skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Tao's article certainly requires more background to read, but it gives a much deeper insight than explanations based on Cesaro or Euler/Ramanujan summation, which (as Tao points out in the article), in addition to being very puzzling, are actually mutually inconsistent. His main result is that these classical sums / the zeta function are only the constant term in a certain asymptotic expansion associated with a smoothed version of the original sum. Recognizing the existence of the non-constant terms in that expansion corrects the nonsensical negativeness and logical inconsistency. This is intimately connected to the analytic continuation POV, which is discussed in section 2. It's well worth a read if you have time over a few days. I wrote an overview of the strategy here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/cx3qzv/terence_tao_un...
The former is technically correct and much more descriptive.

The latter is potentially-misleading. One might think that the rate did not increase at all, when in fact it did, or that it did not increase "a lot" (the colloquial understanding of significant). "Statistically-significant" is a keyword with technical meaning.

The former could mean that the rate increased by 2±2 units. A more-precise study might show that the rate did increase, or it might not. All we know from the former is that the rate increased, but that the rate was not statistically-significant.
No, I wouldn't.

A chinese company cannot do business in the USA, they need to register locally at which point they become an American company, technically, to be held accountable under US law.

The concern of nationhood or nationality might be a matter of degree, as well as the details and beaurocratic workarounds, however of fleeting interest because a potentially worse morallity of the Chinese is not indicated. If you note that leaving profits up for grabs to a competing economy, whether the profit was ethicallly dignified or not ... then the moral of the story still sucks?

If you hold equivalently that making profit and not smoking were imperative, then we could have an argument that applies to competition in general. The argument is interesting, if it implies, that non-smoking were a profit, and that profiting from idiots were imperative. Then we could have an argument about obsession and compulsion, that is, addiction and dependence.
I've always thought it would be cool to deck out my house not with Google Home or Alexa, but with my own systems built with Raspberry Pis and software/hardware I built myself. Is there anyone out there trying to build an open-source alternative to all these commercial systems?
The Man Who Tried to Weigh the Soul
Definitely a controversial viewpoint currently. Forget assault rifles, an individual could own a machine gun well into the 70s but mass shootings were unheard of back then. I am for gun control but the underlying issues are being ignored if we treat it like the root of the problem.
Here are some thoughts:
1. Instead of grading, maybe you can use it for training, tutoring. If a student is learning to write essays, I'm assuming it's hard for them to get any feedback.
2. But then there's probably not enough money to be earned there.

One trick might be to write an independent AI to summarize the essay back and see how closely it matches the essay title. This might weed out gibberish essays with sound English sentences.
> I don't have much experience with suicide but to add to this, I think attention can go both ways.

It's the difference between a ruggedly handsome cowboy and a diseased lung on your pack of smokes.
>When researchers analyzed the data by sex, they found the increase in the suicide rate was primarily driven by significant increases in suicide in young males.

"13 Reasons Why" was a show about the suicide of a young girl and was primarily aimed at a young female audience. If the studies numbers were primarily driven by an increase in suicides among young males, the causation implied seems rather dubious.
Ahh, receiving short codes is a niche I've not yet encountered, that makes sense.
In 10,000 years, the Go code will be lost, but bored future people will reconstruct it from its hash through shear brute force searching.

More seriously, if the hashes turn out to have serious security flaws, someone may be able to reconstruct the file someday.
IMO, your proposed second option leaves ambiguity as to whether "significant" means "statistically significant" or "materially significant." The original option is clear on that point.

However, I would argue that the original text is also misleading, because if the result wasn't statistically significant, there's no evidence that rates for females increased. If anything, the first option could perhaps say "While suicide rates for females IN THE STUDY increased after the show's release, the increase was not statistically significant, so we have no evidence that it's a real effect."
https://proxy.golang.org/privacy

A Google privacy policy that's actually reasonable.
From a business perspective, why bother?

Maybe in jurisdictions like the US, where the copyright lobby has been very effective in getting aggressive anti-piracy legislation with huge penalties enacted, the statutory damages alone could be astronomical? Since Facebook could still afford to pay them, it might also offer to settle for a very worthwhile sum without even the risk of going to court.

I'm generally not a fan of hugely disproportionate penalties for copyright infringement, but this isn't some normal person falling victim to opportunist lawyers engaging in a form of barratry, this is a huge company with its own legal team who should know better than to wilfully infringe copyright.
What about a VM that is actually an emulator like Bochs?
This is why capital gain taxes are generally different from income taxes (the previous are lower and can be offset by losses to prevent risk taking).

