skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If he hasn't very publicly retracted that view and apologized (and: he hasn't), then he shouldn't be surprised that people aren't willing to give him the benefit of the doubt when he talks about sex crimes.
It would seem a bit counterproductive to me to use a software renderer when a graphics API will give you a ton of the desired functionality out of the box, and will have better performance characteristics.
FSN Lost 50% of Its Value Amid Hacking
What would be a good resource to get started with Phoenix / Elixir, coming from Node/EJS/React it seems very daunting
Interesting to see deep learning techniques entering the realms of non-cs focused academia. I recently heard of another example from the Planet Money podcast[1], that used deep learning to perform an elephant census.

One of my favorite things about ML is using it to reduce human labor hours on tasks like these.

[1]https://www.npr.org/2019/08/09/749938354/episode-932-deep-le...
Sometimes planting a tree is actually bad. We've introduced specific species into our environment for decorative or other purposes before and then ended up regretting it because it was a bad decision [1]. There's also the issue of when we mass-plant a specific tree species and then the trees all get devastated by disease (due to being a monoculture), creating a massive fire hazard [2].

So we need to plant more trees, but it goes beyond 'appropriate for the ecosystem', we have to consider very many factors to anticipate whether the trees we're planting will be a nuisance or even a hazard in 10 years and whether they will even survive to sink carbon. We need to make sure we plant a good mix of native species to ensure that they'll survive diseases and shifts in weather, but also deal with the fact that not every species grows at the same speed somehow. Forests are complex ecosystems and we basically have to build new ones from scratch to really have an impact here, and that's more complex than just planting some trees.

I used to be a big fan of Just Plant Some Trees but after seeing the impact of the two things I cite below I've developed some skepticism of the idea that we can just apply Tree Planting as a blunt-force instrument to compensate for all the damage we're inflicting on existing trees.

1: https://www.kqed.org/science/4209/eucalyptus-california-icon...

2: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/flexibility-...
> I sorely regret the decision and consider it to have fundamentally ruined my life beyond repair.

This is an incredibly worrying statement; nobody should feel that way. Do you mind if I ask why you think it has not only ruined your life but so much that it is unrepairable?
> Imagine hackers being exiled to Mexico, and being let in on the precondition that they spend the first X years working on improving Mexico's public infrastructure.

I think people would even volunteer to do that for free if the willingness was there, but it isn't really.
How dystopian - our murderbots will be held accountable by our lawyerbots.
That might be necessary, but it's not sufficient; there are many users who are not "verified" who are very convinced of their own importance;)
Right. There is however an argument that the smaller total impulse a stage does (RD-58 is used for upper stages, where the stage mass is closer to the stage payload), the smaller the relative mass of fuel+engine of that stage is, and so the fixed mass of the bigger nozzle added to the stage costs more, in Tsiolkovsky equation, that the mass for the bigger stage. Going further, we can argue that for larger stages it's beneficial to spend some mass on nozzle, because that mass is used for larger impulse provided by the stage.

Interesting that using http://rocketworkbench.sourceforge.net/equil.phtml I couldn't get declared Isp (380) for methane-LOX for reasonable nozzle expansion ratios. Maybe the model is too approximate...
>paid date

Well that's one way to phrase it.
The UK has some of the best tech and some of the worst politics in all of Europe.

Considering the talent available, the country really has been badly run to the point of criminality.
Solution is always "provide incentives" for any meaningful change to happen. Without incentives , without recognition, without working on human mentality nothing changes.
Google Assistant phone calls are damaging consumers and restaurants
California law allows college athletes to be paid
If you look at the animated map on the Washington Post website it shows that especially in northern Romania deforestation has taken place in the second half of the 20th century, so the article does not contradict your data.
"Deterrence in relation to criminal offending is the idea or theory that the threat of punishment will deter people from committing crime and reduce the probability and/or level of offending in society." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterrence_(penology)

So, punishment as a deterrent is currently a theory.
Yeah, and IMO it's not even a good theoretical way to look at an analog computer. The hard part that will eat up time is differentiating the small differences between spaghetti to arbitrary precision. Analog systems still have to deal with signal to noise ratio issues, which affects the decision criteria here as in, "which one of these is the next longest?".
I agree drug use is better treated with addiction therapy than prison.

But the article in question is about a human trafficker. How does giving a human trafficker "education" (free college?) deter them from doing more trafficking?
But I have parents. Do you think I was raised in a vacuum?
> I am absolutely am, though I've also done my own climate reconstructions from raw, unadjusted data, which was the beginning of me deciding which 'side' of this debate was correct and honest, and which side were clowns. That is to say after doing the math myself it became clear one side was not even arguing in good faith, or incredibly ignorant.

