skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
From what I understand from other Googlers, there are internal markets designed to track and allocate compute resources; this is necessary because of their expense, and because of the low marginal value of many possible uses.

> I worked at Google for many years. Google has so much idle compute at any given moment, they tend not to care _at all_ about you using it. It's not a problem for a Google employee to just grab a few thousand cores on a whim and do whatever they want with those cores, and many people do use this freedom.

And it works out for them, does it not? Because the uses are useful on net, even if some of them seem speculative or silly or inefficient. If they weren't, if people were just constantly burning resources to do absolutely nothing, presumably things would change and those resources would be tracked by the markets too or other measures taken. Let Google as a whole decide where to optimize, end to end - don't push it onto individual researchers and guilt-trip them into worrying about whether they are 'green AI' or evil people who hate the planet.

> I think you'll agree that this is pretty terrible.

I would not. I think it's awesome that machine learning is seeing the tiniest crumbs of the resources other fields have (still grossly disproportionate to its potential) invested in it, and we are no longer in a field where all results are reproducible on a $200 gaming GPU run overnight, and this is delivering big gains in performance and surprising nontrivial demonstrations of scalability (which would not be true of, say, IBM Watson). Again, as I said, imagine applying this sort of standard to any other field of science. 'You can't discover the Higgs boson using just 250 watts and a $200 interferometer you bought off eBay, I think you'll agree that this is pretty terrible.' Reproducibility doesn't mean 'should be reproduced, frequently, by anyone, at arbitrarily small budgets'.

> Between two models with approximately the same validation accuracy metrics and inference timings wouldn't you choose the one that's more economical to train?

No, I'd choose the one with the lowest total cost for my purposes. Do you program only in assembler to make sure you write programs with only the most economical runtime costs? What a narrow way of seeing costs... I'm often much more concerned with which one is easier to modify, or to scale, or to reuse for transfer learning, or which runs acceptably for users. The model which is 'more economical to train' is only better on one of many axis, and when someone else like OA or DM pays for it, it is a sunk cost of zero relevance to me. (How much does it matter to me how long it took GPT-2 to train? Not very much! Because I download the trained model and finetune it for other things.)

> Why aren't these metrics even mentioned most of the time?

They typically are. Most DL papers will mention roughly the GPU/TPU count and wallclock time, or you can guess from the training graph or baselines. And that's really all you need to know as you evaluate trainability as one of many cost variables; stuff like CO2 emissions or flops are not.
Same! I'd also be curious to hear about production scenarios that would really benefit from Redis going 5x faster. It's pretty darn fast to start with!
>general opposition to regulation, because compliance costs burden smaller firms more, raising the barrier to entry

In your favor, I'm aware of at least one regional co-op ISP in Minnesota that either shut down or sold out due to the reporting/compliance overhead that Title 2 placed on them. This isn't a conspiracy theory, this is simple organizational dynamics - larger corporations are able to absorb larger regulatory burdens that smaller players cannot.

This is something that NN advocates seem to have a very hard time accepting. The law that was shot down wasn't "net neutrality", it was classifying ISPs whole of Title 2 (which is a ginormous blob of legislation, minus a couple of "forbeared" provisions) which had a specific form of net neutrality as one of its many provisions.

>reduces choices for consumers

This, I don't get. How so? What choice is being meaningfully restricted by the requirement that you don't discriminate based on source or destination?

>Most Americans have less than 3 ISPs. This may be true depending on how you restrict which ISPs you're referring to.

Mobile carriers are not realistic internet providers for daily home use because of draconian bandwidth caps and other forms of fuckery (like restricting video streams to 480p) even when "unlimited", and that's not getting into the latency/reliability issues that make things like online gaming difficult.

Most people will have a telephone company and a cable TV company to choose from, with a smattering of third party DSL carriers (that still require the telephone company's lines), and some very niche options like fixed wireless (see latency/reliability) or satellite (high pings and bandwidth caps).

