, and faces absolutely are considered personal data under article 4 point 14. Faces are even in a special category of data which you are prohibited from processing at all unless some conditions are met, although article 9 point 2e allows processing such data if they have been 'manifestly made public'. The GDPR doesn't define what 'manifestly made public' means but the Scottish Parliament[0] suggests that it could mean images purposely uploaded to social media and made public, but note that just because you are not prohibited from processing such images does not mean you have a lawful basis for processing that data in the first place.

>It can have single image and compare it to the porn collection without storing any results anywhere, but just returning 'XXX was a porn star in YYY'.

>Implementation detail. This can be totally avoided. Tool can accept picture and return the result.

This is an implementation detail that I had not considered. The original tool and article talks about crawling both porn sites as well as social media and both are fraught with legal issues, not every video or image on porn sites is going to be legal in the first place (revenge porn, stolen images) never mind the copyright issues involved, and crawling social media for this information is simply not acceptable under the GDPR.

>Tool can also create opt out mechanism

Such a tool would almost certainly need to be opt in from the data subject, article 6 makes this clear, you need specific consent from the data subject or some other conditionals which aren't applicable here. Best case scenario if you want to operate such a tool in Europe is that you argue (in court, mind) that you have a legitimate interest to run such a tool which does not override the fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subject, which does not seem like it would go in your favour at all.

[0] Page 6: https://www.parliament.scot/S5ChamberOffice/2018_06_01_Motio...
> And the lack of compiler makes it harder to catch typos, incorrect types, non-handled null/None values, etc… before runtime.

linters exist for a reason. it isn't so clear-cut any more, either, with type hints in python that can now be enforced, although honestly i haven't experimented with that much, since i don't think it's necessary.

> Big projects written in dynamically-typed languages are hard to reason about and maintain.

let's not pretend statically-typed languages are always easier to reason about. throw enough interfaces into a Java project or templates into a C++ project and they're also hard to reason with.

you may have had bad experiences with dynamically-typed stuff, or simply prefer static typing, but these seem more opinions than facts.

and again, i'm happy to argue that it's hard to predict the future. many projects benefit more from the increased velocity dynamically-typed languages offer at the start (the exploration if you will), than trying to build a system for millions of users from the start. that probably makes sense for FAANG projects, but for most it's overkill. so the suitability towards "long-term, stable systems" is half true. hindsight can be powerful, but can also be misleading.
Ruby is an interesting data point. I only know the basics, but I've never thought of it being particularly weird, except maybe for its emphasis on runtime reflection and "monkey-patching", and yes, the vocabulary, which I believe partially stems from its creator being Japanese. It's still a fairly niche language, and I believe Ruby on Rails has had a lot to do with whatever popularity it has garnered in the West.
Much higher interest rates presumably. I don't think there's any fundamental reason why you shouldn't be able to buy a house without a deposit. A deposit just shows you can be sensible with money, and therefore the loan is much lower risk for the bank.

But if a bank is willing to take on the high risk in return for very high interest rates there's no particular reason why it shouldn't be possible. It may end up being exploitative, like payday loans, but not necessarily.
Haskell for Readers
> I'm talking about software development

And the value different languages may add is entirely about software development.

> I don't think it matters if it's strong or weak evidence, as it's not even about software development.

Programming languages are not about software development? Oh do go on.

> As I mentioned in another comment, C is not a good example.

A study of C vs C++ strongly indicates your claim about languages is false and suddenly C is not a good example? I'm trying to believe I'm just misunderstanding you but it's getting more difficult.

> The original prediction of that theory was that no 10x improvement would be made by a single language improvement

This isn't what you said. Let me remind you "If you're referring to the particular languages, then the reality is that no big effect has been found for the choice of programming language on software quality"

The goalposts aren't being moved, you've just bought them plane tickets to barbados.

> If you want a more precise statement: no theory or empirical evidence supports the claim that a reasonable choice among production languages developed in the past three decades or so has a big impact on any measurable bottom-line metric

Another claim. Show me the study that says that.

> But those papers show that, unlike language, process does have a big impact on quality.

