skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A lot of outrage on reddit.
But it seems that this is not a censorship law at all: instead it makes social media sites liable to be sued if they remove political content they don't agree it.

So it's more a free speech law that avoids censorship.

Copy paste from a reddit comment:

Since no one apparently read the article or paid attention to the actually meaningful quote:

The draft "calls for the FCC to develop new regulations clarifying how and when the law protects social media websites when they decide to remove or suppress content on their platforms."

In other words, this isn't about the federal government removing content. It is about the extent to which social media platforms are legally shielded from lawsuits when they choose to remove content.

The "worst case scenario" of this leaked draft isn't the federal government picks and chooses what content is censored—it's that platforms might have to allow almost every kind of content or risk being sued. Which is the opposite of censorship.

(Please note: I am not arguing in favor of this draft. Only pointing out what it is actually saying sans the rampant fear-mongering going on right now.)
Yes, blue collar workers used to vote in favor of their own interests. They've been lured away from doing that for a long time now.
This was the actual advice I was given when proof-reading text I had written. Reading it in your head allows your brain to auto-correct issues in the text. Reading it out loud is supposed to slow you down to "disable" the auto-correct. It's not perfect, but I definitely found and could correct more of my mistakes before submitting the text.
A discussion of it is also linked from the main article: https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=800197.806048 .
This is a valuable observation. I think the question, though, comes down to which of these two things should be mastered first or if they should be done in parallel. In general, the explosion of successes in DL in the last few years has been driven by AD and backprop rising to the occasion to make novel architectures explorable for the first time.
You're not the only one who detests touchscreens in cars. Mazda agrees with you[0]. I think touch screens are primarily useful for complex interfaces and interfaces that change every time. But driving a car needs to be as easy and reliable as possible, because you need those eyes and brainpower on the road, not trying to figure out an interface.

[0] https://www.motorauthority.com/news/1121372_why-mazda-is-pur...
What's nice about GSuite is contacts and calendar syncing on Android and iPhone.

Do realize that Android only supports GSuite. In other words, by default it doesn't support CalDAV and CardDAV. There are apps for that, but I found those to be a hassle.
And training. When this and the Fitzgerald broke around the same time, there was a big dustup about the officer training school having been cut for budget, in favor of "on the job" training. You'd think something like this needs classroom and simulator time with grading and certification for exactly this reason.
I've had this problem. And like a few problems in life, this was paradoxically solved during recovery from a particularly bad concussion.

I'm not always good at self care, for example. This is a particular weakness that the Vicious Critic would exploit. One night, as I was laid up, incapable of doing pretty much anything, VC comes online and starts ripping me for failing to cook for myself and relying on delivery. A second voice came online... my angel (I don't mean this in a religious sense; this is a normal phenomenon among people who hear voices). "HEY! Be nice to klyrs!" And then their attention turned away from VC, and towards me. "I'm so sorry; you don't deserve that..." and proceeded to talk me through obtaining dinner in a kind and gentle manner. I thanked the voice for their care, and didn't hear from VC for quite a time.

After that incident, VC would still come back from time to time. The angel hasn't come back unbidden, but I can summon the voice to combat VC.

I understand that this process is taught through CBT or DBT. Long live DIY, I guess. But know that there's help available.

> But I am certain in my case when the voices started and I am not sure the superpower problem solving skills are worth the trade.

There appears to be a dichotomy among societies in the world. Ones where people who hear voices are considered gifted, and ones where they are considered ill. In the gifted societies, the voices are generally good and helpful like my angel. In the ill societies, the voices are generally malevolent like my VC.

You have a gift. But aspects of it have run amok. Ask your voice to be a part of the solution, and stop attacking you. Demand a respectful tone, and shut it out when it behaves poorly. Progress with your voice will neither be easy nor monotonic, but it is possible.
If you are still looking for something to help with this I recommend you look into zazen meditation.

