skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In my opinion, the best way to learn about abstract algebraic structures is to sit down with a book and write some proofs. That’s the purpose of these structures, to provide a minimal language for describing the behavior of mathematical objects for the purpose of exposition or proof. For example, prove that given any element g of a finite group G that there exists a positive integer k such that g^k is the identity element.

“Implementing” (with big scare quotes) algebraic structures by essentially implementing what appear to be “interfaces” (or traits or type classes or ...) might give you a brief “aha!” about what an abstract algebraic structure is on the surface, but won’t give much insight or practical use beyond that. Critically, one of the many hugely lacking aspects in this approach to implementing these structures in a language like Rust (or Haskell or ...) is that one needs to prove that these interfaces satisfy the axiomatic laws of the structure.

I maintain a library that allows one to compute with groups of permutations. The entire library—thousands of lines of fiddly code—is dedicated to one and only one algebraic structure (the group) on one and only one kind of object (the permutation). Countless papers have been written about just this combination, and should give you some appreciation for the depth of this subject. Slapping on a “identity” and “mul” implementation to a “Permutation” object doesn’t do justice.
I was taught to hold birds like that, TIL it has a name and it's a thing.

IANAO, but it works on herons and pelicans.
Few things:

- Get your accounting in order. Pay a professional to do it; don't try to do it yourself.

- Take care of yourself. You'll probably be flying a lot; don't take the cheapest routes, tell the client it's business at >4 hours in the air, etc.

- I unfortunately get brought into a lot of situations where a CEO / VP is looking for justification in firing someone or making a big structural change. In these cases, it's important to keep in mind that you're working for the person who is paying your fee and to not get hung up on trying to fix the situation. It sucks.

- Charge a lot. Think up the largest number you believe would be reasonable for your services and multiply that by 1.5x. Consultants are supposed to be expensive.

- You'll be amazed by how many people reach out and want to take phone calls to go on fishing expeditions / mine you for free value. The way I deal with this is: A) I ask very pointed questions about what, exactly, they're looking for in an engagement via email before I take a call. If they don't have a compelling need, I decline ("I don't think this is a good fit for me." -> be blunt) and B) I have developed a 6th sense for whether a company can afford me / the project sounds viable. If you have enough inbound, don't be afraid of false positives in turning down phone calls.

- Don't bill hourly. I charge per project on the basis of value; if a potential client fights you on this, reject them.

- Try to get work on a retainer basis. You're being paid to not only do work but to be available -- you're a service provider. This is nice because the revenue "stacks" up and you also get more integrated into the team this way as it frames you as a source of insight / wisdom. If you're using consulting as an entry point into a new role, this is very effective.

- Build something proprietary: an Excel model, some tech, an audit framework, a taxonomy, whatever. Brand it. That's now "your thing" and you can set a market price for it that is divorced from incremental work.

- Build out a proprietary funnel for business: a blog, Twitter presence, whatever. If you have to go find business on your own / do sales, you can't charge as much as when people come to you.

- In general, I think it's good to be skeptical and to err on the side of telling people "no." There are a ton of lightweights / window shoppers / sleazy people out there; get good at detecting them and rejecting them quickly.

- NOTHING IS FREE. You don't pitch, you don't do exploratory onsites, you don't give samples, you don't take "no-agenda meetings," you don't let people "pick your brain." You are a consultant and if people want your insight, they need to pay you for it. Internalize this phrase: F* YOU, PAY ME.
"I have my own media server"

Is this accessible online, or just at your house?
> But as you grow, that ten percent of underperforming people becomes large in absolute numbers, and is very painful to deal with.

I feel that beyond hiring, our entire society has a problem with tails of distributions. There is this strong movement behind standardization of everything everywhere to minimize the variance, but that not only eliminates both tails, it also lowers the mean. So e.g. here, in order to avoid exceptionally bad hires, companies not only forgo the chance of getting exceptionally good hires, they also lower the quality of a typical hire.
So what?

That point is orthogonal to may primary objective. Which is only to keep the rights to boycott quake, or like quake, or dislike quake, or feel indifferent about quake, open to all Americans. I don't care how they use their rights. I don't even care if they use their rights. I only care that their rights never be infringed by the government.

You're talking about strategies for civil disobedience. Which is great. It's just that strategies for use are a layer on top of your rights. In a very real way, the only reason you can talk about strategies, is because you have the rights necessary to freely engage in civil disobedience.

This, more fundamental, issue is my primary concern. That the right to any sort of civil disobedience be freely available. I don't care how people use those rights. I mean, obviously right. I mean, not to sound crass, but I don't even care if Nazis hide behind those rights. So why would I care if anyone else uses them? I just care that no one be constrained from using them.
Interesting enough, I have the same philosophy - I never cared about grades, not even a degree really. I took what interested me and what I felt would help me. For me I always took 16-20 credit hours Per semester, including summers and averaged a GPA if 2.8-3.4 per semester or something. I also took enough classes in 5 years to get two bachelors.