There are people on the other side of the issue who have done the same thing and come to the opposite conclusion. For example, over 500 scientists and engineers recently signed a letter to the U.N. saying:

· “Nature as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming”
· “Warming is far slower than predicted”
· “Climate policy relies on inadequate models”
· Carbon dioxide is “plant food, the basis of all life on Earth”
· “Global warming has not increased natural disasters”
· “Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities”

Signers of the letter include: MIT professor emeritus Richard Lindzen; Freeman Dyson of the Institute of Advanced Studies at Princeton, and Stanford University professor emeritus Elliott D. Bloom, as well as several signers formerly affiliated with NASA.

Are they all "incredibly ignorant clowns, not even arguing in good faith"?
I would offer that a lot of proposals like Project Vesta sound great, but are massive-scale geo-engineering projects that could, themselves, have unintended consequences.
Could you elaborate why you assume that your knowledge and skills can't be recycled in another (engineering) area?
If money is not a concern, being an artist is exciting.

Being a good hacker really helps with creative processes.
My intent was not to attack you but rather the idea that contributing to internet forums somehow gives you any ownership rights to the forum.

For example, I don't know if HN makes money off this forum, but all of us commenters are contributing content that furthers the site's goals (hopefully). Yes, dang and sctb are paid to moderate this forum, but if there were no comments, there would be nothing to moderate.

Does that mean that by virtue of participating here for seven years I somehow have some right to tell them how to run their business? No, because there's no employment agreement. And even if there were any agreement, I doubt we would have the ability to do anything about some sudden change in direction from the C suite.

The realization that mere comments or the moderation of them on an internet forum create uncompensated content that someone else may profit from is apparently not as plain as I thought it was.
I disagree with you, but don't understand the down-votes. It's a popular point of view with a long history and deserves to be addressed.

You're quite right in that corporate structures do disperse liabilities. It's there in the name - limited liability company. However there are well established standard mechanisms for balancing out that real and tangible benefit, which are taxation and regulation.

Public corporate ownership is all very well, I'm not in principle against it in certain areas. However what I suspect you are advocating is enforced public ownership, i.e. the prohibition of private companies and socialisation of the entire economy. That hits two big problems.

The first problem is purely practical really - it doesn't work. It's been tried over and over again, and is a recipe for disaster. Now I'm not saying all public companies will fail, not at all it can work fine for some activities particularly utilities and social services. I'm saying that resorting to public ownership across whole economies fails. Every time.

The second issue should really be the first in terms of priorities really. Forcing universal public ownership and prohibiting private enterprise is oppression, pure and simple. Capitalism is just the exercise of individual freedoms and rights of ownership over property and capital, and free association with others. That's it. That's all it is. You don't even really need limited liability, although I think that is a reasonable and well proven enhancement when balanced by appropriate regulation in the public interest.
A chef in the army usually isn't trying to poison people's bodies so we would have little worry about them trying to do it in their private restaurant.

A propagandist for the military is charged with poisoning people's minds and so we should therefore be very worried if they take up similar positions in the private sector.
Being alone is not healthy whatsoever. I dread to think of his mental condition.
I distribute my thoughts using email. I have not hit it's scalability limits yet. I cry when I think that in some future I will have to be under some proprietary platform control to distribute my thoughts.

> The reality is that you can't.

The reality is that is was solved a while ago, the solution is rss and email.

Instagram instead offers popularity and nice photo filters and colored ticks on avatars. Which are nothing in common with distributing thoughts.
The software industry is where quality goes to die, if anything the surge in popularity proves the point
Off topic, but that link doesn’t work because it redirects through guce.advertising.com and I use a pi hole. I wonder if it was a deliberate decision to redirect traffic away from the site to an ad server to have it redirect back after trackers are set. Maybe they don’t care that they lost the adblock users. Still, it seems like there’s a better way than to redirect all traffic away. That makes no sense to me.
When Go fanboys say stuff like "avoid weak and no typed programming languages" in relation to Go, it just shows they don't know much about type systems.

"No typed programming languages" aren't a thing. Some type is inherent to any programming language that runs on a computer, because at some point you have to shove the data into a range of memory and it will either fit or it won't. Assembly has types. They are very weak types, but they are types.

On a continuum of weak vs. strong types, Go is very much a weakly-typed language. If you think it's strongly typed, it's probably because of two things: 1) you don't have any experience with a strongly typed language like Haskell or OCaml, and 2) you don't know the difference between strong/weak types and static/dynamic types. There's a widespread misconception among Go programmers that Go has a stronger type system than Python, which is pretty false: Go's type system is more static than Python's, but it's definitely weaker than Python's in a few ways. Go does have a stronger type system than C, but that's not saying much.
This is an important consideration. Our lives are the best they have been in, well, ever. And our lives are better for the very reasons that cause problems with the environment.