----

I do think it's interesting that most of the doomsaying has yet to come true. I don't think there's any demand for these tightly segregated services NN people seem to think we'll get, or else we would have seen meaningful, industry-wide pushes in that direction, and as for speeds, they've only been increasing.
Let's say that the 20% rate applies to income tax, corporation tax, dividend tax and capital gain tax.

When a company allocates $100 to its employee, the employee receives $100 of salary, pays $20 of income tax, and ends up with $80.

When a company allocates $100 to its shareholder, it's first considered as profit, so the company pays $20 in corporation tax, the shareholder receives $80 of dividends, pays $16 of dividend tax, and ends up with $66.

When a company has $100 profit but does not distribute any dividends, it has to pays $20 in corporation tax, so the shareholder value increases by $80, so if the shareholder sells the share, he receives $80 of capital gain, pays $16 of dividend tax, and ends up with $66.

So, yes, if the all the tax rates are the same, you actually end up taxing capital more than salaried income, which would be a big incentive against creating your own company.
I understand this is an unpopular SCOTUS ruling/decision but I don't understand why a comment summarizing and linking to the case is worthy of downvotes? Is something about this comment inaccurate or misleading in some way that I'm missing?
Something more prosaic, like removing the gay flag emoji in countries where it's frowned upon.
Indeed. C++ seems to be having a bit of a rennaissance now, and that was created in 1979!
This is NIMBYism trying to conceal itself with faux-progressivism ("but big developers! infrastructure!").

The more requirements you tack on to any kind of housing development, the more expensive it becomes to build housing, and so projects on the margin get killed and rents go ever-higher. That's not acceptable.

If Magnolia needs new infrastructure, that should be handled by the city government, and funding for it should come from city-wide property taxes or municipal bonds. Tying infrastructure funding to individual housing projects is silly, and if I'm being cynically honest, I have a feeling it's a fig leaf to mask that the real goal is to just kill the project entirely.
Even if ignoring the huge overpopulation concern, I'm still not so optimistic. How much social progress has happened simply because older people die off and can no longer vote? If we still had a significant population of people born in the 1700s, what might U.S. politics look like?
I've never heard anyone suggest that WebGPU would be appropriate for ML training workloads. Maybe inference, but not training.
A lot of convoluted discussion going on here. The simple truth is that in America we tax income earned from having wealth at a much lower rate than income earned from work.

And lower income earners pay a larger portion of their income to payroll taxes than the highest income earners.
So many things to say in response to this article but lets start here: "Your standups are killing your velocity."

Agile in general is about predictability first and measuring a predictable velocity. Predictable velocity answers a very important question for product management which is "When can we release".

Additionally, Agile Methodology touts Cross Functional Teams where each developer is not a specialist in any one area of the product necessarily. The daily standup is a good place to indicate that a dev has run into an obstacle and seek guidance from someone else on the cross functional team who may in fact be the in house expert on that issue.

Guidance in this case typically comes in the form of "Oh, XYZ Thing, I built that - the code you're looking for is in /secret/stuff and if you look in there I think you will find what you're looking for".

What guidance is not: "Im having trouble with XYZ - will someone else on the team TOTALLY DROP THEIR SPRINT COMMITMENTS AND DO MY JOB FOR ME".

Agile and its daily standups are not about increasing velocity. They are about ensuring predictable velocity at the cost of absolute velocity (the max the team may be capable of performing at which itself will vary from sprint to sprint).

Now, all that aside, the real value of the daily standup is obviously accountability. That little 15 minute meeting forces a slacker to stand up in front of the rest of the team and clearly indicate that they either are or are not pulling their weight. Used properly it can be a very motivating practice.

Perhaps the author works in a place where every team member is a one person gang capable of independently completing any task whatsoever in the bounds of a sprint. In such an environment Agile itself does become a bottleneck. In the prefect world Agile is absolutely unnecessary - but most of us live in a world thats far from perfect.