Unfortunately, during job interviews many companies ask for GPA on graduation. I always had to explain “I learned a lot! I just pushed myself to the limit and when you do that you get B’s”

It’s always an interesting discussion and occasionally will lose my potential interviews. The truth is that school is really about certifying what you know, not learning. Personally, I think that should change, because building the skill of curiosity and The ability to research and understand a topic is far more valuable. But to learn to be curious you also have to be able to explore - can’t do that craming for test.
The hippo is a another close relative of the first water-loving mammals.
The way you state it pretty blatantly leaves the question of "if they're 46B light years away, then how is the universe not at least that old?".

This comment heavily reminds me of the mannerisms of professors that have the mentality of "I deeply understand this subject from years of past studies, so you should be able to understand it from my vague and half assed explanation alone".
Your last graph is very interesting. I think it resonates because tests are setup with the test-devisers biases and blind spots, but original thinking (tautologically) has to be outside the current consensus that built the environment that built the test makers.

There's a snake eating its tail situation here.
Brace yourself. Dijkstra was complaining about the fact that APLers wanted a computer available in order to write programs! He thought the only sufficient way to develop programs was to first conceive a mathematical proof of the program's correctness, then write the proof and the code together. I think this is part of what he means when he talks about the future of computer science, although it's not clear whether he actually thought this methodology would become common. I probably have more sympathy for this viewpoint than most, but I think it's obvious that it has not held up well.

Like many of Dijsktra's complaints about APL, this one is ironic because APL today is one of the best embodiments of the idea that code should be communicable without a computer. APLers will gladly discuss ideas with each other by writing APL on paper or a blackboard, or even by speaking it out loud. A few people have remarked that this is a unique feature of array languages: other programmers will write things down, but only array programmers use their own language to do so.
No, space inbetween is stationary. It's galaxies that shrinks. Think of ice in water.
and yet you stated nothing about this factor in your original comment.
If one doesn't specify a comparator and there is no obvious/sensible default, then an error would be perfectly reasonable.
Well, yes, lower level protocols are harder to implement and deploy because they require new hardware - but I'm not sure how are they relevant in a discussion about higher level protocols that are in software and build on the Internet Protocol?
Isn't that weird that it's easier to replace high paid jobs in finance with ai before jobs related to flipping burgers?
Thats not an accurate view of what automating M & A is going to look like. The future is CRMs, more data transportability, and generally improved tooling will change the 1 deal/month capacity of your rain maker M&A team of 8 to a team of 3 doing 6 deals/month. You don’t need to replace the whole flow with computers to add automation.
Technically, galaxies do travel:

> In physical cosmology, peculiar velocity refers to the components of a galaxy's velocity that deviate from the Hubble flow. ....

> Galaxies are not distributed evenly throughout observable space, but are typically found in groups or clusters, where they have a significant gravitational effect on each other. Velocity dispersions of galaxies arising from this gravitational attraction are usually in the hundreds of kilometers per second, but they can rise to over 1000 km/s in rich clusters.

-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peculiar_velocity

Granted, 1000 km/s isn't even 1% of light speed, so clearly this motion couldn't contribute much to a distant object's recession.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20841059
Are there any resources good for finding out more about this and such studies? Myself, I went through this process in physics, and in many cases it was years afterwards that I properly understood the implications and context of the early courses, and only through repeat exposure could grok the actual connections in the problems. It seems especially hard to test and evaluate something that is planting the seeds for a more complete understanding, maybe years down the line.
Just inject:

td:nth-child(3) > span.pagetop { color: transparent; }

Hides karma, leaves user and logout intact (as they're links)
No, like "what happens if a tornado hit the powerplant and chucked trees and other debris at various parts of the powerplant".
Same. I tried it in 2016 during an interview and it was incredible... but I don’t have a use case for it and so can’t justify.
BigInt is in Stage 4 (https://github.com/tc39/proposal-bigint) which means that more than 2 implementations are shipping it unflagged. This is the last stage of any proposal in the TC39 process, which means it is de facto part of the standard.
That seems to be the trend these days. Videos are cut for emotional effect mainly. A lot of videos about race cars are like that. Quick cut here, quick cut there, cool sound, it sort of implies that something cool is happening but you never really see it. Same with the latest Marvel superhero movies. I watched Avengers and I couldn't even tell what's going on in the fight scenes.
> Nasdaq runs algorithms to look for market abuse and manipulation in real time.

That's how you write honestly for the target audience.