It can if done properly; it does not do so automatically. You can have code reviews that are of little use because you have no spec to review the code against. I have been in that very position. I don't dispute the value of process but it's a necessary but not sufficient condition to bring about quality. I also agree code reviews are good, if done properly.

ME >> With enough process you can close any hole in a language, but it gets exponentially expensive.

YOU > You are now making an unsubstantiated claim that contradicts a substantiated claim.

If I use C I have to worry about garbage leaks, double-freeing pointers, out-of-bounds accesses etc that can be detected with code reviews. If I use python, I never have any of these problems so a code review need not check for these. That's a lot cheaper.

(Edit: weird stuff happening to my post, may appear twice)
well... being in Chile does not excuse you from doing this properly. This type of work very likely requires permit. Whether or not someone will go and inspect it, that's a different thing (until it causes a problem).

fyi: I'm also Chilean.
Historically US trade black people like livestocks. Does that justify the ongoing human trafficking/sex slave/forced labour in South east asian and eastern europe?
Well ... depending on where you are in the US, certain officials and municipalities are already doing exactly what you describe, while many would openly like to do so except that some pesky laws and constitutional rights seem to be in the way.

Let's not even get into the US's treatment of foreign nations and governments. One man's freedom fighter, another man's terrorist.

There is no "moral high ground" between the two; you're just choosing which evil you are more comfortable with.
A little bit of column A and a little bit of column B. I had a vague memory of some guy getting bitten in a boat, then added google.
Zero if it runs off solar.
I agree with your overall viewpoint, that the timeframe is pretty arbitrary. And after all, it's kind of a catch 22 to say "It's going to take a lot more effort to become a billion dollar company now" and then in the same breath say "Aha, see, no billion dollar companies from the past 3-4 years."

At the same time, I strongly caution interpreting any VC-funding-round-extrapolated-total-valuation as a true valuation.
_All_ US products and licensing are impacted by this incredibly brittle international spat, driven by understandable but sadly misguided sentiments. Each time we do this it strengthens the positions of those whom the current leadership believes to be an 'enemy', because at least they are acting in a fickle manner towards the international community.

This attempt by the US to express power economically over... what is China at this point? A cheap and under-regulated labor pool for US consumers? Regardless, this attempt will continue to weaken the economic and diplomatic utilities that the US has available, at least when it is led by nationalistic political leaders.
The state visit will be eventful. I am guessing we will have some inkling into this matter within the next few days.
That's a separate issue, surely. The subject is manufacturers not properly clearing user data and saying the mitigation is "just don't sell it".
Wtf? Closing the 'x free articles remaining' modal triggers the same behaviour as clicking the subscribe button (redirect)

How are we supposed to read an article with most of the screen obscured
Well that's surely a nice theory.

The jobs part not the hyperbole.

Me I prefer to have insurance, protection if I get injured at work and the whole host of other things myself and my parents fought for.

It's easy to stand up and say you want things differently, until you get older and have a family. Then you realise those pipe dreams of an easy life doing what job appeals to you at the moment are the vapid dreams of the young and lazy.
Not really hard, there's no united position. Huawei is a significant supplier of 4G infrastructure in Europe so ditching Huawei completely would be very costly, and at the moment it's mostly a matter of the individual nation states.

I don't think there's a country that has issued a complete ban comparable to the US, and most European countries will probably purchase 5G tech from Huawei for parts of their networks.
Isn't it the 10Y-2Y which is the famous recession signal?
I Walk to Work Every Day
Sigle – A beautiful decentralized and open source blog maker
Show HN: Nullboard – Simple, light, locally-stored to-do lists
‘The algorithm is our boss’: Uber drivers face long hours, no benefits, danger
No, 3m-10Y is the best recession signal for the United States.

[0] https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economi...
fb2k is the best. By fluke I stumbled upon it when it first launched, and I've never looked back.

Rockbox is one of those things that is perfect once you live with it for a while. I've been using it since the iPod Video came out (and on a few devices.) The main thing with Rockbox and the modded iPods (iFlash etc) is limiting the EQ bands and other DSP settings. The Sandisk Clip+ is an unexpectedly killer device for Rockbox -- but like anything, the UI takes some getting used to.

