skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
When comparing Electron and non-Electron, bear in mind that Chromium typically uses a fair bit more memory than Firefox; I’d estimate 20–40% as a rough figure, though it depends on all sorts of factors.

You pick Gmail as another example. Gmail is a memory hog and fairly slow. For comparison, Fastmail (which company I work for) tends to use 10–15MB in Firefox for slightly different functionality (no chat, and I estimate the Hangouts widget to be about half of Gmail’s bloat, but on the Fastmail side you can load the calendars, contacts and settings modules in the same document comfortably without breaking 20MB), and is a good deal snappier. It comes of careful engineering with performance as a priority, and a small team.

Slack is simply atrocious in these regards. Painfully slow, utterly greedy for memory. I often run it in Firefox rather than standalone to keep its memory footprint down. Whichever way I do it I regularly find it to have crept up over a gigabyte of memory, on my single workspace.
... in which case the ordering of operations is not deterministic, so it's not relevant to this thread of the discussion?
I'd like to believe that this is Amazon actually trying to crack down on fake supplements on their website, but it coincides too neatly with a noticeable increase in presence of the Solimo brand, Amazon's own supplement brand.

So Amazon's model here looks like:

1. Allow sellers to sell counterfeit products, so they can take a cut of profits from both legitimate and fake inventory.

2. Copy the best-selling products after they've been product tested, and compete against their own customers (sellers on their platform).

3. Undermine the credibility of their competition by warning that their competitors' products might be counterfeits.
Sorry, won't happen again.
Indeed, this isn't a comment on your summary (which I have no reason to not believe to be accurate). I'm commenting on the ideas behind the article itself.

Still, I disagree. Even a large order won't "move" the market by itself (unless you're the Fed). At best, it might trigger a flash crash (we've seen a few of these in the past few years), where liquidity temporarily dries up (HFT market makers remove their passive orders, until they figure out what the hell is going on, precisely because they already predict cases like this) but comes back as soon as human traders figure out that nothing is going on (and the price has no reason to move).

More likely, a large order might blow through a few layers of the order book, which is good for market makers - instead of selling it at $100.01 (which is the "best", i.e. "lowest" price), you're selling it at $100.02 (i.e. you're making more money than your fellow market makers). In general, if you're an "institutional" (or otherwise big & slow) trader trading "large" orders (relative to the standard market volume), you're trying hard to disguise your intents. If HFTs know that you will buy the next 100 shares, they'll just sell it to you for $100.09 or more!
> I'm curious if anyone with knowledge can speak to how Robinhood sells data to high frequency traders?

They don't sell the data. They sell the trade.

> I've also heard some people argue if you're investing a decent amount, you're better off with commissions over market orders on Robinhood.

Potentially, although if you have to ask, it's unlikely to really matter for you.

(Robinhood, as is required by law, gives you the best publicly available price, and no fees. They can do this because, as above, they're selling your order flow, and their are people willing to privately offer better-than-best prices to certain types of orders. That value can be split a number of ways between the broker and the customer, and Robinhood as opted to keep the money, use it to fund their operations, and offer zero commissions. But you could imagine a different broker who charges "normal" commissions and passes the price improvements on instead. For some customers, that might end up being a better deal...or not.)
> The left controls the public universities

But, this is prejudice - there is no authority structure in "the left," it's a totally amorphous set of political / ethical ideals that's honestly terribly defined.

So there's two issues I take with this statement:

1. What is "the left?" Can we actually draw a border around it in a way that lets us make the statement, "the left controls the public universities?" I'll hazard that you'll find, within public university administrations, people pro- and anti-choice, people pro- and anti- gun control, supporters of total Israeli sovereignty alongside protesters of Israeli's government, fiscal conservatives alongside socialists... I'm not trying to dispute that public university staff "lean left," but I just don't agree that there's some secret cabal of "leftists" who all agree with eachother.

2. Left-leaning staff are not card-carrying members of an organization (I mean, outside the Democrat party or something) that directs their actions. The definition "the left" arises from a shared set of political beliefs, not the other way around, like a political party. I.e., the democrat party (kinda) represents a certain set of ethics, and you join it if your ethics are aligned. But "the left" is not something you join, it is a description of the majority amalgamation of your beliefs.
Funny. I agree with you that infinite scroll brings a bunch of UX issues.

But a dark pattern? Definitely not. I have had multiple projects this year where the feedback from UX workshops has overwhelmingly been to use infinite scroll. This is feedback from real users, customers, and clients.

We need to be careful to align the website UX to the correct target users. Are you building something for a very technical market or power users, such as software engineers? Sure, ensure you don't interfere with the experience.