Solutions to these problems really do need to take the human factor into consideration as well. Failing to do so will continue the flailing we're currently seeing.

Planting trees is a great start; I know of few people who want fewer trees.
Even if it's not as effective as other alternatives, I think it is most likely at least something of a deterrent. For example, I hear of criminals purposely avoiding crimes with more serious punishments (e.g. mugging someone but avoiding hurting or killing them).

In addition, there's a saying that "locks don't keep criminals out, they just keep honest people honest". I think it's likely that punishment at least serves a similar role.

Granted, I think we would probably both agree that the US justice system (for example) is too focused on punishment and not enough on rehabilitation.
Regarding climate change ancient forest is neutral, as it releases the same amount of carbon that it absorbs. Forestation on the other hand creates carbon storage, which is a very nice thing to have these days.
I very much disagree with the general tenor of the comments. True, a Ph.D won't directly translate into more money, or more exciting job prospects. Also true, a Ph.D isn't a golden key to life.

A Ph.D in a solid field gives you a new set of tools for solving problems, and it gives you the luxury of digging very deeply into a subject you find rich/stimulating/opportune. I walked out with:

- deep knowledge of cutting edge techniques in my field
- a network of world-class experts to whom I could turn when faced with interesting business/engineering problems
- years of practice in solving hard problems

> I much prefer creating things.

A good Ph.D serves your ability to create.

> I'll be stuck doing things that bore me after a number of years, with no room to grow to more interesting things.

You don't have to stay in academia for your Ph.D to be valuable.

>I also think I'm just not that bright and that a PhD would be a huge intellectual challenge for me.

None of us are "that bright". That's the whole point of the Ph.D.
Listen, one person saving plastic bags won't save the environment, and sometimes when I hear a self-righteous person making a big deal about "eating local" -- which may or may not be fuel efficient -- my eyes roll.

But there are some lifestyle changes that, if we could convince a large section of the population to do it, may make some real difference. Like eating less meat -- and eating less food (see https://bigthink.com/surprising-science/obesity-climate-chan... ).
In reality, the public has just woken up to the fact that VCs were dumping bags of shit on them at absurdly inflated valuations, and that many of these bags of shit are destined for bankruptcy due to cash burn - they are commonly outright frauds designed to siphon cash from the uneducated public investor class to enrich VCs and founders. Fuck greedy VCs if they want to dump their money into frauds and flip it onto the public. Fuck these criminals to hell. I hope they go bankrupt if they don't figure out that that is the real shit going on here.

VCs: Quit whining about the public using their brains to avoid your fucking scams.
This is a great first step. College athletes are extremely exploited. The amount of value they bring the universities vs. benefits they currently receive is laughable. It's wild to read about coaches who make millions of dollars per year coaching these teams complain about the athletes being entitled.
Great job.

On the "Why may I want to use Mesh instead of..." you may consider describing why I would want to use mesh instead of jupyter notebooks.
" Intel and AMD for example employ a ton of PhDs."
Not for their titles, but for their skills. This is what I have also said.
In the Loop – September 30, 2019
In HN, asterisks denote italics, which is troublesome for citing pieces of code in-line. Look at your rendered comment!

Reliable code formatting is achieved by putting code in its own paragraph that has at least two leading spaces on each line.
Most law firms will be limited liability partnerships these days, and will have professional liability insurance.
Mars: Facebook keeps maps current and accurate
I remember the change from paper bags to plastic bags. It was a huge step up in terms of usability and convenience. However you decide to replace plastics, it needs to take in mind the convenience and hygiene that plastics brought to the table.
> CEO wants to make $20M? Nobody in the company can make less than $200k. Seems fair to me.

This seems likely to result in a situation where any work that can be is performed by external contractors not "in the company". Unfortunately, it's very hard (or maybe impossible) to legislate what things should cost.
Trees are Big O in the carbon sink direction. Switching to renewable bags or paper straws is just making your huge carbon footprint slightly less huge by sub-percentiles.

Plant 100,000 trees in a summer though and you’ve more or less offset your life’s consumption - cheeseburgers or no.
“Troubling Trends in Machine Learning Scholarship”
That's a narrow view of the word "support." Her father doesn't support her meth addiction.
I don't know for sure whether it's natural or not, but I keep wondering: imagine someone runs a groundbreaking research which eliminates all the possible biases and digs to the root of the issue. And it turns out the difference is natural Is any member of our corporation diversity board going to apologize then?
Fox Sports’ NFL 4K HDR Fiasco Is an Embarrassment for the Whole AV Industry
Elemental sulfur isn't all that nasty, it would be fine in a pile somewhere. The issue is dispersing it into ecosystems quickly. Kind of like fixed nitrogen, which like sulfur is a nutrient
I would try. It would be almost impossible in the current climate though, so I would be unlikely to succeed given that I myself could be removed over my position as soon as someone says something distasteful and I'm accused of either supporting it or creating a hostile environment for other employees. But the world I want to live in is one where employers take no action whatsoever for opinions expressed off the clock.
Not speedy even if you go back ~ 90 years ;-)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schienenzeppelin
Quick Answer: No it will not.

