skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Tesla Smart Summon v10 nails crazy Costco parking lot
I can tell this is a C++ thread, heaven forbid you touch anything new within the last 20 years...

The JSON obsession is that everything under the moon supports it- and it's a nice easy structure which can be converted to a dynamic or statically typed object with no issues. Plus it's very human readable, so it's great for debugging.

If you sit there and ONLY use C++, ok why bother? But many systems need to talk to different systems these days. I can setup a webapi that can communicate with my angular typescript, C#, matlab all through nice easy JSON. Each language just converts it to the object and I'm good to go.

The question is why are you so against such a widely accepted format of communication?
Deep Function Machines: DNNs that work on infinitely many dimensions (2016)
What is the closest crypto analog to this kind of key?
It has also affected the Print industry in a major way.

No longer is there much need to have a 200+ DPI difference between your display and what you’re printing.

Gone are the days of zooming way way in to a page-sized PS document - it’s just the size it will be for print.

For my girlfriend, this was super important.
http://www.bruno-latour.fr/sites/default/files/P-36-Berliner...

This is the original technical document on this key.
Assuming 4k/month on rent, your leftover pay after taxes and rent is more than most senior engineers gross in the rest of the US/Western Europe. 200k is a lot.
Also, I know that *mycin antibiotics can decrease liver metabolism of statins, and increase their side effects. In particular, rhabdomyolysis (muscle damage).[0]

So I suspect that grapefruit isn't the only issue. In that there may well be interactions among the drug classes listed.

0) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4006404/
>You're always going to have giants in any communication network

I suppose you make that claim based on the assumption that any electronic long range communication system at most reduces to a network?

If so, your assumption—while applicable to our current global communications network—doesn't cover the communication systems which could (& hopefully would) already exist if the ARPAnet originators hadn't messed this up by dropping the Internet layer and renaming the Network Layer to the 'Inter'net layer. It got Telcos exactly what they needed to remain giants.
Very curious about classical AI mixed with deep learning. Does anyone know of any examples?
How so they determine false negatives? Are there other less broad and more expensive test?

That said, isn't it also possible at Stage 1 for the body to cure itself? That is, __in theory__ is it possible Stage 1 defecation is too early? That med intervention could be premature?
I’m questioning the journalistic integrity of Bloomberg after the author of the article about the “Big Hack”, with China infiltrating hardware, received a promotion.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/09/17/bloomberg...
How recent? It looks like this change is very new.

(You should still be able to force an offline account by disconnecting for the internet during install, but, that requirement is terrible.)
If the context simply is "median California household income", then it should seem like a lot, because it really still is a lot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_California_locations_b...
:) Nothing too interesting. Probably snooze by the sea with close access to good food, good books and certain people I care about.
Scientists and mathematicians already spend an extreme amount of energy trying to think of the shortest, cleanest possible route for people to learn their fields. The resulting documents take years to create, and are called textbooks. (At least, the good textbooks are like this.) Often people will work for thousands of hours on their books, essentially for free. Students go from outsiders to participants by reading them, all the time.

The problem is that things genuinely are hard, and there's only so much compression you can do before you're reduced to meaningless handwaving. Textbooks are already compressed by a factor of 100 relative to the original research literature, sometimes even oversimplified. Demanding something a factor of 100 better than a textbook is going to get you something like one of those useless "learn C++ in 24 hours" paperbacks.
> You don't have to take anything orally to treat dehydration. A bath or shower can help with hydration at times when she can't stand to take anything orally.
Dehydration isn't always as simple as a lack of fluids. It can also be impacted by a lack of electrolytes and inadequate fat....

Big No
Zero probably means you’re just not good enough at finding them.

Any number larger than zero is likely to have some false positives, fakes, edited versions of other images, etc....

This is not an easy problem to solve, regardless.
Are you sure though that your extra stuff was actually on correct an on point? AFAIK in math you have the primary notions, the axioms then all the previous definitions and proofs, maybe I am imagining somethng different then what actually happened though, an example would be good but it may not be possible for you to remember or express it in a comment here.
I agree; I disable antialiasing to the best degree that I can when I code. This is not possible on Retina displays on MacOS though because they render at a higher resolution then down-sample.

I was pretty disappointed the original article didn't talk much about hinting.

Even old operating systems did a great job at type hinting to align glyphs to pixels (even when antialiasing is on). "Modern" operating systems (especially MacOS after Mavericks) assume retina and throw hinting to the wind; the consequence is pervasive blurry text even on retina displays.
My function is to probe for biological infestations, and destroy that which is not perfect.
Microsoft Chief Talks Augmented Reality in Schools
> As it's impossible to leave the building without a key in case of a fire.

Isn't that the case for most doors that lock? You can't leave through my (brand new, to-code) front door from inside without a key to unlock it first.