Considering they're working around clickwheels with a center button, d-pads with menu button, some with power buttons, others without... its a bit of a marvel that everything is accessible on the devices that are able to be used -- but like I said, I've been using it for ages and can get around some of the odd navigational quirks.

One of the biggest benefits of Rockbox over the iPod firmware is 'timestretch' / playback speeds for files (podcasts, audiobooks.) Its still my favorite audiobook player.
> While Storm's Clojure implementation served it well for many years, it was often cited as a barrier for entry to new contributors. Storm's codebase is now more accessible to developers who don't want to learn Clojure in order to contribute.

While I appreciate that programmers have limited free time and may not want to learn a new language to contribute to open source, I feel like learning Clojure could be of value to the programmer in itself.

The supposition that Clojure acts as a big barrier against contribution from developers might be true, but I really feel like developers who only write code in the ALGOL family of languages are missing out. Learning a lisp language is not an impossible task and can improve your skills as a developer.
> there are a lot of inefficiencies that are hard to solve in-house by the big corps

The problem is that it's much harder to sell to big companies than it is to sell to consumers. While a consumer may be receptive to an unreliable app with MVP-level functionality, a big company isn't going to risk the stability of its business operations on that quality of product. They're going to want stability, scalability and support, and they won't want to deal with a startup that's at high risk of not existing a year from now. One exception would be if the startup offered a unique product that couldn't be replicated internally. But if all they offer is the promise of better efficiency, what's the point of risking your business on it?

If a startup has survived long enough to achieve this kind of stability (like the already-public companies you cited), then it has a better chance selling to big corporations. But it's going to take a significant amount funding and growth for them to get to that point.

The companies that are seem to be winning the most at selling services to big companies are huge, established businesses like AWS, Microsoft and Google.
This used to happen to me all the time, until really recently where suddenly my junk stopped being flagged. Usually my boobs would get flagged (if they set the scanner to M) or my downstairs (if they set to F.) I don't know why it's not happening anymore... software update? but it's a welcome change.
The odds are that if there's intelligent life elsewhere in our galaxy capable of space travel, they've had millions (possibly billions) of years longer than we have to develop their technology.[1]

Why would someone with technology even thousands of years ahead of ours need to get right up next to our aircraft to analyze them? Why would they need more than a few seconds to do so?

If there are hostile spacefaring cultures out there, we're basically done for as soon as they find us. We'd stand less chance against them than an army of cro-magnons would against a Spectre gunship.

[1] Because the chance of another form of life reaching the space age at anything like the same time that we did is astronomically low, and if they haven't reached that point yet, we're not going to run into them.
Though I'm certain the security concerns were integral to the design of WASM, the ability to pass a pointer from JavaScript downstream into WASM terrifies the hell out of me.

I know that theoretically every WASM module is supposed to have a fully isolated memory block, but I can't help but wonder about the day where a bug allows WASM to deliver malware payloads to read other web browser tabs. Let's hope that WASM doesn't become everyday in advert networks.
Something I made to replace an ever-growing pile of scratch papers with ToDo lists for everything under the sun.

It's a single html page, depends only on jQuery and a small webfont pack. It can be used completely offline, and it stores all data locally.

The UI is optimized for keeping things as compact as it gets and adding new notes as quickly as possible.

There are screenshots of the UI in action on the GH page - https://github.com/apankrat/nullboard
Thanks for letting me know my site was down :)
Are you sure it's unfortunate? Seems like you had it coming.
Excellent point. It doesn't really.

I wonder if, looking at these examples, BigCo's are actually doing Tech a disservice by promoting the fuck out of high performers until they reach such a senior level that they don't need to do anything no more. I guess my concern is that these folks could have been accelerating the pace of tech even more, but are basically sitting out committees, managing others, and in general not making the kind of ground breaking progress they would have made otherwise.