I have a Ph.D, and I have worked both as an academic and as a developer (at Apple). More than half the people in my group at Apple had PhDs, but I would say that their degree was irrelevant to their position and job. What mattered was the skill and passion they brought to their work.

The people I met who were truly happy in their job (either in university of industry) were the ones who loved what they did. If you love doing research, and all that goes with it: reading articles, writing papers, advancing knowledge, then, assuming you have talent too, you will be happy as an academic, and you will need a PhD. If, on the other hand, you want to be creative, contribute to a team effort, work with like minded others, then you do not need a PhD. I do not believe that getting a PhD will give you "expertise/knowledge/academic maturity".

Personally, I learned WAY more outside of university, and tackled much more interesting problems after I left. My post-research life was much happier than my research life.

Good luck.
I have always wondered what would happen if we could find a way to grow floating barges that would provide an environment for algae (and potentially other organisms) to grow in the oceanic deserts. There is a huge area that could work as a carbon sink there.
I want to agree, but the problem is that you now need 10 versions for many operations that are in a string library. Hidden assumptions -- like 'replacing a character in a string can never fail' -- may fail (eg in an email address type which only allows only a limited char set). Some constraints can't be expressed without dependent types (say you want to define a URI type that limits the length to 2000 chars total but is composed of variable length components, like the domain name, query strings etc).
So give it a several year phase-in period, and provide mechanisms to remove/permanently disable the systems.
If it is, I wonder if we could use it as a gravity slingshot to "fire" interstellar probes at incredible velocities? Imagine the Oberth effect kick you'd get from that!

They'd never be able to slow down but they could do flyby missions of extrasolar planets, etc.

In the much further future maybe it could fling interstellar spacecraft that carry enough propellant to slow down. Basically you'd get the acceleration for free and just have to decelerate at the end.

That black hole could be our Stargate, though in a less sexy way than the movies. :)
WeWork Pulls IPO Filing
KTM Lovers KTM 790 Full Review
That's not a scientific claim, because it's not falsifiable. It's a pseudoscientific one, based on computer models that have not proven accurate, and which they admit low confidence in.

Therefore, to say, "However big they seemed compared to the past, they're nothing compared to the future," is clearly unscientific, alarmist propaganda. Of course, it's not surprising, given that some scientists have advocated misleading the public on this matter for over 20 years.[0]

0: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21115712
> I do, because trying to manipulate people's emotions is the lowest form of argumentation.

You claim this, but the rest of your post is primarily about emotions. You want people to admit they were wrong, as if that makes any difference to the science.

> Start off by admitting that scientists aren't always correct

I can't imagine you could find a single scientist who wouldn't admit this, but ironically the example you give, "the ice age predictions of the 70s", is a common myth propagated by global heating deniers. See [0].

> ("the science is settled" is one of the dumbest phrases ever uttered)

The science is settled. Why do you think it's dumb?

[0] https://skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s.ht...
If you look at legal theory, the actual reasons for punishment are a mixture of deterrence, prevention, rehabilitation and retribution.

It is certainly possible to question how well any of these goals are met, or even the overall framework. But it is useful to start with the reality of how folks talk about punishment in a criminal justice context.

Ref: search "purpose of criminal punishment" and pick one.
So, do you think the entire concept of reservists should be abolished?
The adjective you're looking for is "anti-competitive"
Planting trees is good, but it won't solve our problems. It would be nice if governments first halt and prohibit the destruction of our existing forests in case that happens for a profit. Same counts for all other resources like gas, oil, minerals, etc.. It should not be possible to farm that for profit, it should only be allowed when there is a real proven need where the loss can be calculated and compensated to assure future life and to prevent the extinction of species.

If this depletion of resources continues at the current rate, we are in fact committing suicide at a planetary scale. The sad thing is that we can only look and talk about it, there is no control by anyone. We wanted democracy, well this is one of the traits of democracy. No control, but above all discussion and corruption(for profit). I'm afraid that if our governing systems remain dictatorial, communist, democratic, etc.. we won't make it into the next century. Mankind will eventually destroy itself(and other species) because of a lack of an intelligent governing system.
A masters program in forensics..