It wouldn't be secure if you could open it without a key - isn't that the whole point of a lock with a key?
Neumann and Musk show how startup founders use the same tactics as cult leaders
And doj said no problem. Thinking this is something is entirely stupid and partisan. You are being played as usual but you lap it up, like usual
Congratulations, looks awesome.

I had an idea for similar kind of game where you are a wizard and program your own spells. The mechanics would be inspired by how magic works in The Dresden Files[0], where you draw in magical energy, transform it and then use it in some way. Maybe one could connect it with linear logic and programming.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dresden_Files
If that's truly what they mean, that's far more than confusing - it's flat-out deceptive.
This seems to work only with cloud providers, not with dedi boxes / VPSs?
I didn't notice this being mentioned in the webcast or in any of the follow-up articles I've read on the presentation: while the timelines for 6-months-to-orbit seem insane, I believe the underlying drive for an aggressive schedule here largely derives from Mars launch windows. [1]

We have a launch window to Mars open from July 2020 - September 2020, the tail end of which is almost exactly one year away. Starship will have to be orbit capable well before this window, such that the flight and maneuvering characteristics are understood well enough to reasonably justify taking a crack or two at an unmanned cargo Mars mission within the 2020 window. Musk might not have explicitly mentioned it in the presentation, but I would bet that the Starship teams are internally being driven to these targets.

FTA, Musk is quoted in 2017, saying SpaceX was targeting uncrewed Mars missions in 2022, but given his ambitions and depending on the progress of the Starship/Super Heavy, I can see them actually aiming for 2020 such that any failures would still guarantee a path to making the 2022 window.

All of this is my own amateur speculation, would love to hear corrections or other ideas.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploration_of_Mars#Launch_win...
No matter how you cut it:

Understanding > knowledge
Using OCX from ASP, written in Delphi, VB and C++ Builder, alongside VB Script, was definitely better than PHP 3.
There’s a Alan Kay talk[0] that might illuminate for you that leap of logic about simplicity.

[0] https://youtu.be/NdSD07U5uBs
> Yeah. I'm ok with calling anything that looks weird a "paradox" (even stuff like "The Monty Hall problem"), but in this case describing the problem this way is precisely what's misleading about it: the person describing the "problem" must first pretend that there is a well defined (even though possibly not known to the less educated listener than himself) "random" way to pick 2 points on a circle, which there clearly isn't: there are different algorithms to do that, that produce different distribution, which very obviously look different when plotted, and choosing any specific algorithm/distribution makes the "paradox" disappear. So I really dislike when stuff like that is called a "paradox". It's just a way to trick the listener (or yourself) into thinking there is a problem, when there really isn't any.

It is also a good way to broach a discussion on the nature of randomness.
> If you're in Safari or Edge, this might still look ok! If you're in Firefox or Chrome, it looks awful, like this: https://gankra.github.io/blah/text-hates-you/transparent-cur...

It doesn't look awful in Firefox, it looks perfect (it's version 26 of Firefox though.) This is what I see https://i.imgur.com/sjvqycv.png
> MacOS also prompts incessantly trying to get you to create and/or link a cloud account.

Well, kind of. It seems to prompt me once per service, more or less. If I keep closing them, I've found that macOS does eventually shut up.
My preferred proof assistant is definitely Metamath, I think it just needs a big company to come along and build an awesome front end for it and it will become the standard.
I think the GP is trying to say that, once you get past all of the definitions and proofs, the underlying idea is almost always relatively simple.

I do agree that it's pretty hard to be rigorous without setting up all of this edifice, but I've also found that it's very easy (at least, as an applied mathematician) to take an idea and continue generalizing it until the original application becomes a very small corollary of the new statement—one that appears usually unmotivated and "magical."

In some sense, this is a wonderful thing: you can usually prove a much stronger statement using the same tools you used to prove the weaker one, but in some sense it makes many things unbelievably difficult to understand as a first or even second-time reader.

To give an example, I was reading a book on dissipative PDE-solving as an optimization problem. The book's main chapter starts with a theorem that is so general and so far removed from any one specific application that, even as someone who works on several related fields, I struggled to understand its significance. The book then spends the next several chapters showing how existence/uniqueness of solutions to a bunch of PDEs are all corollaries (with some work) of this theorem.

The problem I have is that the presentation would've been much clearer going the other way. Start with the easy-to-prove existence theorems for the PDEs you care about (which mostly relied on simple tools and could've been proven in a few lines) and build up the generalization to the "main theorem." There, the reader doesn't have to guess the meaning (and/or marvel at the "ingenuity") of the original statement since the motivation is perfectly natural and clear, and they certainly don't have to struggle through a proof without a clear ending. Plus, you usually get the nice side-benefit that, by the time you present the most general statement, the proof is almost always immediate ± some small tricks.

