skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Just wait, interfaces that can hear what you hear exist, as is the tech to digitize and broadcast it. So in theory, you could spychip all the mammals. With clever genetic editing, you could likely build it in in a similar way to the famous passive embassy bugs. Speaking of insects... /foilhat
Immortality Roadmap
And so Deeplearningcoin was born.
> the internet, effectively the most immediate form of mass communication we've ever known

It's a multi-to-multi communication tool though, where a unidirectional medium like radio or TV allowed you to get the message out (while controlling that no other message went out), the internet is messy, there are competing messages and they aren't easily censored, you can't be sure to reach the intended recipient (back in the TV days, most people watched TV and there were only a limited amount of channels; even if you had the power to make the big media companies broadcast your message on the web, tons of people will not visit any of their sites in any given day), and you compete with cat pictures.

It's communication by masses, not to masses. Traditionally, "mass communication" meant one-way-media usage to communicate to large parts of the audience.
Why do universities need to compete with big companies? The less they behave like corporations and more like places of learning, the better.
Having a few hundred consumer GPUs or a few dozen "datacenter" GPUs should be within the reach of any University department, and at least Nvidia also seems happy to sponsor University setups (after all new research creates demand from the industry).

Sure, this doesn't compete with Google's data-centers. But that's assuming Universities are for some reason competing against private industry. That's not how any other engineering discipline works, so it's a bit odd to just assume without discussion.
English is not my first language, but yes, to my knowledge that is grammatically correct.

Maybe it is a bit ambiguous, although from the context it should be reasonably clear that I was with my (now-ex) girlfriend for that period of time, and not with OkC itself :)
> I feel much safer depositing my savings in a regulated bank than I would converting them into any type of cryptocoin. Is my perception wrong?

I converted all my fiat back in the days to crypto. I didn't feel safer back then, but later on as the value skyrocketed and I diversified crypto gains to all kinds of assets my comfort level increased very nicely. I still have good stake of crypto, now I wouldn't feel safe not having some amount.
This is an interesting argument as we are in completely unknown territory.

As is it now we have some of the oldest scripts still readable because of pure luck (they were trapped in specific materials that preserved them, stayed in unopened cave etc.), extremely high effort (actively kept in pristine condition, backed up, repaired as needed) or wide appeal (e.g. religious books, reference books)

Basically we don't have much of the random papers circulating in markets and left lying around when their appeal was pretty small.

I think the same process will still happen with digital data, there will be a very low chance to find back the integrality of random users facebook posts, or the verge's amazon echo reviews in 4 centuries. But the work of the 'digital monks' will still be a lot easier, and I'd expect the bar to preserve any specific content to be a lot lower than what we had in the past.

Say, people's cooking recipes might survive a few centuries more, and possibly at a massive scale if a few dozens of people take the time to make that happen, where in the past this would just be unrealistic.
If you want to be that drastic, why not ban non renewables crypto mining first.
Also, google cloud is 100% renewable, right?
I wonder when we started sending digital images from space. Apollo did not use them but sent analog signals. But I think Voyager used digital images.

Commercial digital TV was first introduced in the US in 1994, also predating this patent. That's fairly well known and widespread, also all of the TVs all of us own and which are part of FCC standards violate this patent.
Does anyone else find those avatars really creepy? They look like the characters in those weird CGI kids cartoons.
I think the concern is that near earth orbit one day will be impassable without some garbage collection.

The acceleration of objects in near earth orbit is vastly greater than the particles from a mine. Space ships collaring with super fast particles in the orbit could spell disaster for the spacecraft.

Hopefully we find ways to make the rock impact negligible if we ever get to the stage of unable to leave orbit due to collisions with space particles (Not saying subatomic particles I just mean debris)
Apple threatens company with lawsuit for open source animoji alternative
Odd that you take those quotes to all blame women when several of them are about dating apps and the companies that run them.

Your further insinuation that this audience is in anyway "incels" because they don't care for dating apps or struggle at dating is frankly gross. That you immediately start with advice for them to get in shape (as if that's their problem) is awkward and rude and assuming.
OKCupid held onto their integrity as long as they could. After the HotOrNot-derived dating apps popped up, and the Match purchase, they definitely lost their way. If I had to date again, I would just meet people at bars, without OKCupid's rather effective personality matches (engaged to one person I met there, married another, slept with dozens), dating apps mostly seem pointless.
Issue with GitHub
Not able to comment on PRs, apply labels
High CO2 levels reduce the nutritional quality of plants. They grow better but are less nutritious.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2018/06/19/616098095/as...
Outsourcing to Ukraine 2019/2020 All you need to know
That's exactly what the long-form dating sites brought to women's inboxes. It was either tomes that would assemble into "War and Peace" within a couple of months without her participation, greatest hits like "So I'm in your area and I am just going to say I'm horny, how about we go to a motel and you give me a blow job" or "Hi. How are you".

