skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My understanding is Pest doesn't use packrat, and thus doesn't have the unbounded lookahead mentioned in the article. I figure that unbounded lookahead comes with a lot of downsides, and my opinion is that Pest solves lookahead in an interesting way. It felt relevant given the focus on lookahead in the article.
Quantum Computers, Neural Computers, and the Future of 0s and 1s
I think the roots of fake engagement are coming from our perception of key success metrics for content creators.
I don't blame those people - advertisers and services are more in charge of that behavior. We tend to think that likes and views are the key signs of content quality or popularity.

By the way, WeChat has a really nice way to cope with fake likes. For official accounts they hide the total number of subscribers, leaving only the number of friends that read this account.
Instagram is hiding the number of likes on posts in several countries as well, in order to "remove pressure" on users.

I think that is on of the ways for healthier content ecosystem.
There seems to be no other explanation for the borderline ridiculous proposals that keep making their way into laws, including but certainly not limited to CAJA 2009 which criminalizes sexual drawings of fictional underage characters - which they admitted in their own reports wasn't based on any empirical evidence and in fact only on hearsay and faulty reasoning from the likes of children's charity workers.

This is an egregious case with the chance to ruin lives (in fact, a substantial number of people are convicted under it each year according to stats in the VAWG report) but I wonder what other deplorable incompetence I'm missing out on seeing from the UK government.
I don't think the communists ruling China need any justification for immoral behavior. Lack of justification hasn't stopped them in the past.
Okay, just clarifying.

You are in fact redefining the term. Which isn't an issue, it has been redefined many times before: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness (Which I see you've edited to be included in your response). My problem with your definition is that it obscures the fact that "political correctness" is almost always used as a pejorative, whereas your definition gives it a more neutral, clinical meaning. If we were discussing religious dogmatism, it would be the difference between "devout" and "puritanical." Your definition obscures the normative usage of the phrase, and can lead to people talking past each other.
To me this seems less understandable than the reproducibility crisis in psychology research, for at least in psychology research there is always the possibility that different samples can belegitimately different, and thus legitimately provide different results, but in machine learning, there are standardized training and testing samples, and the methods can be entirely encapsulated into immutable computer code. In this respect, the lack of reproducibility in machine learning papers suggests to me either distorting incentives or rampant unreported tweaking of parameters and/or falsification, or probably, I suspect, intentional obsfuscation of methods to retain value as IP in the private market. I'm not sure which or which mixture, but publishing code, and datasets if funded with public money should be made more manditory.
Emacs is not an IDE. It's more a text-mode Lisp machine with lots of little libraries to build your own IDEs and other text-mode applications.

So comparing a big IDE like Visual Studio vs Emacs is like comparing a big framework like Rails vs lots of little Clojure libraries.

The latter is always more complex to learn and setup, but it is also more able to adapt and evolve. It's a different design compromise.

I think Emacs is really worthwhile to learn, and it's become much easier recently. Things like ELPA and use-package streamline configurations a lot. The Language Server Protocol (LSP) will make things even better.
Given their stated mission:

> OpenAI’s mission is to ensure that artificial general intelligence benefits all of humanity.

I'm struck by the homogeneity the OpenAI team.

https://openai.com/content/images/2019/07/openai-team-offsit...

It seems to be mostly white people and a few Asians, without a single black or Hispanic person.
> What kinds of problems did you see?

A unique action generator, action type, and reducer for every endpoint is the common failure mode (probably because thats what the docs do). Also, the react-redux bindings are a truly horrific API - only call connect where you absolutely must (you can can actually call dispatch on the store if you have a reference).
I can believe this about a class B or C. Class A is too large to go unnoticed.
I love love love groovy.

Unfortunately my current team pushes hard against it because apparently its "java but not strongly typed" and therefore inferior.

The collection utils are great ( [].collate is a personal fave ).
Tesla has finally discovered subassemblies and the concept of minimizing wiring.

Other car companies have been using both for years...even decades, in Toyota's case (the original pioneer behind using subassemblies in automotive design).
Packrat isn't really a parsing algorithm - the PEG is the parsing algorithm. Packrat is instead an optimisation that can be transparently applied to a PEG. It's a common cause of confusion. And to make it more complicated some PEGs aren't really tractable without Packrat, so then that's sort of not an optimisation any more.
The averages are basically pointless. They might as well publish average average book lengths for categories on Amazon. Want a young adult novel? Average price 4¢ per page! Oh you want a specific novel? Sorry we advertise averages only.

What you'll actually get is determined by factors entirely out of their control. Whether that's an install engineer using a reel of Cat5e because that's what was in the truck even though the work order said crappy Category 3 phone cable would do, or even the neighbours are all using the most expensive package and that causes electrical interference that reduces everybody's bandwidth.