However, if you're targetting business or social users, you need to base your decisions on their priorities. This means the optimal path for their primary use cases. This means optimizing for the 98% of the times the user just scrolls down the feed, not the 2% of the time they scroll a bit and refresh.
Didn't notice that Guido van Rossum was the author until I got to the end. As someone who has done work with the Python grammar, and watched it grow into the complex mess that the Python 3.8 grammar is, I'm glad to hear that Guido is exploring PEG parsers as an alternative to LL(1).
Here you go, buddy:

(WHO) Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health (DPAS):
- Not more than 30% of the total calories should come from fats.
- Eat at least 400 grams of fruits and vegetables per day IN ADDITION to grains, potatoes and and other starchy roots.

(USDA) Nutrition Evidence Library. A series of systematic reviews on the relationship between dietary patterns and health outcomes. Alexandria, VA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, March 2014.
- "The major findings regarding sustainable diets were that a diet higher in plant-based foods, such as vegetables, fruits, whole grains, legumes, nuts, and seeds, and lower in calories and animal-based foods is more health promoting"

Harvard School of public health have a great summary of recommendations with sources at https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/healthy-eating-...
- 50% Vegetables & fruit
- 25% grains
- 25% protein
- Fat in the form of plant oils, in moderation

"But there was a study..."

You see that's the thing with research: It's hard. And very easy to misrepresent with cherry picked data. That's why actual dieticians are required to undergo formal training to learn how to correctly interpret scientific results. And why guidelines are based on carefully conducted systematic reviews by subject matter experts like the above.

"But, but, Joe Rogan... and Dave Asprey... and Tawnee..."

I know. They're full of shit. Don't be scared of carbs.

"But I lost 20 kg on keto"

After the initial six months of reduced water retention, there is no advantage of low carb over low fat diets. Systematic reviews show that the field is plagued by publication bias on this topic with low quality meta analyses favoring low carb diets while high quality meta analyses don't find any difference. (e.g. Churuangsuk et al 2018, Obes Rev 19).

"But glycemic index..."

You seem a bit confused about what this is and what it is used for. If you are trying to say that sugar is bad then yes this is true to some extent, especially for sedentary people, but it depends a lot on the type of sugar consumed e.g. you'd be hard pressed to find a registered dietician recommending against eating sweet fruit which has a relatively low effect on insulin levels and comes packed with other good nutrients. Regardless, this does not preclude a healthy high carb diet.

Not that I'm under any illusion that you'll let systematic reviews by the world's most trusted institutions sway your opinion, but to anyone else reading: please do consult reputable sources for dietary guidelines and be wary of overblown claims from amateur "health enthusiasts".
AR and Drones Combined Can Greatly Help Search and Rescue Efforts
The jobs are awarded on the basis of political loyalty, ambition, and tribal (party) potential, not domain competence.

In the UK - and I guess the US - they're executive roles. The Prime Minister's office sets policy, with varying levels of debate and pushback, and the department heads implement it.

Executives who climb high enough are allowed to suggest policy of their own, under the oversight of the PM. Ministers direct implementation, but the details of execution are handled by the Civil Service.

No competence is needed. In fact in the last decade or so in the UK most of ministers were absolutely incompetent dolts elevated to purely political appointments - with results that surprised no one.
This is useful to me. Thanks!
Its just an anecdote, not data, and it isn't an opinion I hold strongly! This is based on like 15 people.
Okay, so an innocuous display of generalized status. No indication Kushner would do anything (through any kind of back channel or otherwise) to use his position to aid these investors. No indication he has done anything of the sort.

Pretty much as I expected; media telling the truth to leave you believing a lie.
When you sell shares, cost basis is reported to the IRS by the brokerage. The parent comment suggests that RH always reports the FIFO cost basis, i.e. price of the first shares you bought as opposed to the last shares. There are places on tax forms where you can adjust your cost basis up or down from the one reported by your brokerage, but (without doing any research into it) I doubt that "I don't want to use my brokerage's cost basis method" is a valid reason to use those.
Maybe something about the dummy fix polluting the lead dev's code aesthetics?
I recently used the Rust "Pest" PEG parser, and it took an interesting approach to lookahead. It delegates the problem to the grammar writer.

For instance, you are responsible for declaring any possible branches with choice operators.

The approach becomes quite similar to manual lookahead in a recursive descent parser, but more declarative.

I presume that this makes the runtime characteristics of the parsing a lot more predictable and bounded, and I'm surprised I hadn't thought about the solution before. Seems like a great idea, and worked well for my usecase.

https://pest.rs/book/grammars/syntax.html
Zfs has a lot of features over ext4 its not remotely equivalent.

