skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It is less fraud and more like gambling. They want the next Google or Facebook desperately to make big money.
Yes, but did you ever have a conflict of interest between your two positions? As other people are pointing out, psyops (generally speaking) involves tweaking public opinion in ways that favor the government. This person also happened to have editorial control and influence on Twitter.

If he were just a developer, it might be different, no?
Predictive CPU isolation of containers at Netflix using a MIP solver
> Stallman defended Minsky

> People are angry at Stallman for what he actually said, not what you think they think he said.

This isn't the lie we're talking about, whatever else people are angry about, many are angry about:

"MIT Scientist Defends Marvin Minsky: Epstein Victim Likely ‘Presented Herself’ as ‘Entirely Willing’"

This headline implies Stallman was defending Epstein, not Minsky, and suggest he said the victim was "willing".

> and he had to ignore the legal definitions of both words

He didn't ignore them, he criticised their usage and how they are perceived by the public; Are you going to comment on the full context and motivation behind Stallmans' comment?
The next time I (male) am looking for a job, I will make a specific point of seeking out job advertisements targeted at women in tech and applying, just to see what happens.
I look for practical information in reviews such as 'works well but the plastic grommet holder snapped off after a week of use, look out for the weak electric dimmer switch' etc etc.
The subjective reviews are mostly a waste of time
It sounds like it might not be the right move for you. If you do go into a Ph.D, I do think it's important to have a clear idea of what you want out of it.

I did a Ph.D and have no regrets - for me, it resulted in more interesting work and rapid advancement once I was in industry. I picked up a lot of relevant knowledge on distributed systems (not know-how or techniques, but generally how to think about them and evaluate them) that comes in use every day. Exploring the (vast) space of potential system designs and figuring out how to evaluate them is something that I picked up in the Ph.D and is incredibly useful in my job. A Ph.D doesn't give you that knowledge on a platter, but it can give you the time and resources to learn and practice it. I think a lot of engineers in the industry are... not great... at doing this and in many cases don't even realize it.

Anyway, doing a Ph.D. gives you a big blank space to fill in with self-directed learning and research. For some people that's a golden opportunity. If your goal is to be taught skills that you will directly apply in your future career, a Ph.D is a crapshoot. You might get that if you have a hands-on advisor in the right area.

One thing I've noticed is that whether work is interesting is as much a function of the individual, environment and team as it is of the work itself. A curious individual who is engaged with their teammates and is given autonomy to do their job in the best way they see fit is likely to be a lot more engaged in a "dull" task than someone who is working in an "exciting" area without those things.
So... Microwave and VHF are not vastly different frequencies, Microwave starts at 300MHz and VHF ends at ... 300MHz.

Yes, they each span a wide range of frequencies, but every frequency range spans a wide range of frequencies. These two are as close as you can be.

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

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

Not coincidently, VHF Radar is defined to be between 50 and 330Mhz, which actually overlaps both Microwave and VHF television.

Now as to the main question, if I set up a device to interact with radar at some frequency and attach it to a stealth airplane, what frequencies would you expect it to effectively interact with it (assuming it's tuned at all, they could just be attaching a big piece of flat aluminum)?

Answer: If my device has peak interaction at frequency F, you will see harmonics, so you will see significant interactions at 1/8 F, 1/4 F, 1/2 F, F, 2 F, 4F, 8F.