You can measure your actual characteristics, and the ISP will offer to do a half decent estimate of that, that's useful to at least decide which service to buy but the average is essentially worthless.
For reference - the saddest little File menu https://i.imgur.com/YPoCmbR.png
This kind of thing reminds you of the fact that the reason we don't do business and trade with North Korea is because they're a geopolitical threat, not because they abuse their citizens. So long as a country like China's evil stops at the border the rest of the world could not give less of a shit.
Actually the code review / issues are not necessarily non-dvcs. For example https://github.com/dspinellis/git-issue
About as much as you're enjoying your Brexit I'd guess.
Origins: How the Earth Made Us
It’s a legal directive, not a monetary incentive
How does that matter? Does diversity for the cause of diversity lead to better results? Is there any data around this?

Hiring the most qualified people is the most important thing. As long as there isn't an inherent bias for not hiring someone who is hispanic, black, or brown, it should b e fine.
both good reasons for your future boycott of door dash!
Are there other food delivery services who have clearly explained fee structures?
The first time Legion really clicked for me--and when I could place it in context--was reading the first few chapters of the Legion thesis [0].

[0]: https://legion.stanford.edu/pdfs/bauer_thesis.pdf
Mystery of the Ghost Blimp
I really did mean Amazon Logistics.

https://logistics.amazon.com/

As far as I can tell, this is Amazon coopting the gig economy for their own deliveries. The quality of service is predictable. I doubt the delivery people (sorry, Amazon Delivery Service Partner) make a heck of a lot of money.
A lot of their writing gets done by people making less than them, like legal aids. I've written content for lawyer's websites for not much money.

I also wrote legal notices as part of my corporate job. I started at like $9/hr and was make $12-something/he when I left.

Some letters got reviewed by the legal department and approved by my boss, but I wrote them (using a form letter to get me started, then fill in the specifics).
I'm in the same place -- Amazon sold me a counterfeit charger.
Well, not counterfeit, but with a fake ETL/Intertek -- a UL competitor -- mark. I told their CS and they refunded me, then continued selling the charger with the fake ETL mark.

I moved $40k/year of IT spend from my company off Amazon to BHPhoto.

I also stopped buying any makeup / food / supplements / dog food / dog toys on Amazon.

Hell, I bought my dog's new leash and collar straight from the manufacturer!
Except that he left.
So the idea is to make ecu in the vicinity to be responsible of the components, and drive them through communications.

Nothing new, trucks are applying this technique already.

The big drawback is that it increases SW and systems complexity. You cannot believe how few of the SW guys in the automotive industry have a clue about CAN (or flexray) communications and its failures mode. Its unbelievable how much code does not react properly on Communications failures / init / lag.
Totally agree... but also think the world will benefit as well. "Microsoft is investing dollars that will be fed back into its own business, as OpenAI purchases computing power from the software giant, and the collaboration between the two companies could yield a wide array of technologies.
Government enforcing and supporting monopoly is government not doing its job. Look to the individuals responsible, particularly those who've constructed the incentives for other parts of government to support such monopolies.

Left to themselves, corporations acquire monopolies. The market gravitates towards nasty local maxima when there is information asymmetry, or when people simply don't have enough spare resource to compare options properly (attention asymmetry?). The primary organised force against corporate opportunism is government.

Government does of course have its own failure modes, democracy regardless (for similar reasons) against which corporations and the free market operate.

Claiming that either half of the system is remotely capable of self-regulating is moronic.
I initially bought up states and their interplay with belief, but I'm hearing that their beliefs simultaneously aren't important, while their belief in non-interference with people's beliefs, is. And I think those contradictory claims are even independently both very interesting given most of the history of "western civilization".
Exactly. If I'm not refactoring the underlying data structures....the refactoring isn't a very interesting/difficult one at all
I worked at one of those companies. They were very self-certain that their hiring was high signal. They were likewise completely disinterested in doing a control group test where we randomly hire people from the fail pool and see how they compare once hired.
I guess this shows that the data really are what matter. Most ML methods can get signal that are reasonably approximate to each other. So are we hyper optimizing the methods? So my guess is that the data is the advantage. Having a lot of it and having exclusive access to it. Is it also time to move beyond derivative me too type publications?
The "Cocoa" Telegram is not really Cocoa at all :/
> And I don't blame them- it could impact funding, access to journals, etc.

No, being "understanding" about this makes you part of the problem.

Part of research is trying new things, and exploring, but you should always be checking this against simpler techniques and currently accepted best performance. If it isn't an improvement, you don't publish at all unless you have something interesting to say about why it isn't improving things. Or perhaps in a methods survey.

One thing that happens when a technique like deep learning gets popular and things like python toolkits pop up making it easy to try, is that you get researchers in adjacent areas who don't really understand what they are doing trying to apply it to their favorite problem domain, and then comparing almost exclusively to other naive groups doing the same thing. It can be hard to tell if there is anything interesting there, even when there are dozens of conference papers, etc.