Replacing this functionality on ext4 requires an entire stack of alternatives. Worse if you opt to use zfs and ext 4 you now need 2 complete stacks or to use an inferior set of tools to be compatible with a commodity service.
Why are the powerless people the parasites? Google (and also others) is not a morally neutral entity here. They created this problem. They could stem the flow of malvertising or click-farming or spamming by hiring more and more review staff as their company has scaled, but its simply not in their DNA. I mean literally they are the richest of the richest of companies in the richest country and their owners are amongst the richest people on earth.. and the tired out cliche is still "it doesn't scale". Yeah..I'm pretty sure you can hire a few more folks to your team.. :-)
I am saying testing say crystal formation in space is only relevant for crystal formation in space. If that’s what you’re going to do aka manufacturing in space then sure experimenting in space is required. Getting the economics to look promising for actually manufacturing in space then that’s a separate thing.

Aka Manufacturing would be that larger goal I was referencing.
Partially, partially because the sites use quite a few plugins and I find it more convenient to use WordPress for them than to recode everything from scratch to work with a new system.

I actually listed all the things I'd need to recreate with a migration, and it's basically:

1. The entire account system
2. Plus the admin dashboard
3. Post/content editor
4. Media library
5. Paid subscriptions setup
6. Social media integrations
7. Apple News integration
8. Permalinks/friendly URLs
9. Any systems WordPress has for data sanitisation
10. Plus the challenge of either matching the original URL setup or flawlessly redirecting about 20,000 pages.

Also budget stuff. Most companies I've worked for don't spend a lot of time building their own site/blog, and wouldn't budget for an entirely custom CMS build or migration.
Counterfeiting is going to happen. Typically you deter it by detecting it and punishing the counterfeiters. Commingling defeats this. I guess we can make Amazon inspect everything they receive from third party sellers thoroughly enough to reliably detect counterfeits themselves, but that seems much less likely to happen.
Back when naval communication was radio communication of manually keyed morse code, one major source of naval intelligence was recognizing the "hand" transmitting messages via the timing patterns of key entry. The messages were encrypted and that wasn't broken, but the timing patterns were essentially in the clear and gave up some useful information.

I wouldn't be surprised if you could generate signatures from the timing patterns of text input events in javascript, too.
That's unfortunate. There is a lot of literature out there that talks about how after the founder leaves, usually the COO takes over, because they would leave if they don't get the job, but after that, usually they look for a more "visionary" person, because the COO makes things efficient but not interesting.

Look at Microsoft. When Gates left, Ballmer took over, and did great things for the company financials. Profits and revenue were consistently up year after year. But the company stagnated product-wise and lost favor among enthusiasts and investors. He left the stock 10% worse than when he got there, despite the profits and revenue.

But since Ballmer left, Nadella has done an amazing job continuing the profit and revenue story while also winning back the hearts and minds of developers and investors with some great new products and product vision.

Apple needs a Nadella -- a long time insider who has a strong product vision.
What makes you think an intern would be able to do this? A few of them might, but I imagine most wouldn't. Being able to make something easy to maintain means knowing what is difficult to maintain. Except for the sharpest, who actively learn from others, the best teacher is experience.
That's just a PEG isn't it - that's what this article is about. It's not a new idea in Pest.
> But since much of the rare earth patents are probably needed for making defense systems, I think it can easily be set aside as a "national security", "self defense", etc... I am sure a savvy lawyer could come up with the argument.

We can desire to violate the treaties to our hearts' content, but if we don't actually have the elements the patents are referencing we won't be able to violate any of the patents.
Explain what?
That the term gets used often enough to complaim about people being upset at being referred to in outright slurs is the whole point. The term is connotationally polluted as said usage is associated with those who are either unself aware or disingenuous.

In the 1950s? Politically correct was most certainly in use by then - for almost or over two decades at that point.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness#Histor...

Being totally outside the overton window may effectively the same thing - although it may receive the handwave "offensive all of proper society" or similiar. Especially back when obscenity laws were in force in naked defiance of the first ammendment.
EvilGnome: Rare Malware Spying on Linux Desktop Users
It's a fair accusation, though I bristle at the use of the phrase "alt-right goon." If that's the impression I gave in my writing, it's not what I meant, so I appreciate you giving me the space here to clarify.

Basically, I yearn for a rational approach to bringing together the ridiculously divided country, and at first glance Jonathan Haidt seemed to be the guy for it. But, experience has taught me that people that come to the table of this discussion and start using phrases like "political correctness" are just another conservative hiding behind a moderate, disaffected mask.
You seem to be forgetting that that also generally requires some European gal to come over, too. That's a lot more risk tolerance!
Why is it downvoted?

* because it's a low-effort comment that contains crass generalizations.

* because Haidt et. al. are not right-wing partisan hacks, but bona fide liberals.
You confuse cause for effect. Emerging monopolies gain the power to warp regulations in their favor by virtue of the concentration of wealth and power. That concentration is an inevitable consequence of the wealth-income feedback loop. Without limits on wealth, capitalism collapses in on itself like a black hole.
Jony Ive?
I'm not interested in categorizing for the sake of categorizing, I'm interested in how AI researchers and those otherwise involved can get a measure of where they're at and where they can expect to be.