Have a look at the book: Zen mind, beginners mind. It was one of the best things I discovered for myself. Hope you'll find it useful.
> AFAICT, none of them link to the actual documents.

Nobody involved has the actual documents.

From the second paragraph of the CNN article:

> The draft order, a summary of which was obtained by CNN,
If they link the document and people read it, then journalists wouldn't be able to spew their biased interpretation and readers would call them out.
Most of the Chinese can’t afford to eat?? That’s a pretty bold claim. Evidence?
I agree. Until I got to the end and discovered the super gravity gun. Then I used a cheat to start over with that gun and play the whole game with it. So satisfying
Yeah—technically, a scalar is just whatever type can be used to multiplicatively scale a vector in some given vector space but, at least in computing, it’s pretty clear that people just mean “some kind of integer or real number, definitely not a collection/enumerator type”
Seems like the worst case scenario would be that some sites would be able to remove or prevent everything the administration doesn't agree with, and yet not be targeted by your FCC, while other sites would have to accept every contradictory or unbalanced post countering their content or be sued.
I can compare doing zazen meditation to physical exercise, but, in this case you are training your mind.

It's very hard at the beginning, but if you persevere, you'll eventually get there.

Just remember the first time you were doing push-ups. It's like that. Like doing push-ups with your mind. Very hard at the start, feels great after you get used to it.
Sorry for the super late reply. I don't know if anyone will see this... But...

In minimax regret, you have a set of available decisions D, and a set of possible states of nature N, and a utility U(D,N). Each state of nature also has a probability P(N) (which can be influenced by the decision too in some problems).

States of nature include "interest rates rise 1%", "interest rates fall 1%", and "interest rates stay the same". Decisions include "invest in stocks" and "invest in bonds".

Minimax regret proposes to ignore the probabilities P(N), instead suggesting a way to make a decision purely based on the utilities of the outcomes. But that is actually an illusion.

Outside of math class word problems, we don't have N or U(D,N) handed to us on a silver platter. There is always an infinite range of possible states of nature, many of which have a probability approaching but never reaching zero, including states such as "win the lottery", "communist revolution", and "unexpected intergalactic nuclear war".

In commonsense decision-making we don't include those states of nature in our decision matrix, because our common sense rules them out as being implausible before we even think about our options. You wouldn't choose to invest in bonds just because stocks have the most regret in the event of a communist takeover.

So what actually happens is we intuitively apply some probability threshold that rules out states of nature falling below it from our consideration. Then we minimize max regret on the remaining "plausibly realistic" states of nature.

Humans are so good at doing probability mentally that this step happens before we even realize it. But if you are writing code that makes decisions, you'll need to do it, and so you'll need to have at least a rough stab at the probability distributions.
"That voice is a fucking vicious asshole to me"

Oh my god yes. Because it knows all of your weaknesses and where it hurts and goddamn bastard always is ready to point out the flaws you make, rather than the good stuff.

I often think myself is my biggest enemy.
Google and Facebook etc are acting like online government and run their censorship at will based on their own ideology, they need to be checked and held liable legally, the top management should go to jail for any wrongdoings.

While we hate censorship from the government, the same should be applied to those de facto online big guns and those who actually are in control inside the companies.
The idea is that some repeated patterns can be encoded in a functions, but other repeated patters need more abstraction. Try to find some repeated pattern.

Some real example from a internal site for 500 users in the university:

The idea is that I have a parameter with the data of the current user, a parameter is like a global variable but each tread has it's own copy so it's "thread safe". Sometimes I want to iterate over all the users inside one of the administrations form. So I have to write in racket something like:

(for ([u (in-list all-users)])
(parameterize ([current-user u])
(do-something-interesting-here)
)
)

(The last three parenthesis should be in the same line, but if you like c-like formatting, let's put them in their own line.)

I had to repeat this pattern a few times. It is boring and error prone. Perhaps I have to add a lock for the user profile. Perhaps I need an special case if the user in the iteration is the administrator. But let's keep the example simple.