Social security and Medicare are funded directly via payroll taxes, they are not part of he general fund and you pay for them separately. Comparing them is like comparing medical insurance premiums or 401k savings to military spending.
Baseline interpreter is a good example of doing things that help most Web pages instead of benchmarks. One of the major things that ARES-6 and other benchmarks test is whether generators are JIT'd, for example. This doesn't really help Web pages, as it's a rarely used feature at present and even rarer in hot loops.

SpiderMonkey should get around to jitting generators, but I have a hard time blaming the team for focusing on real-world improvements first.
In half jest, how do you feel about "Slack" then? One can argue it makes the product more memorable.
But did the checklist had the correct instructions on what to do in the case the extra alarm light would turn on? I think since MCAS was not disclosed there must not have been mentioned in the checklists either
Access to bridges also increases the chances of successful suicide.

The clear change that should be suggested is more proactive identification of mental illness and increased guaranteed access to mental health services. If that reads to you as nothing but "thoughts and prayers", I don't know what to say.
I've felt like I've had serious burnout for almost four years now. We've lost about 70% of our development team with no plans on filling the positions they've left open. We've not had a manager for over two years now. Haven't had a project manager for over two years. Our workload constantly increases. I recently got done with a stint of 45 days straight. Down to only 6 days a week now, but will be back to 7 before the end of the year to meet deadlines. I work for a healthcare company that is top 5 in size in the country. Our CEO had record compensation last year. I'm very excited by that. I love technology! What an interesting and exciting job.
You don't think young men can find young women influencing?
Why not just say: Suicide rates for females did not change in a statistically significant way.
> Your first point is particularly laughable. If your network connection to the internet is down and you're a SaaS provider, you're probably going to need to fix that before you can roll out a fix to your hosted software.

Don't assume that your SaaS runs on the same network as your build machines. In most cases this is not the case - or at least it shouldn't be. Your SaaS might be broken in some way, you're trying to create a build to fix it on your secure corp network and your connectivity to the Net disappears. And it's 3 AM in San Francisco and everyone who can fix it is asleep, and meanwhile your European customers are not happy.

Let's be clear. You can mitigate the effect of all these problems one way or another. But the mitigations are easier if you have less moving parts and less dependencies on systems you don't control.

Lets face it, ultimately it all comes down to limiting your business risk at least cost (because money). One simple way to do that is if your build environment travels with your code down the years.
> Like, I believe Sweden's population is about 10 million- much easier to have the social 'glue'

This specifically is what I am not understanding. Why is 10 million supposed to be easier?

10 million is about double the size of the metropolitan area I’m currently in, and roughly a hundred times the size of the last city I worked in. In both cases the population is much too large to be a single community.
Are you seriously arguing that my simplification of the process somehow invalidates the point I'm making? We can go into the entire process and it wouldn't change the point at all.

It has nothing to do with crypto-pairing. And every laptop on the planet reading cycle counts means nothing when the battery health being displayed is more than just cycle counts. It's cycle counts, discharge rates, and power consumption. In order to have an accurate reading, you need history for all 3 of those things. If you start with a used battery, that history will be inaccurate.

No, I don't have any family members working at Apple and, no, I do not work at Apple either. I just absolutely hate disinformation because it's literally everywhere. People jump on the anti-Apple train with so many bits of misinformation and ignorance that it boggles my mind. Out of all the companies out there, Apple seems to be the only one that cares (or at least that pretends they care) about things like privacy, security, and sustainability and they're the only ones that take active measures around those things. I want to support companies like that so I do.
How would uploading the library help with that?
Isn't it more like 30 people vs 300 people? The proportions of differing opinions are are still the same in that case.

Your East vs West coast comment also confused me. I'd argue Canada has the same (or more) regional differences in politics.

There's the East Region (Ontario + Maritimes), Quebec (featuring a different language, heritage, culture and legal system), The Central region, and the West Coast.

Oh, and of course First Nations throughout (which of course the US has as well).
There are ways to report on suicide responsibly that are supported by evidence[1]. I think we need similar guidelines for mass shootings.

[1] http://reportingonsuicide.org/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Nice_truck_attack

87 deaths from a truck ramming attack. The existing licensing system was obviously insufficient to prevent this attack. What do you suggest be done to prevent attacks like this in the future?
Because very very little happens in the client itself. Basically any button that does something is just an api call out to their servers and an update to the view. You can see this yourself when you're working on a higher-latency network connection -- damn near every click gets you a spinner or a pause of some sort before things happen.
I am not a biologist, but I doubt that. If you want to do this to an embryo, then abortion is a much saner option option.