Airport radar is around 3Ghz. So if the radar reflector operates at around 3Ghz, it will also work pretty well at 1.5Ghz, 750Mhz, 375Mhz, and even 187.5 Mhz. 187.5Mhz is TV channel 6 or 7, depending on country. Half again is 93.7 is FM (which the article specifically mentions).
Can you please reconcile this statement:

Dorian was technically a normal hurricane.

with the following

[The Labor Day Hurricane] was tied with Hurricane Dorian for the strongest landfalling Atlantic hurricane by maximum sustained winds, with winds of 185 mph (295 km/h) at landfall

Or if not, at lease please stop calling people "stupid" for bringing up Dorian as an indication that perhaps we should be concerned about increasing frequency of severe tropical storms?
Practical Machine Learning with Python and Keras
You don't see a situation where one side can mass produce bots and completely dominate (zerg...)? Such a side would likely also force the losing side into slavery or starvation
Publication -- somewhere -- of interesting negative results would be invaluable specifically for the discussion of how the experiment went wrong. Experiment design is tricky and it's not something you get a lot of exposure to except through the experience of others you interact with.
Only continue with a PhD if you really love research and learning. Even the best international positions are ridiculously underpaid and you will have to move around the world multiple times and travel way too much.

I spent 10y in academia. Loved my PhD and subsequent research positions. Went back to industry because I wanted to spend more time with my lady.

For me the research years have paid of exceptionally well. Lots of interesting people and projects, and enabled work I would never have been able to get off the ground without the training and network.

But my case is very uncommon.
The world’s most dynamic humanoid robot
Those systems seem close to a dog's intelligence only because you haven't worked on them and don't know how they work. Nothing about this field is obvious. If you are not an expert, just look at the history. People thought at the dawn of this field over 60 years ago (yes, really) that machine intelligence was right around the corner. The optimists have been wrong for more than six decades and they are wrong now. If you are an expert you can look at speech recognition, computer vision, and all these things you mention, and compare them to the intelligence and awareness of a dog, and realize that they are not close, not in the ballpark, not in the same league, not even the same sport. The ANN/DL research is not moving in the direction of AGI and nobody in industry and almost nobody in academia is bothered by that because ML is getting results and careers are being made, while chasing AGI means spending your career on something that almost certainly will not show any results. If anything, the current success of deep learning means we are further away from AGI than we would have been (which is probably a good thing) because there are fewer people working on it.
Show HN: Codeless automated UI testing service
Agreed. NoCaptcha is a red falg to me as a user that usability has taken a backseat to ease of administration.
Forever 21 fashion chain files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection
I think we might be getting our wires crossed :)

I'm talking about the UK here, which I understood to be similar to the rest of Europe(?).

That's a UK website and 3 phase isn't common here. I've just double checked my fuse box, and I have a 32 amp fuse for my socket ring main.

Don't forget for a ring main the current is spread over 2 wires, so if theres 32amps power draw, theres only 16amp on each side of the ring.
I can't speak to his interactions with any doctors. I imagine he forgot. This was before he was 21, so alcohol wasn't an issue yet.
This is exactly a kind of project I was looking for to get some inspirations from.
I still use the wirecutter but feel my trust factor has diminished quite a bit recently
Fakespot CTO here. That's a good observation. Our engines utilize NLP heavily conjoined with proprietary ML models to detect influenced reviews that basic statistical analysis will never (or with low levels of success) be able to infer from review data sets, unless there are very basic signals such as 100 5-star reviews posted in an hour.

Fake review authors and providers are increasingly becoming sophisticated to bypass various filters in place on Amazon and other websites so you need to be able to leverage SOTA analysis to detect them. We also don't reveal how we detect certain fake reviews due to the fact that they will use that information to their advantage to further exploit our system, which allows us to be a couple steps ahead.

Anyone interested to know more about this topic feel free to email me at saoud@fakespot.com.
> The vast majority (~80%, [1]) of the greenhouse gas emissions do not come from "lifestyle" choices such as eating meat, but from transportation, industrial use and electrical production.

But the reason we use so much transportation, industry, and electricity is due to lifestyle choices. Meat requires feed which is transported, and then the animals are transported, and then the meat itself is also transported. Industry makes those iPhones you buy a new model of every other year. Etc.

> As for the specific question of meat, it would undoubtably help for everyone to eat less meat, but in fact if every single person in the US went vegetarian, it's estimated that it would only reduce the US's CO2 output by about 5%

5% is nothing to sneeze at. Eating less meat alone won't stop climate change, it's true, but in combination with other sacrifices?