Basically the same thing happened with kernel methods when SVMs were hot, to a smaller scale.

Compare this to say, AlexNet. The reason that was immediately obvious something interesting was happening there was the fact that lots of people who did know what they were doing in models, had tried lots of other approaches, and you could make direct comparisons.

So yes, blame them. I do think negative results should be valued higher, but the fact you did some work doesn't make it publishable.

Frame it another way, if you give me a paper proposing a complex model and I grab your data an play with it a bit and it turns out linear regression with appropriate pre treatment works better ... well then I'm forced to believe you are either incompetent or being dishonest. Or, if students, your supervisors are.

This generalizes well. You should always be comparing against a known (or considered) good solution on your data under the same conditions, not just comparing against last years conference paper and variants you are trying to "improve". The right choice of baseline comparison will depend a bit on the domain, but not including it at all is shockingly poor scholarship.

I've even seen paper submissions with no direct comparisons at all, because the "researchers" didn't have access to the comparators data, and were too lazy to implement the other methods. Which leads to another sloppiness - methods that get pulled into comparison not because they are the right choice, but because there is a publicly available implementation. In the best case this forms a useful baseline. In the worst case, well, I guess it's good for your citation count if you implemented it :)
Your disagreement seems to be with the word "control". I will agree that it is perhaps too strong a word. Yet we both agree that public university staff lean left; this means that the left has more... shall we say influence? "Control" is too strong, and yet, the situation is not neutral.

[Edit: By the way, let me just say how much I have appreciated the tone of this discussion with you, neaden, and BryantD. I have felt that thoughtful people who disagreed with me were reasoning with me. I have not felt slammed or yelled at. It's been what an HN discussion ought to be.]
Ok, thank you for clarifying. If you don't mind me asking, is the manual approach to lookahead common to most PEG parsers? And if so, why would packrat be associated with infinite lookahead?
Windows, what about PowerShell? I've not used it extensively, but have heard good things.

Or just use Python across all three platforms?
> Patriotism and nationalism are strong in China and this is not because of the government. In fact the government is an expression of this, not the cause.

> China was attacked, invaded, humiliated from the end of the 18th century until 1945. This is what created a reaction that led to the collapse of imperial rule and to the rise of the modern parties (Nationalists and Communists).

For a discussion of the birth of nationalism and patriotism in China, see this Chinese article [1] by Wai Kin Chung 鍾偉健.

Like anything in social science, nationalism–including the Chinese one–is a social construct. The nationalism of China, in particular the term 中華民族 Zhonghua minzu, was first coined towards the end of the 19th century [1], and before that China was much more receptive of people of different ethnicity: in the past dynasties many famous poets and generals were of a different race. More precisely, Chinese back then didn‘t care much about differing ethnicities, but they care about differing cultures. The Chinese nationalism (esp. stressing the humiliation by foreigners) was socially constructed near the end of the last dynasty (Qing) in China, and clearly played an important role to its demise, in the way you pointed out.

For comparison, Japan or Germany do not stress their defeat and humiliation by the Allied power for their nationalism, because their source of legitimacy is democracy.

[1]: https://gushi.tw/you-are-also-chinese/

> (Nationalism) This is a real source of legitimacy.

Exactly, completely agree.

Xi, like his predecessors, is trying to equate the party with the nation (mostly the Han race) to fuel this modern Chinese nationalism for legitimacy, and the latest attempt is a revival nationalism called Chinese dream [2]. In the last decade, a main source of legitimacy for CCP was fast GDP growth, but this source is drying up quickly due to excess production, unsustainable credit expansion, and aging population. So Xi is trying to promote another source of legitimacy for CCP in case the economy is not performing well, again stressing 中華民族 Zhonghua minzu or effectively the Han race and their humiliation by foreigners, as you elaborated.

[2]: https://www.eurasiareview.com/08122018-the-contours-of-xis-c...
1 billion worth of Azure credits?
I hope to see Microsoft contributing to LLVM and LLD in the future if they're serious about adopting Rust for Windows.
He spends way more time talking about the "gear shift" mechanisms than about the actual gears. The one time he mentions the fixed ratio (something that combustion engines can do and have done, btw) it's in the context of the driver not having to actuate a shift.

Engine noise is an excellent feedback source because it utilizes a sense that is otherwise mostly idle when driving. Tire noise is much quieter, harder to hear over other sounds. And, engine noise is directly proportional to vehicle speed unless I intentionally and consciously change gears.