Doing this a a living person would be pure madness, given the fact that we can't yet CRISPR even simple edits and deleting a chromosome (how would you even target just one of the copies?) is something much more complicated.
That's not the worst part. The worst part is the attacker getting the data. The slight chance that while you're infected you also happen to be on a public wifi in the same room at the same time as a random opportunistic hacker, or that an ISP employee is risking their job by combing through petabytes of transient customer data, is much less concerning.
Gitlab- Story of a Pioneer in Remote Work
All of the articles that we have on the platform are human-read. There is, however, the request functionality where you copy / paste the link to an article and it gives you an AI narration (using Polly).
> I imagine this is how windows gets bloated with candy crush saga

Who knows, it's possible the Windows team just watched a lot of people install Candy Crush, and decided it would be a good addition to Minesweeper/Solitaire/Hearts (and what employer wants those on their computers?).
Did you even bother to read the article? They state this themselves.

> The lack of change in homicide rates during the period of interest lends some strength to the idea that changes in suicide rates were influenced by the show and not some other environmental or social factor that occurred during this period. [...]

> While compelling, this research had several limitations. For example, the study used a quasi-experimental design, meaning that the researchers cannot make a causal link between the release of “13 Reasons Why” and the observed changes in suicide rates. The researchers cannot, therefore, rule out the possibility that unmeasured events or factors influenced suicide rates during this period.
Fructose usually comes as part of fruit. Fruit is extremely good food for humans (as long as you have not eaten fatty foods before it).

Fructose also has the best ability to be absorbed by muscle cells without the need for insulin, compared to other sugars.

I think you mean high-fructose syrup, which is not fructose but a glucose-fructose. Contains the same word but is verrrry different in health profile.
It's not "masquerading as unbiased news reporting", it's a longform magazine essay. Of course the writer, who has been covering this story for years, is going to bring his own perspective to framing the story and exploring the implications of the case. The New Yorker is not a newswire.

What's happened here is you saw an article you didn't agree with and invented a completely fictional scenario to justify dismissing it. You're also fundamentally confused about the medium.

This seems to be part and parcel with the mindset endemic to HN where any coverage of any issue that doesn't 100% agree with the commentator's preconceptions is assumed to be Wrong and the author either malicious or incompetent.
Thanks! I'm working on making it more real-time... would love to satisfy that use case even better.
Ok that makes sense. Thanks! Also, this sounds like a perfectly neat use case for svn sparse check-out.
But that's the point, it isn't your real life face, only the avatar you chose, so you don't have to show your face if you don't want to.
I think it's to combat the colloquial definition of "significant" with the specific statistical definition.

All polls and samplings have an amount of error (e.g. Biden leading in the polls at 30%, 3% margin of error). If Biden polls at 32% next week, there was an increase. Colloquially some would say that's a significant increase (after all, his pie grew by 6% compared to the prior week!), but it's very likely to do with chance. Unless you survey the entire population, you don't know the true proportion in which something occurs.

A change from 30% to 35% is quite unlikely to be random chance.
A randomized double bind study probably has ethical issues. I guess this is the best we can do, unless Netflix volunteers viewing data for everyone
Yeah no cap they kinda glorified suicide. I don't mean like the gritty details, but like the concept. The show romanticizes suicide as a way to get back at the people who harmed you, solve your problems, and make a huge impact on all the people around you, for better or worse.
Yes and No.

Yes - if a billionaire borrower buys a $200,000 house with a mortgage, there is little repayment risk for both borrower and banks. The mortgage payments are unlikely to stress the borrower.

No - that risk can be distributed between bank and borrower. Bank provides 75% of the value of the house, so it takes more risk. However, it can reduce risk in variety of ways, including: 1) taking collateral, 2) taking a guarantee from borrower, 3) diversification, 4) off loading risk to 3rd parties.
> As a ruler. Want to know how big something on your screen is in pixels? Fire up an xlogo, line it up with one edge of the thing, resize until the opposite edge lines up too, and if your window manager puts up a tooltip during window resizing (which I think all the ones I've ever used do), then you know the size.

I don't see a tooltip that shows the window size. I am using Xfce.
> When you “tax the rich at 90%” it disincentivizes people from working

It reduces the incentive to sacrifice other things for additional income once you've already reached the level at which the increased tax kicks in, yes.

Why is this a bad thing?
How would you translate "petit bourgeois" in German?
Well, obviously selling paid software is a well known way to make money. However, it would be really cool if we could give away software for free and make money off it at the same time.
Please add some sentences about what this does exactly
People who cant will have much better negotiating position when people who can actually leave set boundaries. Also, being software developer is not that bad job that you would be so much locked at one place. While there are some people who have no choice, many of us do have a choice.