In summary, Agile as a whole and certainly daily standups can and do act as a drag on the velocity of a proficient team. However the purpose of these practices is not to maximize velocity but rather to ensure a floor for velocity such that a team may never achieve its maximum potential but will instead continue to reliably deliver a velocity that is constant and predictable. Think of this as a sort of Productivity Insurance Policy and it makes a lot more sense.

*Additionally - I know of no law that restricts a developer from reaching out for assistance/additional guidance immediately on discovery of a blocking issue. The daily standup is just a convenient place where you have a crack at communicating with the whole team in one place. Typically with some manager type lurking quietly on the call like a parent keeping an ear on the kids playing in the other room.
Lots of reassuring news about Tesla recently. Odd. And reassuring. Which is odd.
Might as well plug my similar project here: https://github.com/mrmekon/connectr

A minimal Spotify controller for the menubar/systray. I mostly play on speakers, though sometimes librespot on my desktop to avoid running the hog of the Spotify app. The main feature for me, though, is the alarm clock; I set a raspberry pi to push a new release playlist to one of my speakers every morning.
The basis of the lawsuit was that there was some submit-your-ow-pizza contest thing that you could only do on the website, not on the phone.
> If one would never hear about Taiwan, would we really "know" it exists?

It's a sort of reverse branding exercise. If you can reduce exposure as much as possible there's not going to be a lot of sentiment for supporting the cause. What would be of Palestine today without the exposure that has been directed at it.
Those that forcibly suppress of opposing thought on pronouns share characteristics that define fascism.
Personally I just do time machine over the air. You just need to setup a Netatalk server with mdns on a raspberry pi or any other spare computer and that’s it.

Now I’m trying to sort out how to push backups over vpn since it’s not identifying the drive correctly, but when I’m home it’s flawless.
Unite Us (https://www.uniteus.com/) | Software Engineer (at least 4 years of experience) | NYC or REMOTE | Full-Time

Unite Us is a technology startup that builds coordinated care networks of health and human service providers to address all determinants of health.

We've been mentioned in 2019 CB Insights List of 150 Most Innovative Digital Health Startups.

We are looking for:

* Full-Stack, Backend, and Frontend Engineers: https://www.uniteus.com/job-openings/?gh_jid=4325466002

* Software Engineer in Test: https://www.uniteus.com/job-openings/?gh_jid=4373314002
In China, any mapping app is ran through the government owned mapping servers. Apple Maps, Google Maps, etc., are all using Chinese servers deployed and ran by external Chinese teams.
They all have to be saved somewhere. A lot of Mac only apps also use the defaults[0] system which allows you to read/write values there.

man defaults
defaults domains | tr " " "\n"
defaults read com.apple.Safari

For dot files, I personally use stow[1] but there are other utilities and workflows out there[2].

[0] https://ss64.com/osx/defaults.html
[1] https://www.gnu.org/software/stow/
[2] https://dotfiles.github.io/
> The USA has a large number of regressive taxes, which tax the poor more heavily than the rich. These have been steadily expanded. And it has one, only one, progressive tax - the federal (not state) income tax - which has been steadily made less progressive in recent years to the point where overall taxation is at best flat and more likely slightly regressive.

Citation needed. Saying the US has "only one" progressive tax is a bit ridiculous. The income tax is by far the largest tax almost anyone pays. It's certainly the largest tax I, and everyone I know, pay. And that only increases as you get richer.
> an organization with an opinion in its name is not a trustworthy organization TO ME

You have a strange life for that to be considered a "tip".

I'm usually ok with the Federal Reserve or Green Peace or Humane Society or whatever.
The article is geared towards front end engineers, clarifying how and when to compress images and which formats to choose. It stresses the importance of the image context more than the technicalities of the image. This context can also lead to the decision to choose other types of image, such as choosing a simplified drawing instead of a photo when the image context is icon-like.
> Are they trustworthy?

Most are, yes, and the community is pretty good at pointing out the ones that aren't.