Think of it as her being a customer and you being a sales person at Best Buy. You want to sell her a specific TV ( your commission is higher ). Are you:

a) going to start by printing a manual and all technical documentation and chase her around the store with it?

b) walk up to her and say "This TV is great for watching porn" as the intro?

c) Say "Hi. How are you?" and just stand there looking at her?

None of those three approaches are going to close your sale. The customer is telling you that (c) does not work, you sort of understand that (a) does not work and your brain should tell you that (b) is probably not what you lead with. At least I hope your brain tells you that about (b).

So now you have these inputs and she is still in your store and you can still make a sale and a commission. What do men who are unsuccessful with women do? They throw a temper tantrum about her not giving them a chance to sell the TV!
> what you call freedom I would call criminal.
> In that regard cryptocurrencies have a problem.

No, cryptocurrencies don't have a problem if some random guy on internet thinks nonsense.
This was sarcasm, but the article lists this as a Neolithic invention with domesticated animals. Meaning it actually fits perfectly within the Paleo diet story.
Not sure how that is relevant to OP's question then. You're describing PON, ONT-OLT communication is typically encrypted as well which makes the response make even less sense.

Wouldn't say that the cost benefits are from that, majority of the cost is going to be from putting fibre into the ground or on poles, same cost for 1 or 200 pairs. The real benefit is that you don't need any active equipment like in an ethernet distribution network.
This is a terrible idea! You're not avoiding anything, you would still have to escape these characters in CSV because it's entirely possible (in fact, almost certain) that someone will want to use the character itself in a CSV file.

Besides, it's arguably a GOOD thing that the delimiter in CSV (the comma) is such a common character, because it forces all parsers to properly support escaping and quoting. If it used some sort of unique character that was almost never used except in CSV, then 99.9% it would work without correct escaping, but the 0.01% when someone entered "you should use the character X to separate fields" as a column it would fail, and those cases are much more likely to slip through the cracks.

Also: the whole point of CSV is to be human readable. There's no obvious way to render "Record separator" on screen, and the format would essentially become a binary format.
So now the stock market is a scam too?
I once got a mail for a free software I published: "You're product sucks, I don't like it, why are you even doing this? There are much better alternatives out there.".

So what to do with that? I have to admit that this mail really stung for a while. Maybe I should have asked, why it sucked for this person, but then, why should I care about someone rude?

It didn't take me long to learn that some percentage of people tend to behave badly, especially on the internet and I can't do anything about it. I don't even exclude myself, I also wrote things to support addresses that I regret now. Overall, when I release something in the open now I do it because either I don't care, it's good for my image or I hope that people like it. I ignore rude comments and enjoy the happy ones. You would hope that people that know about OSS would be more considerate but they just aren't, free-loaders exist everywhere, it's a human problem, but it's also no reason to not stay idealistic.

EDIT: typo
> Carbon emitted as a result of manufacturing should count toward the destination country, not the production country.

Has anybody studied this yet? This point comes up every time this issue is discussed, but I don't remember ever seeing any effort into quantifying what the situation looks like from this perspective.
Something I've wondered is whether technology like this could eventually be self-defeating for hardware manufacturers. Rather than the evolution of graphics deriving from improved accuracy of the optical simulation fuelled by advances in computational power, it may instead derive from optimising subjective video quality, similarly to video codecs.

While accurately simulating optics is needfully computationally expensive and gives special-purpose graphics hardware an advantage, it's not clear that psychologically subjective high quality graphics (i.e. generating visuals which are inaccurate but convincing to humans) has such a need.
For me, that would maybe balance out if the salary difference was <2x. 5x? Forget about it.
> Don't think you have to be a 'gym bro'.

Yeah, people often think either it's try to be Arnold Schwarzenegger or sit on the couch all day. There is a very wide spectrum between those two extremes.
Insurance is just a one part of the problem.

Large practices have treatment standards on which physicians are evaluated. Reporting side-effects might be politically inconvenient in some cases. Medicine is also, like other human endeavors, subject to fashions and fads.

At best, applying machine learning to health records will generate a hypothesis that must be checked in a properly controlled trial.
What are your tips while going for a solo trip?
Mistakes of AI adoption: mismatch of business and tech
Russia created a redundant and resilient cyber-attack capability
About 9 years ago I was working in ad operations for the owners of vBulletin (they were a large internet publisher). I had just read a basic book on Java to use the Dart API to automate a bunch of tasks with the remnant waterfall. I'd been at "hello world" a few months prior. I had never used PHP aside from installing Wordpress.