While I do think that math requires a large amount of definitions to work and to put everything on rigorous footing, I also think there's this kind of weird way of writing where definitions and proofs are presented as "magical" and then shown to be right or useful later, rather than the other way around. This is fine for a few things, but I've found that most presentations that work don't follow this template (yet most mathematical papers I've read sadly do).
Because to be superior, the tooling and libraries also have to be superior.

PHP was only free beer with a clunky language and 3rd class DB support.

MySQL couldn't hold a candle to real RDMS back then, versus what was available with ODBC connectors.
It also has the potential to prevent literal carnage. The risk might be high, but so is the reward.
*Cries in fortune 500 wage slave
HN has a limit of 50 characters or so for the title of an article.

"Lawrence Livermore National Labs" did not fit, and so was abbreviated to fit HN's article title length requirements...
Compassion can be trained to extend further (see the Buddhist tradition, or the recorded words of Christ).

https://www.dalailama.com/messages/compassion-and-human-valu...

> Ultimately, humanity is one and this small planet is our only home, If we are to protect this home of ours, each of us needs to experience a vivid sense of universal altruism. It is only this feeling that can remove the self-centered motives that cause people to deceive and misuse one another.

> I believe that at every level of society - familial, tribal, national and international - the key to a happier and more successful world is the growth of compassion. We do not need to become religious, nor do we need to believe in an ideology. All that is necessary is for each of us to develop our good human qualities.
Isn't space launch already demand constrained? SpaceX has flown 9 times this year, with a few dozen undated upcoming missions listed as well [0]. He's talking about being able to do tens of thousands of launches per year, but who's going to pay for it? If almost no-one is paying to put a few tons into orbit now, where is the demand for millions of tons a year going to come from?

[0] https://www.spacex.com/missions
> And doj said no problem.

You mean the DoJ who are implicated in the same complaint?
Most employees at career fairs are wearing the same thing. Students don’t know the title of the employee until after the pair has begun talking.
I don't think there is a problem with the product per se; as others have mentioned I only listen to one radio station ever. That isn't a limiting factor for me, and I like the design and aesthetic it gives off. The kicker for me is I can't justify the cost, even if I understand 100% why it costs what it does.

That being said, there are still a lot of people out there in a certain age bracket with a certain life style for whom $60 isn't a big deal and they would be be more than happy to pay that much for something that 'brings them joy'. The Farmers Market set is still out there and living large, even if it isn't quite as rampant as it was a few years ago.

Now if it was $25, I would probably get one in a heartbeat, because that's my 'this isn't going to hurt me and if I enjoy it, why not' price.
Another view is that this is one way (among many) in which detail orientation is reinforced and transmitted as an essential part of the culture.
No, there is no magic formula to make hard things easy. This is the same as the classic "monads are burritos" thing. A programmer spends a week trying to understand monads, and finally it clicks when he makes an analogy with wrapping burritos. So that must mean that burritos are the real way to explain monads, and everybody who didn't use the burrito analogy was being obfuscatory on purpose, right?

Of course not! If that programmer than goes out and tells somebody else that "monads are burritos", they'll have no idea what that vague, nearly nonsensical statement means. You need the context of grappling with the idea over time for an analogy to actually help.

Good textbooks are already extremely optimized for ease of learning; the authors of these books are universally people who started in your position, thinking that everybody would be so much easier to learn if it were just written in sensible language, usually the language they were happening to use when the idea finally clicked for them. And the result ends up hard to understand, because the concept genuinely is hard to understand.
Maybe we should instead invent a domestic 3 phase distribution system. No more zero crossings requiring energy storage, just flat constant power. It would require a new, small four conductor plug to be designed. Total volume of copper would be a less for the same available power, since the three wires deliver twice the power as two single phase wires for the same conductor size. There would be more insulation involved so the wiring might grow or might shrink if outlets were held to 1500watts.

The big savings would be in longer lived electronic devices. A sizable portion of digital electronics ultimately fail because the capacitors in their power supplies exceed their designed lifetime. Electrolytic capacitors (ticking time bombs) are cheap and compact for the capacity so they are used for the energy storage required in single phase systems, but if designing a three phase power supply less storage is required and maybe manufacturers wouldn't have to optimize the smaller, capacitors with electrolytics. I've had a 4k TV and a rather expensive musical instrument amp fail for capacitors this year, about $3000 of gear there. Looking back further there are a couple of professional powered sound reinforcement speakers (twice), an iMac G5 (three times). It's probably safe to say over the decades I've had $10k of electronics fail prematurely from electrolytic capacitor failure. These are all items which were not obsolete or worn out. Scale that up from one person to worldwide and it's easily in the hundreds of billions (10⁹) of dollars which could be saved.