Now I can use a macro to define the pattern:

(define-syntax-rule (for/users body ...)
(for ([u (in-list all-users)])
(parameterize ([current-user u])
body ...
)
)
)

This is the simplest way to define a macro in scheme and racket. It has no error checks. It has no room for variants. There are more advanced methods to write good macros. One important point is that there is some magic to ensure that the variable `u` used inside the macro don't mess with a variable `u` defined outside the macro.

The nice part is that the macro looks almost like the code I want to repeat. I only need to use `body ...` in the definition in the first line and then replace the interesting part with `body ...`. Here is the magic! In the easy case, the macros look almost like normal code!

Now I can use it as any normal thing in the language, for example

(for/users
(writeln (user->name (current-user))
)

(define count 0)
(define sum 0)
(for/users
(set! count (+ count 1))
(set! sum (+ sum (user->age (current-user))))
)
(define average (/ sum count))
(writeln average)

I hope the examples are self descriptive.

The idea inside the lispy word is that users should write macros when it is necessary to write macros. Try to use them sparsely. Try to make them blend with the language. Try to make them intuitive to use.

A bad example of a macro is:

(define-syntax-rule (show x y)
(writeln (list y x y))
)

It's a bad macro because it looks like a normal function but the expressions are evaluated out of order and one of them is evaluated twice. So

(define n 7)
(show n (set! n (+ n 1))
(writeln n)

will show

(#void 8 #void)
9

but the user probably expect

(7 #void)
8

So write macros, but write them sparsely and wisely.

My recommendation is to enjoy Elixir, try to find repeated patters, try to enclose the patters in functions. When that fails try to write good macros. When you understand why you want more macros and more macros try racket (or scheme/lisp/clojure/...).
Amazon's new Lord of the Rings – 'main shape of the Second Age is not altered'
What you call fenders for _cars_ we in the UK call bumpers; and they're like boat fenders, for allowing vehicles to bump without causing too much damage (they fend off the other vehicle).

But your bike fenders appear to be what we call "mud guards" which don't act as "bumpers" at all but instead prevent mud/water from spraying up.

Did I get that right, or do the "bike fenders" have some sort of anti bump facet to their design too?
The biggest issue is that the ecological costs are not reflected in economic transactions in modern economy. We simply cannot estimate them properly, because ecological disaster is a long slowly moving process, not very visible at first, but very significant thereafter.
Complete agreement: cyclists should be big tent on this – or scooters – since everyone using a bike lane is someone voting for more and better infrastructure.
Adora Cheung – How to Set KPIs and Goals
I'd say these are the 4 most important, because they show the actual core of the algorithm; everything else is just input/output:

mac = hmac.new(secret_bytes, counter_bytes, digest).digest()
offset = mac[-1] & 0x0f
truncated = struct.unpack('>L', mac[offset:offset+4])[0] & 0x7fffffff
return str(truncated)[-digits:].rjust(digits, '0')

In other words, HMAC your secret key with the time and pick digits using the output of the HMAC.
If the Netherlands is not the flattest country in the world it's very close to it. Denmark is the same story. Either way, both countries are extreme outliers in this category. E-bikes remove the most daunting barrier to cycling for many people: the difficulty of hill climbs. So it makes sense to leave out the flat countries and focus on those with rolling hills and mountains.
There are plenty of valid arguments against DoH. If DoH becomes common, it most likely will resemble the situation with DNS resolvers we have today. Meaning, there would be the eternal problems inherent to centralization. I.e. both that the centralizing powers would have enormous power to disappear something off the internet, but also that the central servers would recieve huge amounts of constant real-time data of what everybody was doing.
This example came to my mind:

"I can't get involved in it, you know. One thing I didn't want to do was make an emotional decision and I wanted to do what was best for LeBron James", LeBron James talking about himself in third person, https://youtu.be/yrd9T-hny84?t=14
>Regenerative agricultural practices include:

no tillage
diverse cover crops
in-farm fertility (no external nutrients)
no pesticides or synthetic fertilizers
multiple crop rotations

https://www.drawdown.org/solutions/food/regenerative-agricul...