But the real question is are they any less trustworthy than Google itself and the phone manufacturers? From what I've observed, they are more trustworthy that that crowd.
Imagine that the war of 1812 had resulted a complete British/Canadian conquest of the US, which lasted for the most of the 19th century. Then imagine that Florida had successfully seceded from the US after WWII and joined the Soviet Union, along with all of Canada. Then finally imagine that the Soviet Union won the Cold War and has been the sole world superpower for the last thirty years.

How would we feel, in that world, if the US government wanted to censor people mentioning Florida? Of course there would be complicated questions about whether that censorship was ethical or helpful, and about the government's real motivations for proposing it. But I think it would be clear to everyone involved that "kindergarten levels of pettiness" wasn't the right starting point for understanding those motivations.
>TikTok did it with aggressive traditional Google and Facebook ads

weird everyone my age (20s) and younger know of tiktok through twitter/youtube

never new tiktok had ads on fb, weird for them to target boomers
ZkSENSE: A privacy-preserving mechanism for bot detection in mobile devices
You could perhaps claim that perspective (gimp masks) as well, since they typically reduce motor range or flexibility.
True, but they also need to earn money. See last week's south park about exactly that.
I like the concept, but I'm not sure that the Z-80 is the best implementation substrate -- it's got a lot of oddball properties and special case instruction encodings (due in part to the way things were squeezed in around the base 8080 instruction set).

A PDP-8 can be implemented in fewer transistors (original DEC wiring diagrams are on bitsavers, and github has source for several clones in Verilog), and DEC already shipped a moderately full software suite for it.
Dream?? https://www.computerworld.com/article/3438856/call-me-crazy-...
Ah, yes, the "tax the living hell out of the working poor" tax plan.
At-Liberty Podcast: Edward Snowden Permanent Record
Vine was unprofitable and i'm sure outside of sleazy Chinese data stealing, TikTok is as well.
There's low amounts of evidence because electric cars are so new but common sense would dictate that the simpler a machine is the less it will break all things being equal. Even if the current generation have issues, applying Toyota's continuous improvement paradigm to the process will ensure that they quickly speed up.
> Care to share where you saw the model 3 not being profitable?

https://ir.tesla.com/node/19496/html

The above 10k reports a $976 Million loss for 2018. If you want to "Ctrl-F" something, try "Net Loss", which should bring you to the $976 Million loss in the financial sheets. Or search for "(976,091)", which is the precise number in that 10k for their Net Loss.

--------

The 10Q reports (quarterly) for 2019 aren't much better.

Q1 2019 reports a $702 Million loss (in ONE quarter!!): https://ir.tesla.com/node/19771/html

Q2 2019 reports a $389 Million loss: https://ir.tesla.com/node/20111/html

H1 2019 has lost $1.09 Billion loss, and there's 2 quarters left in this year. Even if Q3 2019 ends up profitable (and I find that unlikely), there's basically no chance for 2019 to be profitable either.

Tesla has bet it all (again) on Shanghai Gigafactory 3. The Model 3 rollout to the USA has been wildly unprofitable, Tesla needs to sell significantly more vehicles at significantly higher prices.

Gigafactory Shanghai will arguably help, but that's another $5 Billion bet, and Gigafactory 1 isn't even paid off yet. (Gigafactory 1 was paid with debt due 2019 and 2022. The 2019 debt was rolled over to 2014, and 2022 isn't looking too hot IMO).

Tesla has time to turn things around before 2022. Although, maybe Musk can pull a Musk again and convince everybody that the company is worthwhile and all the bondholders offer another $Billion loan. Clearly it worked for rolling over the 2019 debt, but I have my doubts that it will keep working.

--------

EDIT: Elon Musk likes to confuse the issue by talking about "Gross Profits". Yes, Tesla has a "gross profit", but most people don't actually know what that means. When people talk about "profits / loss", they typically mean "net profit".

The TL;DR is that financial sheets talk about 4 kinds of money: Revenue, Gross, Operating, and finally Net. "Net" is the bottom line, while "Revenue" is every dollar that ever came into the company (usually sales).