When I gave notice, I was asked if I'd like to work on vBulletin as an engineer.

(Some good reading at https://vbtruth.com/category/company/vbulletin/ )
In understand the first reference, but not yours. What's it from?
Or we fuck up and make it an earth asteroid rather than a near earth asteroid ... lol. With the way events have been shaping recently I say there’s a 50/50% chance of success
Your entire IP address.

> WARP is not designed to allow you to access geo-restricted content when you’re traveling. It will not hide your IP address from the websites you visit.
It's super hard to avoid "evil" in BigCo.

If you drag the chain of evilness long enough, you almost don't want to work under any tech companies. Depending on your willingness.

Like Intel CPU R&D center is established in Haifa, Palestine, Palestinian Arab villagers literally driven away, homes were destroyed, they never returned back. Today almost everyone uses Intel CPU, including Palestinians (ironically).

Or even any US companies in general, where native Americans are driven away from North America.
DropBox doubled down.

https://twitter.com/DropboxSupport/status/117695661143435264...

https://twitter.com/DropboxSupport/status/117695664129355777...

https://twitter.com/DropboxSupport/status/117695667110665830...

(And they have no idea how twitter threads work)
Reminded me of this excellent talk

https://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_c...
My usual response is "Then go use those alternatives instead of bothering me. It works fine for me."

The majority of the things I "throw out there", I know perfectly well will not be useful to a significant number of users, and that's fine. I just do it because it costs very little, and someone might find it useful.

(In case you were wondering, I'm not going to show the stuff I've put out here for a variety of reasons, sorry.)
Both of your points are true of healthcare. No, not everyone will break a leg or need major surgery, but everyone gets old and dies. Flu shots come out at the same time as pumpkin spice lattes. From an aggregate standpoint I would wager healthcare needs and costs are predictable and forecastable, just like commodities.
Yeah, AI is expensive, but it does a lot of human work faster and correct. I've tried to use it with https://designbro.com/packaging-design/ and it really helps a lot :)
The point is that all the nice manipulation you would like to do are sound in O-notation and unsound in many other notations, what the parent wants is

O(n^2) + O(m) * O(n)

where m is the number of roundtrips.
Is this kind of competition healthy? More and more often I see competition as needlessly wasteful.
I find most tea (baggies, leaves in a strainer, etc) taste the same and mainly just bitter. Same thing with coffee and alcohol, I can discern no difference between types when drinking anything containing any amount each. Tea is definitely bearable with some honey and milk though.

That's just my crazy taste buds though. The closest explanation for this is being a "supertaster"[1]. I've done the supertaster blue-dye tongue test but compared to my friends we saw no noticeable difference.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supertaster
If you think intelligence communities for other nations aren't doing the exact same thing in the USA, you're kidding yourself.
I am also having issues with commenting on PR.
yes e.g look at BitCoin after they remove BIP 70 BTC is now Bitgold

BSV = BitCoin
Have you ever actually tried to do this? It is hard.

A family friend, a smart guy with excellent insurance, was recently diagnosed with Parkinson’s Disease. Since I’m a neuroscience researcher, he asked me for advice. Despite working in an immediately adjacent field, at a Parkinson’s Centre of Excellence, with access to experts and tons of relevant training and literature, I found it very difficult to make a recommendation, even between the options his doctors had already laid out. I can only imagine how hard this would be if I had to consider the price of these treatments too.
Also, the proximity of the smart phone transmitters to the body isn't doing you any favors. The fact that so many kids use smart phones and hold them so close to their heads when not yet fully developed is certainly a cause for concern.

Not sure if true, but I've read Apple has disclaimers about this for health.
In the US transportation emits more greenhouse gases than the entire US electricity production. AI easily pays for itself if it makes transportation or industrial processes even marginally more efficient.
Nice, but works only on Pixel phones.
Iterating over objects and arrays: frequent errors (2017)
The problem of LoRa is that is just slotted ALOHA, which maximum data throughput is only 36.8% of the available bandwidth. The more you transmit the more packets collide and data must be retransmitted in a spyral of death, so the system needs to operate using a small portion of the bandwidth not to collapse. Practically if everyone in New York would use LoRa and have dozen of devices in their homes using those bands, the bands would be jammed and nothing would work.
I'm not an expert, but I've read highly-cited ML papers where the researchers barely bothered with hyperparameter search, much less throwing a few million dollars at the problem. You can still get an interesting proof of concept without big money.

And low resource computing is more theoretically and practically interesting. I've heard experts complain of some experiments "they didn't really discover anything, they threw compute at the problem until they got some nice PR." This was coming from M'FAANG people too so it's not just resentment.
Right, I should have phrased it better: it's about self-interest. That interest _can_ be use of the software for yourself, and you're right, it can be selling support for the software or in open core models, selling add-ons.