In other words, Regenerative agricultural is indistinguishable from Permaculture as a cultivation method.
I don't buy this article's premise (that there is too much recycled, unoriginal content).

You could make this same argument for all forms of art (music, TV, theater). They can all be explained the same way: the barrier for entry has decreased.

Anyone can upload music to Soundcloud or a video to Youtube. Now there are whole albums/TV series/movies being produced on these content networks as a result of a kind of indie discovery that never existed before. This is wonderful!

The benefit of all of that discovery is the same drawback: that anyone (good or bad) can enter the market. That means in order to capture the "average" audience you have to water down and dilute what is popular to appease everyone. Most pop music is unmemorable. Most pop movies are unmemorable. BUT, they are good enough to capture a wide enough audience to convince them to pay for it.

That doesn't mean there isn't great film to be found. Or music. It just requires a bit more discovery than your local pop Top 40 radio station or whatever they're peddling in the box office.

There have been so many great films in the last 20 years with original stories. Here's a bunch that I just rattled off the top of my head without much thought:

Boyhood, Interstellar, Inception, Spirited Away, Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind, Wall-E, The Intouchables (now called The Upside), Pan's Labyrinth, No Country for Old Men, There Will Be Blood, Amelie, Slumdog Millionaire
The math stuff is not quite alright if you compare it to the PDF. Besides that the PDF is absolutely preferable on iPad Safari.
This draft isn't available anywhere. This article cites a CNN article:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/09/tech/white-house-social-media...

In that article, CNN reports on the draft order:

>According to the summary seen by CNN

CNN hasn't even seen the draft apparently. They've only seen a summary of it and they dare make all these extrapolations.

This seems deceitful. I'm not impressed.
Really? Feels too close to cultivating schizophrenia. Why not keeping youself as "I" in inner dialogue, add "what the fuck did I just do?" or "what would somebody else think in their head?" questions more often if you think you're not objective. If you really want to put yourself in somebody's shoes, why not do it temporarily and run the dialogue as I=them? I think changing your inner dialogue to 3rd person can have further reaching negaitve consequences. I haven't run any study to confirm it, it's just a feeling, but arguably they haven't as well because 4 week test with single culmination test won't find any issues after a year or two, what if it increases negative schisophrenic-like behaviour tenfold?
> Governments by definition have a monopoly on force.

I've never heard that definition of government. Also, at least in the US (and presumably everywhere else), private citizens have the right to use force under various circumstances.
I actually love latest (3 & 4) Deus Ex while not really like the previous ones (1 at as well) ;)

But yeah, games like Horizon:Zero Dawn are great.

There is also some indie gems like Hyper Light Drifter - I've stopped counting how many times I've beat this game :)
I'm afraid I don't have a single source – this is from discussions about tech teams, culture, engineering, etc, at meet-ups in London over the past ~7 years. They had a relatively large engineering team so there are plenty of ex-Hailo devs around here.

There were some good things to come out of it, from what I understand. I believe Hailo were avid Cassandra users and many of the team went to Monzo who have deployed Cassandra very effectively.
In that case the people could just file a joint lawsuit because their (non-governement) views have been censored.
Please don't flag or remove this. This seems rather important and worthy of rational discourse on a site like this.

P.S. If this Executive order comes to fruition I'm going to file a lawsuit if this post gets removed!
A selected excerpt from this paper:

"The same should hold for Theorem 1, as will be discussed. We avoid the O(1) notation as far as possible, as it can be severely misleading (e.g. 10^42 = O(1)^O(1)) = O(1)).

This work could be viewed as another O() warning showing, how important factors, and even subdominant additive terms, are."
Except your opinion does not actually follow from the facts.