> Nasdaq runs more than 40 different algorithms, using about 35,000 parameters, to look for market abuse and manipulation in real time.

That is how you use big words on an audience not capable of seeing through their meaninglessness, and it's the responsibility of people who do see through it to call it out.
So what will I get out of it once I master it?
> something that Microsoft has never been good at

Well, you're certainly entitled to that opinion :)

As I said, I encourage you to explore .NET Core and its recent advances, especially now that the big runtime improvements made in recent years have proliferated throughout the standard library and new language features. While it's fair (and correct) to say that the Java runtime is ahead due to many years of focused improvements, I think you'll find the difference quite a bit smaller than it was back when .NET was focused mainly on Windows desktop software.
You are implying that PG thinks money is all important - but he doesn’t think that.

PG: if you had to boil it down to one quality to look for, authenticity would be the most important one. “You’re looking for people who are real friends,” he said to Chang. “Not just for people who got together for the purposes of this startup. You don’t want people who were in it just for the money.

He also talks about how that startup founders that are more interested in the product or the challenge of building a business, make buttloads of cash as a side-effect.

And YC funds nonprofit startups too?

Also from another 2004 PG essay:

“””Money Is Not Wealth

If you want to create wealth, it will help to understand what it is. Wealth is not the same thing as money. [3] Wealth is as old as human history. Far older, in fact; ants have wealth. Money is a comparatively recent invention.

Wealth is the fundamental thing. Wealth is stuff we want: food, clothes, houses, cars, gadgets, travel to interesting places, and so on. You can have wealth without having money. If you had a magic machine that could on command make you a car or cook you dinner or do your laundry, or do anything else you wanted, you wouldn't need money. Whereas if you were in the middle of Antarctica, where there is nothing to buy, it wouldn't matter how much money you had.

Wealth is what you want, not money.”””
The tech industry has unfortunately adopted the methodology of centralized hackable tests

I think the opposite is the case. Every industry has some sort of test to get into it. But the other industries are the most centralized and hackable ones. The tech industry is doing the best job of any of the top industries of having an application process that is open to skilled people who don't match the "centralized" standard.

Your grades in college, the experience on your resume, those are "centralized" tests. You have one resume and you send it out to everyone.

When companies give programming tests to applicants, each company is free to measure the applicants' skill in any way they see fit. One might ask math puzzle questions, but another company might give take-home Rails projects. And companies are free to just do a "soft" interview and look at your resume if they want.

Facebook hires far more software engineers with no software engineering education than Chevron hires chemical engineers with no chemical engineering education.

Plus, starting a company is open to anyone with a credit card to open an AWS account. No interview required. Just make something people want.
Can someone explain what is "interpolation threshold"? Both articles talk about it, but none defines.
I agree.

Also, most small businesses do stuff people want. But it's mostly commodities. So the hard part in many small businesses is marketing.

And marketing is mostly hacking.

As for startups,marketing is very important for a startup.

But is it common to sucseed without something people want, or at least get addicted to ?
Apple fails to stop class action lawsuit over MacBook butterfly keyboards
This is an excellent review. It's always amazing to me how some people seem to get the big picture right. Also, it's clear that the Americans learned from Versailles and did far better at reconstruction after WW II.
Having to use widows to use Linux is a whole new level of dumb. Is what it is, but holy Christ is it illogical.
Hi, I am one of the authors of this post.

As you mention, it is a trade-off. In this case we are trying to balance CPU and memory usage. First of all, if you just use the original vectors (or the quantized ones mentioned in the post), it might very well be the case that there is no server where you can even place the index.

So let us consider the example in the post and that we have a server with enough memory. We put the index (1 TB) in RAM and assume that one request takes 1-2 ms. Then a single CPU core can handle 500-1000 requests per second. So now we are using a lot of RAM and very little CPU. Depending on your use case, this can very well be better than what is proposed in the post, but for some it might be preferable to use servers with more balanced resources.

And just to clarify, the memory is shared between CPUs. So you pay the memory price once and you can then scale it to all the CPUs.
A Hint About the Affliction That Kept Marat in the Bathtub
I don't see the distinction you are making. I get that it is not a constant stream of words at that rate, but you still described thinking at roughly eighty words a minute. Right?