Gross (aka "Gross Profits") subtracts "COGS", cost of goods sold. Operating (aka: Operating Profits or EBITDA) subtracts marketing / sales / other costs, and finally "Net" subtracts out debt and taxes.

So Musk confuses the issue because he talks "Gross Profits" when most CEOs really talk about "Net Profits".
barely, and the point of the chart is that over the past 70 years the gap has gone from being being very progressive to almost flat or regressive based on income level.
I've downvoted this because it contains no sort of reasoning. It's essentially "I feel".

Obviously a restricted supply of housing with reasonable commute times via public transit affects the middle class in Seattle. There's a supply/demand problem created by people fighting for zoning regulations in areas like Queen Anne that are actively hostile to anyone who doesn't live there already.

Wanting to live in single family housing near the city and enforcing it legally is exactly why public transit projects like subways become impossible. You need to have critical pockets of density before it becomes a sensible investment.
Famously, the nominal top rate used to be in the nineties.
macOS Catalina
Yeah that was my first thought. Doesn't need to be a full replacement, if side effects are minuscule and long term, this would be a superb buffer. Many hospitals are asking for donations. Well now they might ask for subventions :p
Fancy Believing in the Goblin King (2017)
It also tells China how useful Apple is to US intelligence efforts.

Setting aside the financial aspect, if Apple is unwilling to make a stand here, then they can infer that Apple is not willing to lose access to the market over this.

If they push further and further in a "measured" approach, they can detect resistance. If Apple gets close to the point where they are willing to fight / bail. They it's likely because the situation is getting to the point where its a losing deal. By knowing the costs they impose, they can measure the value to Apple.

By controlling for the financial aspect (which they can calculate based on production costs + sales), they can figure out a rough value of the intel and it's nature.

Of course, that's assuming Apple acts rationally, which would be ill-advised.
I think there is a key language ambiguity here. Whatever your position on what the rich should pay, there is a question of what is being paid as a proportional rate of total income, vs what is being paid in absolute terms. Confounding that difference are also issues of income tax rate, vs capital gains rates and wealth vs income.

The wealthy pay in absolute terms, more dollars, but they pay a lower rate than others.
Larry Niven's most famous work Ringworld, inspired both of the massively popular games Magic the Gathering, and Halo: Combat Evolved.

I suspect that Niven and Fillmore have roughly equal name recognition, though, simply by the nature that Niven is still alive, and appears to be more consequential long term.
To be fair, the scope of a project that would require the ability to jailbreak / root arbitrary mobile devices running arbitrary OS versions would be massive, much less creating an OS that would run on all of them.

Smart phones are a lot of things, but general purpose computers are not one of them.
There are a bunch of niche ones still, they either go way low end or way high end. I have a FiiO X5 for my "regular" mp3 player and a Sansa Clip Sport for my workout one.

Sadly, I work a daytime job and don't really have the time or will to actually capitalize on this. I do think that'd be a great way for Rockbox to fund themselves though. Make a Kickstarter with Rockbox officially supporting it, and the profits could go to the upkeep of rockbox.
Someone check my understanding here:

>If the memory is negatively correlated, a positive change will be most likely followed by a negative change, and the path will be much more random.

Wouldn't the path be less random because you're introducing constraints? Perhaps a better phrasing would be "the path will be much more variable"?
I've always considered the single-threaded nature of Redis to be one of its greatest features.
"I don't see why capital gains should be taxed lower."

The point of taxing capital gains lower than income is to encourage the wealthy to invest rather than hoard their wealth. This is good because invested money helps drive economic growth which is usually good for everyone.
yes, that's very useful for discussions. down vote people for saying what they feel. this isn't a research paper.

> "Wanting to live in single family housing near the city and enforcing it legally is exactly why public transit projects like subways become impossible. You need to have critical pockets of density before it becomes a sensible investment."

Also, Philadelphia has a ton of single family homes, and one of the best subways in the country. You are just simply wrong.