I suppose "make the world a better place" can be a motivation as well (though I don't think it'll last very long for any individual unless they're RMS, maybe). There may be personal curiosity or education as motivation as well.

I don't think percentages between the motivations even matter for what the presentation is about (because it certainly isn't about users that pay for service contracts).

So there are transactional situations (support contract, other payments), there's "better world" idealism, and there's immediate self-interest ("I use this stuff myself").

Users being pushy on a communication medium demanding work from others with no fulfillment of these motivations that would back the demand doesn't even make the world a better place (pushy people != better world), so there's nothing in it for the devs.

Which gets back to the point of the presentation: if you want something fixed, step in (do it yourself, pay somebody to do it for you, ...).
You can ask nicely, and that might even work at times, but you're not entitled to anybody agreeing to that kind of one-sided transaction.
> it doesn't give you any power

The mistake is thinking it's about power. It's about aligning goals. A lot of the individual motivation for OSS is about making the world (what the developer believes is) a better place. Things that contribute to that vision are welcome; things that distract from it are not. The first category includes detailed bug reports and feature requests consistent with the software's existing direction. The second includes vague bug reports and requests for features that the developers don't believe in. Try demanding that security software should include a back door and see what kind of reception that gets.

The problem isn't that asking developers to do things for you is rude by itself. You can ask politely, they can decline politely, end of story. It's not even that pestering developers after such a refusal is rude, even though that's obviously the case. The problem is that such an approach isn't very effective. If you can convince the developers that fixing your problem is consistent with their own vision of how to make the project fulfill its existing goals, that's much more effective than mere badgering. If you want someone to do something for you, in any context, it's better to have them think of you as a collaborator than as someone who just makes demands.
> The human brain doesn't use a billion dollars in compute power, figure out what it is doing.

This may not be true, if we’re talking about computers reaching general intelligence parity with the human brain.

Latest estimates place the computational capacity of the human brain at somewhere between 10^15 to 10^28 FLOPS[1]. The worlds fastest supercomputer[2] reaches a peak of 2 * 10^17 FLOPS, and it cost $325 million[3].

To realistically reach 10^28 FLOPS today is simply not possible at all: If we projected linearly from above, the dollar cost would be $16 quintillion (1.625 * 10^19 dollars).

So, when it comes to trying to replicate human intelligence in today’s machines, we can only hope the 10^15 FLOPS estimates are more accurate than the 10^28 FLOPS ones — but until we do replicate human level general intelligence, it’s very difficult to prove which projection will be correct (an error bar spanning 13 orders of magnitude is not a very precise estimate).

P.S. Of course, if Moore’s law continues for a few more decades, even 10^28 FLOPS will be commonplace and cheap. Personally, I am very excited for such a future, because then achieving AGI will not be contingent on having millions or billions of dollars. Rather, it will depend on a few creative/innovative leaps in algorithm design — which could come from anyone, anywhere.

[1] https://aiimpacts.org/brain-performance-in-flops/

[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOP500#TOP_500

[3] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summit_(supercomputer)
“Better algorithms” - sounds like a good research topic!
I don't know about the ratios (or how a user looking through could really tell what the true ratio is) but as far as none of them having a decent matching algorithm... I'm a big fan of OkCupid here... (I know they were aquired by match but they still operate independently AFAIK) I interviewed for them 12-13 years ago but never worked there, but they were Harvard math guys who founded SparkNotes and "opensouced" an early version of their basic matching algorithm in 2004 or 2005 on their blog, I'll see if I can find and post here or perhaps someone else will share bit the gist was only using the intersection of questions you both answered, and both of you don't just answer the question but also give how much you care about the answer to this question and "acceptable" answers from your match (if you care at all, if not answers don't matter) and they use those to customize weight of each question in matching... I don't know if it has any special romantic matching qualities but it's WAY better than anything else I've tried for a metric of people worth meeting and who you'll sometimes have INCREDIBLE amount in common with, when match percentage is over 90 or 95%... I've dated two 96+% matches for over a year FWIW.

EDIT: couldn't find original blog post but this article seems to have some of the same math/details in less entertaining form
https://blogs.ams.org/mathgradblog/2016/06/08/okcupid-math-o...
Interview with the Guy Who Tried to Frame Me for Heroin Possession
the point about the increase in computational resources reminded me of Gary Marcus latest book. It seems like the increasing trend away from research into generalised AI models towards narrower and narrower domain-specific ML models that consume more and more energy and data is becoming an increasing bottleneck.

I think instead of trying to build larger computers there is an opportunity for academia to move back towards the construction of cognitive models and minimizing the reliance on computation and data. That's what intelligence is supposed to be all about.