Crazy hours are not something driven solely by management.
You mean the same "state" that blames "violent video games" for mass violence ignoring the centuries of lynching in the US?
Wasn't PRISM mostly to spy on Americans? Most of the apps there aren't very popular in the US, and half of them are just straight up Chinese. Seems more like it would be a PRISM-like program but in some Asian country or China.
This is such an asinine argument because it implies the following:

* Let's not examine root causes of anything because freedom

* Freedom by itself is good no matter of consequences

* This is a very US-centric view as no other country has first or second amendment

* How preventing mass shootings is a scary thing, and in which way limiting second amendment is scary?

* Same argument applies to the question you raise about first amendment. What is the use of free speech if all it does is exploit people who are vulnerable to committing suicide?

* Your comment about lonely/sad/broken people is not constructive. There are no actionable items. Instead of academic research you are proposing hearsay and a bet.
Interesting to ponder, but hard to draw any conclusions. There are too many confounding factors, including other prominent suicides covered in the media.

LA Times article criticising the study[1]:

> While no variations in the suicide rate were found for people ages 18-64, the rate among people ages 10 to 17 increased by 28.9% in April 2017, the month after the series debuted, the study said. It was also up significantly in June and December of that year, and was higher than expected in March 2017, when the show was heavily promoted. The April 2017 rate was the highest in the five-year period that was studied.

> Outside events include things such as the much-covered suicides of Soundgarden’s Chris Cornell in May 2017 and Chester Bennington of Linkin Park in July of that year, and the death of musician Tom Petty by accidental overdose that October, Moutier says. Also, former NFL star Aaron Hernandez died by suicide in April 2017. […]

> Here’s how a 28.9% increase can also be described as a “weak association,” according to Moutier: The overall suicide rate of boys 10-17 is actually very low, she says, around 0.6 per 100,000 people. Therefore, any change could be seen as significant change.

Guest column from the executive producer of the show[2]:

> However, the research failed to substantiate the author's own hypothesis: that when the show launched on March 31, 2017, young females would be most affected, because it's a girl whose suicide is depicted onscreen. In fact, there was no increase in suicide rates for adolescent girls that spring — and for boys the increase started before the show even launched. As you can see from the chart below, which is based on the same government data, suicide counts for adolescent girls over the last decade have been much more stable than for boys, which have risen consistently. The highest recorded month for girls was November 2016, well before anyone had ever watched 13 Reasons Why.

[1]: https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/tv/la-et-st-13-reasons...

[2]: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/13-reasons-why-c...
The full text is on Sci-hub: https://sci-hub.tw/10.1016/j.jaac.2019.04.020

I'm extremely skeptical. I don't know how many ways they carved up the data before they found a segment of the population with increased suicide rates at the right time. Also, the show is about a girl who kills herself, but the female rate of suicide didn't increase enough to be considered statistically significant. Lastly, the spike in suicides starts in March, which is a month before the show was released. Their claim only makes sense if you think that watching the trailer is enough to trigger suicides.
Sqeakland.org has that: eToys.

Not that the UI is very intuitive there, too.
But how many people realized they were depressed, or someone around them had suicidal tendencies, and got help as a result of this program?
People say that about address mental illness, etc, but what to me is profound about this is that the mere suggestion/glorification increased rates. There will always be impressionable people out there in some kind of state... you can’t fundamentally eliminate sadness in the world. And certainly you can’t eliminate teenage angst, which is likely the real culprit here.

We need some level of balance here.. unlimited guns and unlimited media has been a recipe for disaster.
>It’s not like we can stop the media from reporting on such things.

Sure you can. Stop watching it. Tell your friends to stop watching it and why. The media nowadays is all about going over the top and sensationalizing things because that's what gets the eyeballs on the screens and that's where the advertisements get them money.

Hurt their wallets and they'll stop.
You need to be more specific. Are you in engineering role? Its very usual for both husband and wife to work, if you want a home in good school district and nice commute. It can get a little hectic at times. Leaving at 3-4 everyday may be tough but one of you can do 3 days a week and the other 2 days a week. Else, with two salaries, you can hire a part time nanny and ask her/him to bring kids from school. That way, stress levels are manageable.

I don't work in FANG but have a similar lifestyle. Since the money is good, I would suggest you take the offer.
I haven't. I've been prejudiced against the jvm for most of my career (mostly because of how heinously Oracle has treated Sun's corpse). I'm over it now.

Thanks for reminding me to consider it.

I'll look at it today.
So does access to knives, chemicals and high places.
Wikipedia for instance only launched in 2001. Arxiv, Amazon, Uber, etc
> that make it practically impossible for modern citizens to overthrow a corrupt government.

Some of the citizens overthrowing the government would be in the military, though, no? Since the military is made up of normal people that live among civilians. It's more likely the military would split into factions, with the revolutionaries gaining control of a sizable chunk of tanks, airplanes, etc. Or maybe the military would stage a coup.

However, a truly tyrannical government would have long purged guns from its civilian population as evidenced by every tyranny ever.