Here's my problem with the people who make arguments like you're making: I feel like you're unwilling to make sacrifices and are using this argument to justify how you can claim to care about the environment while also doing basically nothing to improve the situation. You'll say "well, one person isn't going to make a difference", yes, in the same way a raindrop does not consider itself responsible for the flood. If we are so unwilling to make sacrifices for ourselves, why should we believe that other people will make any? Why will they vote against their interests? Pay lip service to the idea in a public forum and then explain away your own contribution to the problem as being but one drop in the flood, voting is secret. Someone says "we should eat less meat", an objectively helpful thing to do by your own metric, and you say "No, no. It's a small thing, we should focus on something less important to me!".

It's frankly quite frustrating to see. Short of some miracle techology, I'm pretty sure this kind of thing is the reason we won't be able to avoid the worst case scenarios of climate change and future generations will look back on us with well deserved disgust.
I went through this with power tools. What I found was products would end up with three broad classes of negative reviews, segmented mainly by price:

* Expensive tools would have gripes about price or lack of inclusion of accessories. If I bought something in this category it would be problem-free, but so far in excess of what I need as a hobbyist/DIYer that it was comical, e.g. a circular saw that could happily saw my car in half when all I'm doing is building bookshelves.

* Cheap tools would have a consistent pattern of reviews mentioning one or more specific failures that occurred during normal use - e.g. belt sanders that swallow belts or drills where the chuck quickly comes loose. If I bought something in this range, I'd experience exactly the same failure myself.

* Finally, mid-price tools would have the same number of poor reviews as the cheap ones, but the scenarios described would be abusive or unrealistic expectations: people complaining that they couldn't use an orbital sander on concrete tiles or fit enormous router bits to something consumer-grade.

The realisation I wish I'd come to earlier is that stuff in the last category is fine, particularly when it comes to a tool I only use occasionally. Stuff here does exactly what I need, gives good results, and doesn't result in me paying for power I'm never going to use. I guess that's part of the problem with online reviews - needing to get to the level where you're analysing them in depth to differentiate between "it broke because it's badly made" and "it broke because I was doing something completely crazy with it".
In Neolithic Ukraine, Big Buildings Hint at Democratic Assemblies
according to nicholas Taleb, Black-Scholes was always broken. I tend to believe him based on results achieved by Scholes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-Term_Capital_Management
What I don't understand is how do things get this far down the road before a good old fashioned sanity check happens? I have got to think that Soft Bank knew/knows the valuation was off. The fact that they pushed on means they either intended to try and get away with it/take the money and run as I cant believe incompetence is the reason here. How did this get so far along???

As for Adam N, I have to think some part of him knew that it was a bullshit valuation and all the hand-wavy "we are a tech company that also happens to do real estate" doesn't pass the smell test to me. He has personally enriched himself quite a bit so even if the whole thing falls apart he will be ok. I don't know if there is a bubble in SV or not, but it seems that the last couple of really huge unicorn companies have all been based on BS(We Work), Fraud(Theranos), and untenable business models (Uber). I'm far removed from that whole scene so maybe I'm showing my ignorance by stating this. I am, however, very curious to hear about any startup unicorns that are profitable or at least have a clear roadmap to profitability and not based on a business model that will be outlawed in a few years.
I just wonder if We is being used as a scapegoat here, or if it s an actual turning point for “tech” investments
Hmm, will it include cognitive biases, too?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases
Oh look, victim blaming.
In which case it should be labeled as a joke, not "false". And Snopes has a satire tag for this purpose.
I must note that when there's a tie between an exec in a foreign country, and it's military/government, nobody has time for that kind of hair splitting.
Cannot understand how they can restructure this. Even one new building in London which isn't anywhere near structurally complete WeWork has taken 18 floors on a 25 year lease (I think due to open 2020 or 2021).