The problem is you can't get there from where we are. No one wants to drag more wires to residential houses, no one wants to shell out >$1k for a household phase converter and then rewire their house. You won't convince people to add three phase to a new house because it might be the future. And you won't convince the semiconductor houses to make a line of three phase power supply controller chips just because, well, maybe someone might use it.

We're probably trapped at a suboptimal local maximum.

Edit: In response to atoav's comment I found IEC 60309 and its extra low voltage variant which is a 42mm (1 2.3") 3 phase plug and connector in two compatible sizes good for 1.3kW and 2.6kW. Also, that Germans and Swedes did the engineering first and then built an electrical system and they get 480V 3 phase at 16A to their cooktops and stoves through a plug for a whopping 13kW!
Because thinking otherwise is saying that nothing really matters, the government can do anything at any time and you are toast no matter what.
If I inform an officer that someone at the supermarket told me they witnessed a murder, I really hope the officer would investigate further even though I didn’t witness it myself.
You can tap a location on the map and have the car drive their... and it seems to generally respect the rules of driving in a parking lot (going up and down the lanes instead of through parking lots) - I wonder if you could get it to park itself...

If not that capability will probably be added in the near future.
According to Kevin Poulsen, this is a hoax.

https://twitter.com/kpoulsen/status/1177734528833445888
Computer science researchers should form partnerships like lawyers and doctors. They could extract far, far more value out of mega corps than they get paid as salary employees. We are at a moment when AI tech is so black box that they could create a company that is itself a black box.
Also, it's not unusual for star professionals in other fields to make that much at nonprofits. E.g. neurosurgeons can often make that much at nonprofit hospitals. And if one gets into executive comp at a large nonprofit, a million a year is no big deal.

But there is a large variance in the nonprofit world, and it's more common for a PhD in CS to earn something like $60K at research nonprofits. Other nonprofit employees - social workers, for instance - have it even worse, earning not much more than minimum wage with Masters degrees. Sadly, many nonprofits capitalize on the idealism of applicants to compensate for poor comp and grueling working conditions.

So the word 'nonprofit' really doesn't convey much information; it all depends on specifics.
Begins with a conclusion of wrongdoing, but doesn't address alternative possibilities such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which Hunter Biden has likely violated.
What country do you live in? In the US, almost every door I’ve ever seen can be unlocked from the inside (but not the outside) without a key.
I'm beginning to suspect that it could be relevant soon. If you wait for such advanced AI that can understand your documentation, you're making it harder than it has to be, kinda like Marcus is saying in OP. You could solve this with just tons of raw data, but that seems unnecessarily hard. For a firm with the usual small dataset, maybe even unrealistically hard.

Anyways, with some naive googling I found these references which seem interesting with regards to lineage and causality (for the query "lineage causal database schema"):

[0] Causality and Explanations in Databases. The "Related topics in Databases" section seems interesting.

[1] Duke's 'Understanding Data: Theory and Applications, Lecture 16: Causality in Databases' (by one of [0]'s authors).

[2] Quantifying Causal Effects on Query Answering in
Databases. This has some interesting definitions.

[3] Causality in Databases. Seems like a more in depth version of [0].

[4] A whole course on "Provenance and lineage"

[5] Causality and the Semantics of Provenance. Defines "provenance graphs" and some properties.

-----------

[0] http://www.vldb.org/pvldb/vol7/p1715-meliou.pdf

[1] https://www2.cs.duke.edu/courses/fall15/compsci590.6/Lecture...

[2] https://www.usenix.org/sites/default/files/conference/protec...

[3] https://www.cs.cornell.edu/home/halpern/papers/DE_Bulletin20...

[4] https://cse.buffalo.edu/~chomicki/cse703-s18.html

[5] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1006.1429.pdf
Libre does support ODBC, perhaps not exactly the same way though.
How do you define "justified"? The field is so new, someone who really knows what they're doing could mean a difference between a large team spending years and getting nowhere remarkable, and improving state of the art every 6 months. With the same exact team. So would you rather get nothing for your money, or something valuable every 6-9 months? That's the question. These people are typically hired after trying pretty hard to get results out of generalists, and failing.
A classical AI company that's working on "a different part of the brain":

https://www.cyc.com/
Any high voltage DC distribution system would require every load to have a single run, with intelligent connectors paired with remote switches to shut off the circuit at detection of any detected alteration of the circuit (eg. Ground fault, capacitance change, etc.)

High voltage DC is spectacularly more dangerous than high voltage AC.
Scholes & Merton also joined a hedge fund that traded based on their models and cased a financial crash after the Russian bond default in 1998 which their models didn't take into account. Great example of a black swan event.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-Term_Capital_Management
People in tech generally have no clue of how much money gets made in finance
This is the network behavior until it isn't. Like the top most comment, Normalization of this technology is building a prison system, someday we might regret it.
Because only two manufacturers make large OLED screens and maybe three make advanced LED screens and they are all massive conglomerates that control the market.