Kind of reminds me of Feynman's view of the Princeton Institute of Advanced Study; he viewed the institution as the place where good people went and stagnated.
Often the doctor that a person has when they realize that they need to get off a medication is not the original doctor that prescribed the medication.

And yes, most psychiatrists don't want the liability of weaning somebody off a medication.

You are right, it doesn't make any sense--it certainly is not good for patients.
Everybody does that to an extent- they'll just have to find some way of getting their CPU's (including their designs) directly from within China. This may not be as hard as people think with the Joint-Ownership thing that the Chinese government requires. I'm sure that chipmakers would love the business if they can get into China.

To address your comment- yes, they already do that, but because of loopholes, they probably won't have to develop a full stack.
How are they able to employ such volumes? Do they buy DDoS as a service?
Wikipedia will, and have, remove(d) pages about people who ask them to remove it.
Much Stake: The Band of Hackers That Defined an Era
Show HN: NLP crowdsourcing platform for word-level annotations
> made on behalf of the population

Right -- in most cases through a voluntarily elected representative democracy, or something similar. In the US, a decent portion of these taxes are even imposed by individual state laws, not just through the federal government. This is, maybe not the complete opposite of totalitarianism, but it's pretty close to the opposite.

But you might be missing the point of what I'm saying. If you want to move to a totalitarian system where we centralize all decision-making power, it's not enough to find a couple of things we all agree on. You have to be right nearly all of the time.

Go back to the Right to Repair analogy I made earlier. There are generally accepted best practices for most devices (for example, I don't want to be able to overcharge the battery until it explodes). But just because we can think of a couple of examples of this, it doesn't necessarily follow that a single company should control everything I can do with my device. Why? Because my concern isn't that Apple or Google will never get anything right, it's that their priorities won't in general align with mine, and that if something goes wrong, I won't have a recourse to correct the problem (The Defense in Depth analogy).

The same concerns are present with any system of government. If you want to remove user/citizen agency, you need a consistent framework or set of tests that can be applied to every decision you make. You need a way to make a decision and, without getting the consent or input of the general populous, figure out whether it's in their best interests. That's the difficult, impossible task.

Not passing the law; not quieting the companies that opposed it. That stuff might not be trivial, but we know how to do it. We do it all the time. We don't have any idea of how to objectively determine whether or not a random policy is in the public's (or an individual's) best interest without their input.

And it's worth noting that even in drug policy, even representative democracies struggle with this. In the US, we had prohibition, which was an attempt to say, "come on, alcohol is obviously bad for society". That failed pretty spectacularly. Now we do cigarette taxes, but we haven't gone so far as to actually ban cigarettes, even though we're all pretty much agreed it would be better if they stopped existing. And more recently, we're starting to see states decriminalize marijuana, which is a clear example of citizens/states rejecting a centralized "common-sense" decision about what was good for them.

Corrections like this are examples of the system working as intended.

You're looking at this through a government vs. corporation regulatory lens that I'm not really following. I'm arguing that voluntary delegation of a decision making process is different than involuntary delegation, and that preserving individual freedom doesn't mean you can't ever delegate a decision to someone else. I don't understand how cigarette taxes relate to that idea.
read up on the Huawei CEO interview. They won't compete over tech where they don't feel to be a technical market leader. In 5G they claim to be 2-3 years ahead, so they will fight for it and think they have a good chance of winning even if competed against. But for smartphones apparently they don't feel strong enough, so they'll happily sacrifice it instead of competing.

The problem with competition is, although it's good for the consumer, it hurts the business. So if you have to choose between battling for number one or getting reduced from number 2/3 to number 10, the latter might be the cheaper option. And then you can use the saved resources to compete in the fight that really matters.

That's fighting spirit. I wish in the west we could see any of this. Instead we see bickering on all political fronts.
I’ve travelled internationally with T-mobile and haven’t had any problems. Google Fi is yet another Google product where they don’t think in terms of real world users and they over index on technology for technologies sake.
As British subjects, we are of course only allowed to divine such knowledge by the correct interpretation of which particular flowers have been chosen to adorn Lizzie's hat and the precise selection of jewelery she is wearing.