And I have no clue how that actually stacks up. Eighty looks like a small number, but that is more than this whole post.
The State Of Console Gaming In 2019
No billion left behind
I’m not sure how much of a benefit that’d be at this point — the PS3 was some custom hardware that was unique to its era, while the current consoles are 5-year-old x86 chips running custom OSes. Putting Linux into that mix only gets you a stable, but outdated, hardware platform.
> Once objects are formed and bound by gravity, they "drop out" of the expansion and do not subsequently expand under the influence of the cosmological metric...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expansion_of_the_universe#To...
My first accountant was dangerous. His suggestion regarding cash flow and financial management was "spend the money as you want and we'll figure things out in the end of the year". I prefer to have a "friend", someone who will care for my £€¥$ and will kick my heart butt if he sees I do stupid things. Another comment used the word "advisor". I know that legally there are limitations on what they can propose to you, but better have someone who cares. Otherwise just get something like QuickBooks for a fraction of the cost and use an accountant in the end of the year just for the filing.
I run a Netherlands-based startup. I'm pretty sure that all except one our angel investors did it so they tell people about it at barbecues.

Some of them even proudly use "we" when talking about the company (that they have no influence over). As in "we just hired a new head of sales". I'm pretty sure that's a different vibe than what SF angels do, but seems to me that there's plenty places where angels invest primarily for the social signalling.
It’s a myth that they never attack humans in the wild. As with most shark attacks it seems to be a case of mistaken identity. Since orcas are significantly more intelligent though they usually retreat before any real harm is done.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killer_whale_attack
Symbolic Math Software Site
Hi there. I am currently exploring this same idea myself and I’m well on my way. Shoot me an email if you want to chat. Temp email: dithonilat@mybx.site
I concur but his book is one in of the only good ones focused on ML in quant finance.
So what? Don't need much difference in hardware, it was only a firmware change.
They would not have to pretend. Marketing a separate brand with its own identity is a common practice. How many people who stay at a W hotel or a Ritz Carlton or a Sheraton are aware that these brands are actually owned by Marriott? How many people who stay at a Waldorf Astoria know that it's owned by Hilton? These are not secrets. 80% of the world's economy is controlled by fewer than 1000 companies [1].

[1] https://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1107/1107.5728v2.pdf
For the situation in the article it would not have changed anything. As the fake domains were just adding an 's' to the end of the domain.

Also I'm not sure what effect that will have for Chinese users. It might make many of their URLs look strange to them.

See:
https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/7ul9p3/why_is_netw...
How are these cases usually handled in court? Could the Chinese VC possibly require the startup to pay damages over insufficient security measures?
I think Linux is a counter example to that. A lot of commercial companies have contributed to the evolution and made a lot of money competing with each other delivering support for public projects. Linux has added a ton of value to the world yet there are no companies or people approaching the value of MS. The wealth was distributed via competition and a lot more of it stayed with the customers than othwerwise would have.
No, the object is now 46b light years away, but we can’t see what it looks like now at that distance. We see an image of it when it was much closer and younger.
No, no, no, experienced students are saying to themselves.

Oh, no no no, it was too cold always
(Still the dead one lay moaning)
I was much too far out all my life
And not waving but drowning.

Somehow captures the mood of reading pg's later oeuvre.
I think this is the key section:

_"It’s not just speed. The FDA also is approving more drugs, hitting a record 59 new therapies in 2018. Almost three-fourths received a priority review. That, combined with more efficient data collection, is responsible for the faster FDA action, said Aaron Kesselheim, a professor at Harvard Medical School. Companies are also communicating earlier and more often with the agency, which can head off issues at preliminary stages and help them get products through on the first attempt, he said."_

So as in any field, better communication with stakeholders improved the process and eliminated some issues earlier.

Then, better data collection helps them evaluate studies better. I bet it also reduces the back and forth and the "what does this mean" aspect of the studies after.

And then companies can pay for expedited evaluation.. which if they've been communicating clearly all along and have better data, doesn't seem far fetched.

The next thing you know, someone will suggest clear planning with stakeholders, code reviews, and unit tests will improve code quality and even ship dates! But that may be crazy talk.
It is amusing how many of my peers still hold to the notion that heavier things fall faster. Not a higher terminal velocity, but the intuition that they accelerate faster. Hilariously tough for folks to shake.
That's not an accurate depiction of Tim Cook - a man who is a very capable supply chain guy and general businessman. My personal opinion? Steve Jobs was the marketer -- his skill was getting other people with hard skills to buy into his general vision. (Recall the "reality distortion field" he possessed.)
This could be a nice OSINT tool for someone to have though a bit limited in functionality.
FWIW, for the non-POV use cases your website and repos don't seem to answer much in the way of questions.

How does one program patterns for such cases? Does the Web UI help at all with that (if not, there's other projects that handle that way better)? … Quite possible it's a good choice, but the docs I found wouldn't tell me so.
Even without a priori semantic goals, I think you can also transform/rotate your dimensions to maximize their interpretability.

Simplified example: if your two-dimensional system gives you two points:

-0.5, 0.5
0.5, 0.5

Then you losslessly rotate to

0, 1.0
1.0, 0

With the idea that the latter is simpler for humans to assign semantics to