I'm all for electrifying the loud trucks. I just don't like being snuck up on by anything that weighs an order of magnitude more than me.
Rare earth metals are _not_ uncommon, we have tons of them in the US, just not the processing capacity. Which is already starting to change.
Did you try interactive brokers?
I can't really tell what you're saying, but if you're insinuating foul play, I haven't seen evidence of that in this thread. In any case, the site guidelines ask you to email hn@ycombinator.com with concerns instead of posting comments about them.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I believe ekianjo wasn't talking about neural networks, but simulations using models that are similar to how neurons work. Computational neuroscience is a thing.
AGI = Alien invasion
Can We Live to 120 on Metformin?
TNSTAAFL. I think you're misunderstanding that equation?

You're trying to get to orbit, so hold v and delta-v constant. Then you have the ratio of "wet" to "dry" masses constant. So the more you're launching, the more fuel it takes, and that is linear. I don't see how physics would work otherwise?
Tell the physics department to open more faculty positions.
Facebook’s Libra currency spawns a wave of fakes, including on Facebook itself
Yes, those sentences set up the rest of the article, establishing the thesis: Those two sentences are true, and not necessarily at odds with one another. The author spends the rest of the article explaining this, and how they accomplished it.
What are the chances the US government can put pressure on the patent office to invalidate said patents?
China could easily go beyond its border without consequence. Look at how easily Russia took Crimea.
I once received a Garmin GPS as a gift (back before cell phones had GPS in them). I took it out of the box and plugged it in and started setting it up. It had a bunch of information in it already, including a "home address" and several trips around Detroit at over 100 miles per hour! I'm pretty sure the gift-giver was not the one who had used it since the home address didn't match, and they were unlikely to be driving there that fast. I'm not sure whether they bought it online or from a retail store.
What are your thoughts between Krita and Gimp? I know a lot of you love Gimp but I find it a bit dated
So... the linked article doesn't really limit itself to public universities when offering examples of free speech issues. Haidt talks about Oberlin (favorably); they're a private college. Brown University is cited as an example of chilling free speech later on; Brown is, of course, private.

The FIRE database cited -- https://www.thefire.org/research/disinvitation-database/ -- also doesn't make the distinction between public and private. They do leave out religious institutions. I'm sincerely not trying to play gotcha games here; I'm suggesting that your perceptions may have been shaped by a very convincing publicity campaign over the course of decades.

I spent some time with this dataset today (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1eeTHZQOh9faZ2P3C_O3s...) just for the sake of resetting my perceptions and validating how I felt. It was a pretty useful exercise.

And, finally, the Princeton Review list of the most conservative student populations in the US: https://www.princetonreview.com/college-rankings?rankings=mo... That's a survey, doesn't touch on faculty attitudes, and is no doubt flawed in other ways. But man, I went to college at a state school in a rural state. It's fascinating how quickly people assume that UC Berkeley is the typical public university.
How do you give a computer domain-general intelligence (as opposed to the combination of a bunch of domain-specific skills like language, math, visual recognition, speech processing, etc)?

There is a lot of evidence that human intelligence is domain-general, not domain-specific (as in modularity of mind). I haven't seen a good answer to this question regarding AGI.
People with this line of critique against Tim Cook don't actually know how Apple works.

By your own metrics Cook is Nadella. The stock more than doubled under his tenure and the installed base for Apple products has grown massively since 2011 (to 1.4 billion). More people than ever own Apple products.
The manual approach to lookahead is standard for PEG. You mean things like the negative predicate when you talk about lookahead, right? That's in Ford's 2002 thesis. And the operator precedence? I was doing that in my masters thesis in 2006.

Packrat caches intermediate results so that you don't have to factor your rules out to avoid trying to parse the same thing repeatedly. PEGs can already do as much lookahead as you care fore and Packrat doesn't optimise that, except between multiple choices. So that allows you to write more natural grammars.
Google Has Been A/B Testing Link Colors (Again) and This Light Blue Didn't Pass
testing, refactoring, code organization, consistent code styling for easy search-replace, and other best practice norms will save you months of effort in tracking down bugs, fixing new ones you introduced while scrambling around researching, figuring out what's going on when you have an idea that uses code you wrote six months ago, etc. Sure, maybe a tutorial and documentation might not be worth the effort for something that hasn't produced results (does publishable research still count as not having produced results?), but most industry best practices I can think of will save you much more than the time invested even on relatively modest (< 1 month) projects.
> Too high for what?

Too high for an app that runs continuously.
1. Send a series of patches in an email.

2. Send a branch in whatever file exchange service you use. (Also formatted as patch series)

3. Setup ad-hoc vpn (zerotier?) and setup remote via SSH.

4. Push the branch into a private repository on a different service (private gitlab?)

5. Spin up a free t2.micro on AWS and push the branch there.

There are lots of options.
If you're using macOS, have you tried changing the screen resolution? On HiDPI monitors it doesn't produce "jaggedly rendered text" at all (in fact, Apple ships a number of laptops with this as the default configuration…)
A simple function to detect whether user's browser is supported by app