Is there a way they can walk away from all these commitments? I understand they have a SPE structure which potentially allows them to do that, but I imagine there must be some costs or downsides to it, otherwise it isn't much of a lease commitment from WeWork's PoV.
Don't ask "will it lead to..." That question always ends in trading present misery for an illusory brighter future.

Instead ask "is this how I want to spend my short time on earth?" If doing research and writing papers sound exciting, then DO IT.

Follow that approach and your life will be interesting.
So this is what I do not understand: they burn through money like crazy. For them IPO was not a path to liquidity for stock holders, rather it was a way to do the next raise. The large market basically said "Nah, can't get that money on those terms. Sorry". Their only private source of funding is Softbank.

How are they going to raise more money for opex? Go back to Softbank and get another pile of cash at even higher valuation? Because it would be incredibly dumb for Softbank to do that as they have no serious competitors on the next round. So is softbank going to say 'This will be the down round and, we will now own 95% of the company and all of you, previous shareholders, get whatever is left? It is a down round with a wipe out, take it or leave it?'
If any hacker signs up today to AXSAR Solo, please drop us an email at info@axsar.com and we will give you three months access for free. * No credit card required.

Just mention 'Hacker News' in the email.
What makes you think the good PR is not disinformation?
In order for something to be fraud there has to be deception. This was never the case with WeWork.
I'm sorry but that seems an awful lot like "the lesson Democrats need to learn is how to be more like Republicans."

Caring about climate change and a belief in regulation and social welfare is the Democrats' entire purpose, it's what they're selling.
UBI is a "pocketbook" issue, as is socialized healthcare and loan forgiveness.

I agree the Democrats fail utterly at communicating this to mainstream and rural voters, though.
That just seems mind boggling to me.
Agreed on that. AMD put a bunch of work into the Cycles rendering engine (for blender) to get their OpenCL support up to par with CUDA, and now it's completely disabled on the Mac version thanks to Apple deprecating it. Disappointing.

https://developer.blender.org/rBbb0d812d98
The side that can destroy the opponent’s ability to build, deploy, and develop murderbots will have a big advantage. So they will target the murderbot economy and harm people in the process.
Spending less than 2B usd purchasing and distributing iron sulfate in the oceans, we could cause a snowball earth. If we spend 1.2 or so, and harvest all the excess salmon to blunt the cascade of the algae blooms, we could keep temps whatever we want.
> The reality is that is was solved a while ago, the solution is rss and email.

You are in a very small minority when compared to the average internet user. This is the same attitude that advocates for IRC and Jabber when modern alternatives have taken over due to user friendliness, network power, and corporate ownership/management.

It's not to say these platforms don't have problems (they do), or that a non-open model is preferable (it's certainly not ideal).

> Instagram instead offers popularity and nice photo filters and colored ticks on avatars. Which are nothing in common with distributing thoughts.

We can't ignore that the Internet has moved on from our technical solutions since the rest of the world got online. If we want it to remain open, it's up to us to help reign things back in through legislation when we see such blatantly gross abuses such as this.

If you keep pointing to RSS as the solution while simultaneously discounting all of the moves that are being made by the big players, RSS will wither and die and you will be left with nothing.

Platform control. Regulatory capture. Impenetrable new "standards". DRM. Dropped support for HTTP, RSS, semantic HTML, ad blocking, video...

Just imagine what the Internet will look like in twenty years and tell me that doesn't worry you.
Well, according to Shell I can just pay 1 ct extra per liter of gasoline and bam, my ICE is CO2 neutral.
You're free to break from it, have a breakthrough and share it with the world. On a larger scale it's a drop in the bucket though. You'd have to change how and what things are taught and sometimes the cultural intellectual phase might unlock to a worse phase. Best is to let these things happen on their own.
And by your ridiculous standards, crime in Sweden should be going down, yet it is booming. The rate of sex crimes alone has tripled since 2014.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Sweden
Yeah I actually didn’t realize parcel had so many dependencies. I choose it over webpack not for speed but because it’s highly opinionated and requires essentially zero config.