African Americans weren’t just “hyphenated subgroups” earlier. They weren’t even allowed to be in the same places as white male americans. Similarly, Chinese Americans formthe most part lived a separate life, and Japanese Americans were considered so different they were placed in internment camps during WW2.

Even the Irish and Italians were treated differently when they arrived, and had entire sub cultures.

The idea that the US is more hyphenated today just doesn’t seem to follow from what was actually happening in the 20th century.
In my experience, this is not true. Income group, yes, but racial mix tends to mirror the racial mix of the income group locally.
However it is a fact, and not conspiracy theories, that a lot of the protests and their leaders are directly sponsored by some specific powers from the outside.

E.g. the text by Peter Pomerantsev in the article:

"Or take the 2000 Serbian revolution, where students demonstrating against Slobodan Milošević opposed his government’s war-mongering nationalism in favor of a Serbia integrated with the international community."

But Roger Cohen in the New York Times, 2000:

https://www.nytimes.com/2000/11/26/magazine/who-really-broug...

"Backed by extensive financing from the United States, Otpor..."

"Just how much money backed this objective is not clear. The United States Agency for International Development says that $25 million was appropriated just this year"

"At the International Republican Institute, another nongovernmental Washington group financed partly by A.I.D., an official named Daniel Calingaert says he met Otpor leaders ''7 to 10 times'' in Hungary and Montenegro, beginning in October 1999. Some of the $1.8 million the institute spent in Serbia in the last year was ''provided direct to Otpor,'' he says."

"But other American help was as important as money. Calingaert's organization arranged for a seminar at the luxurious Budapest Hilton from March 31 to April 3. There a retired United States Army colonel, Robert Helvey, instructed more than 20 Otpor leaders in techniques of nonviolent resistance."

Those trained and financed there were then later engaged at other places and "revolutions":

E.g.

Georgia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kmara

"It was formed by the Georgian student activists which received training by the Serbian Otpor! through the funding of the OSI."

Egypt:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_6_Youth_Movement

"Mohammed Adel, a leader in the April 6 movement, studied at the Centre for Applied Nonviolent Action and Strategies, an organization founded by former Otpor! members"

And there's even more in Wikipedia.
It’s an interesting concept to me. I do have a lot of “hobby work”, which is still meant to be used eventually. I just don’t apply a timeline, which enables me to focus on correctness.

Then I have my professional work, where the timeline is the primary focus, and correctness can only be pursued where it moves the timeline forward.

These projects you’re talking about are an interesting mixture. There is still a timeline that must be hit, because you need to do your demos, and you need to be ready to shift to a production timeline if negotiations go south. But since there are no customers the business model isn’t changing. And you don’t need to do any polish. So you can stay focused on the raw architectural problems.

It’s like my hobby projects in that you can focus on readiness over completeness, but there still is some timeline pressure.

Interesting to think about. Strange for me, but I guess it’s every day for others!
The nature of your comment is what I call apprehension. Let's be very clear that we are talking about a job that provides compensation in exchange for work. If there is something that is not understood, even a little bit, it is more than acceptable to ask questions. This is generally encouraged. However it is helpful to have some clear questions to ask. This is when a mentor can step through the code with them, line by line if necessary and that's fine.

Simply throwing up your hands because life is hard isn't an acceptable answer. Yes, I have encountered this frequently. This is typically manifested by hoping a tool writes your code for you only to be followed by soul crushing defeat (and endless excuses) when the reality sets in that the tool in question is a leaky abstraction.

Simply asking a developer to try does not an asshole make, but actually it does (matter of perspective). I call this entitlement. It isn't a lack of empathy. Empathy is manifest through good mentorship on the part of the mentor. You can bring a horse to water but you can't make it drink when they as they think they should have to.

This confusion is why I am walking myself out of the corporate world. I just received a recruitment letter last week from one of the FAANG companies and I will not respond. I am tired of the fun and games. You can have it. I am on my way to somewhere more selective that takes mentorship a bit more seriously.