If AI researchers were growing neurons in vats and those neurons were displaying abilities on par with chimpanzees I'd want those researchers to be able to say ‘hold up, we might be getting close to par-human intelligence, let's make sure we do this right.’ And I want them to be able to do that even though their brains in vats can't pass a Turing test or write bad poetry or play basic Atari games and the naysayers around them continue to mock them for worrying when their brains in vats can't even pass a Turing test or write bad poetry or play basic Atari games.

Like, I don't particularly care that AI can't solve or even approach solving the Turing test now, because I already know it isn't human-par intelligent, and more data pointing that out tells me nothing about where we are and what's out of reach. All we really know is that we've been doing the real empirical work with fast computers for 20ish years now and gone from no results to many incredible results, and in the next 30 years our models are going to get vastly more sophisticated and probably four orders of magnitude larger.

Where does this end up? I don't know, but dismissing our measures of progress and improved generality with ‘nowhere near as robust as [...] humans’ is certainly not the way figure it out.

> If I can find an endless stream of cases of failure with respect to a measure that we care about improving, then whatever collation of weak measures we had should be null. Wouldn't you agree?

No? Isn't this obviously false? People can't multiply thousand-digit numbers in their heads; why should that in any way invalidate their other measures of intelligence?
Bird raises Series D at $2.5b valuation
I guess so. It would throw both business models a lifeline and help to stabilize the supply/demand problem (right before automation creates a whole new supply/demand problem).
> Amazon needs to stop with inventory comingling. They know it and refuse to stop, so they are culpable.

An appeals court just recently said this in their ruling on a consumer products liability case. Oberdorf v Amazon I believe.

Edit: Apologies, I was on my phone earlier and I didn't link to the opinion https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca3/18...
Branches: Let each branch owner deal with that. They likely have the most information about it. Create a new temporary branch, merge both sides into it and see what happens.

Tags: Don't have a process which can result in tags pushed into different places. It's a path to madness. Same applies to master/release branches.
React hooks do not solve the same problem as Redux. Hooks solve the problem: how do I share functionality (logic) between stateless, functional components. Redux is for sharing data. Besides sharing data, (React-)Redux is (or at least was) way more efficient because it can preemptively avoid rendering altogether.

> If your back-end is something like a wire protocol over ws where you've already structured everything as "actions" or "messages" it's a decent fit

Redux has been fine for every API I've every used. Maybe you've only seen crazy codebases where people write a unique action generator/action_type/reducer for every single endpoint, but that isn't exactly a problem with Redux.
OP was using Ford's market cap to argue Tesla is overvalued. Your response was that EV is a better metric to use than market cap.

But the EV of Ford including FFS also offers no insight in to whether Tesla is overvalued. Not even a tiny bit.

If we can agree on that, then we're arguing here for no reason.
As a comparison, look at the transformer paper (also 2017), and the progress it has triggered.
"Matrix capsules with EM routing"
>> Second, my guess is that it means that paper authors are using excess "puffery" in an attempt to improve the chances that their papers are accepted for publication. They've decided that using a weak baseline and claiming a 50% improvement is more likely to result in publication than using a realistic baseline and claiming a 0-5% improvement. Unfortunately, they are probably right.

I fear this contradicts your assertion that published results are not garbage. If researchers are claiming their systems are strong based on the fact that they beat weak baselines, then their claims are rubbish and their scholarship shoddy. If, on top of that, their work is difficult to reproduce, or replicate (by the distinction in the paper) then the published results are beyond garbage- they are meaningles garbage, garbage that fails to prove even its weak and insignificant claim to beat a weak baseline.

Basically, this is exactly the kind of shoddy scholarship that Backus accused social scientists of, in his infamous speech about "Cargo-Cult Science". In that speech, he points out that basing new research on previous weak research can only lead in the proliferation of weak results (my interpretation of his words, from memory).

This seems very much to be the case in machine learning research today. This article only provides further evidence that there is something rotten to the core in machine learning research.

>> Reviewers should push back against weak baselines, but be more accepting of results that make modest claims.

Agreed about the second part, however, the paper in the OP says that the way things are, it is very difficult to know which baselines are strong. My interpretation: because they're all trying to beat weak baselines that became established by beating earlier weak baselines. It's weak baselines all the way down.
Amazon "says" they can track the original supplier.

In practice, they clearly don't. I've had a client that was the only manufacturer of a product receive fake versions of their own product that was part of Amazon's commingled inventory. This happened last year.

Also, unless Amazon removes tags prior to delivery, there is no mechanism on many items that would allow them to track goods short of maintaining physical separation, which it is abundantly clear that they do not.