So I guess I’ll change my suggestion and say just use rollup
The new Uber: Weak coffee, vanishing perks and fast-deflating morale
Mods: maybe edit title
to reflect date (2003)?
Well in case of Uber their engineering side is quite strong. WeWork? Not saying their engineering is bad, but as far as I know there's nothing groundbreaking there besides a standard CRM & billing system? So I think as an engineer having Uber would be a very good signal your resume, WeWork would be just like any other company.
He stated that the absence of consent is what makes it harmful. He is against rape, independently of the victims age.
So a while ago people would have said the same about homosexual sex. Luckily, people questioned it anyway, despite being vilified for doing so. How do you know which supposedly unconscionable things are actually bad and which are not, if we are not allowed to question them? Whilst I'm not defending this particular point, on the meta level we need to be able to question things, however settled they might seem, or else we will never again recognise the areas where we are wrong.

A friend of mine is fond of telling people who make such absolute, unquestioning claims that they would have made an excellent SS officer.
Did you not watch the game yesterday?
My point is more around who benefits. It’s not industry alone.

And I would argue consumers have a very big impact on how industry acts. There are a number of environmentally friend products offered that are regulatory requirements at all.
Show HN: Live chat with website visitors from Microsoft Teams
First fully rechargeable carbon dioxide battery lasts 500 cycles
And the if-else construct is also a macro. The whole thing ends up being a case I think.
The main argument for the F-35's stealth is to avoid target locking missiles. It's not to be "invisible".
The 2nd version made it insecure, as scalars are not delimited anymore, and MITM or version mismatches can change the value.

schmorp wrote this:

> For example, imagine you have two banks communicating, and on one side, the JSON coder gets upgraded. Two messages, such as 10 and 1000 might then be confused to mean 101000, something that couldn't happen in the original JSON, because neither of these messages would be valid JSON.

> If one side accepts these messages, then an upgrade in the coder on either side could result in this becoming exploitable.

The 3rd version was a joke, because the outstanding problems were not addressed at all, and removing BOM support for the 4 other encodings is just a joke. First, you cannot remove a feature once you explicitly allowed it, esp. since it's a minor and an almost unused one.

And remember that http://seriot.ch/parsing_json.php was already published then, and the most egregious spec omissions had been known for years already. such as undefined order of keys, or undefined if duplicate keys are allowed. Allowing unsorted keys is also a minor security risk, as it exposes the internal hash order, which can lead to hash seed calculation.
WeWorks appears to have cooked their books. Those responsible are, in my view, trying to avoid further scrutiny.
WeWork Still Needs Cash After Officially Pulling IPO
A new platform to build user communities and get feedback has launched
All we need now is a simulation to plug ourselves into. And this is how The Matrix was made.
You have no idea what the exposure settings were on the camera or the amount of available light. It isn't possible to judge screen brightness from uncalibrated imagery.
The problem of seeing this as a cost-benefit equation is when you may risk facing infinite cost.

Climate change, as a single, isolated factor, won't cause by itself human extinction or at least the end of the human civilization in a foreseeable future, but reality is complex, current civilization and most of mankind depends on a lot of connected systems. Positive feedback loops happen, in climate, economics and in cultures, and from time to time the effects catch by surprise experts. We might be betting it all, and losing the bet, forever.
Using math to blend musical notes seamlessly
> Obviously their team bought the hype

or nobody wanted to rock the boat. If you had pointed out this as a legal grunt or rank & file finance guy, you would have looked bad for "ruining" the exec's payday. Better to let the market decide and just keep your head down and receive your pay check.
Almost completely is a synonym for partial, otherwise it would be fully supports.

As a professor of mine used to say, 99% there is still not done.