skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> This quote is present in the first comment you've replied to. There is no need to attribute malice to me.

You attributed a quote to me that isn't even remotely reminiscent of anything I've said in this discussion. There is no need to grossly distort my position.

> This self-fulfilling prophecy. Russia wasn't a threat, NATO expanded nonetheless, Russia reacted to this threat, you claim that this reaction is the proof that Russia was a threat. Ridiculous, isn't it?

Not really, since virtually all countries in the region consider the Russian response to be wildly disproportionate and in flagrant violation of international law.

> Firstly, I'd recommend you to read "To win the nuclear war" by Kaku and Axelrod about Pentagon plans for first strike. It is a horrifying reading for a Russian, hopefully, it will be such for you too.

You're referring to plans that predate the existence of the Soviet (and now Russian) nuclear arsenal and were specifically made obsolete by it.

> Secondly, the US is working hard on increasing effectiveness of the first strike -- high-precision warheads[2] (no need for them in MAD concept - you cannot miss a city), ABM, etc.

ABM is a joke. Its effectiveness is dubious even for its purported usecase (a limited attack by NK or Iran) and if the U.S. ever tried to seriously scale it, it would always be orders of magnitude more expensive than the effort required for Russia to defeat it. High-precision warheads are unnecessary in MAD, but do nothing to threaten or disrupt it. They exist because U.S. military doctrine is primarily concerned with adversaries other than Russia.

> Thirdly, please google "salami tactics" and "escalation dominance" -- there is no need to use nuclear weapons even in conflict with nuclear-armed country.

I don't have to google them. Russia is in a much better position to use escalation dominance against its EU neighbors than the U.S. is against Russia. In purely military terms, NATO's defensive posture across Eastern Europe and particularly in the Baltic States is still very weak, precisely out of fear of provoking hostilities.

> But NATO is ruled by consensus and it was the choice of the all European countries.

Whatever the formal rules are, NATO is ruled predominantly by the U.S. For the actual countries in question it was a simple trade - safety from Russia in exchange for U.S. influence, market penetration, etc. This arrangement was popular then and remains popular now.

> Not in retrospect. Many people warned about that [1], including former American presidents and George Kennan [0] -- the man behind the "containment policy".

They were in a minority then, now the consensus has shifted for the most part.

> That was remarkably unspecific.

An exhaustive list would be far too long, but it includes both Chechen wars (the first of which caused a significant disillusionment among Western populations), the tragicomically mismanaged economic reforms in the early 90s and the subsequent political instability in Russia, various trade and investor disputes (especially after the '98 crisis), Russian actions in the ex-Soviet republics and many others.
To be fair, one less desire-able 'solution' to drivers issues would be to not allow the hardware to work at all. MacOS users don't have access to Nvidia graphics cards, for example. I'll take Windows' driver work over that any day.
It's not about syncing the arc, it's about syncing a result that is now _asynchronous_ (what did the projectile hit? How is the world changed by that hit? Could the projectile be dodged after it was fired?). For game-meaningful results like headshots, crits, interrupts, or environmental-destructibles if the players can't "agree" concurrently, then the skill-ceiling is compromised, and you'll lose high-level players.
60 of America's biggest companies paid no federal income tax in 2018 - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/2018-taxes-some-of-americas-big...

"Just the 20 companies in our study reported in excess of $175 billion in total deferred tax liabilities at the end of 2013. They do not pay any interest to the government on this amount, even if it takes 20 years to pay it." - https://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-intelligence/2014/08...
My claim isn't that it's easy to solve NLP; of course a resource-constrained system like Google Translate that inderects many language pairs through English is going to have glaring issues.

My claim is that the challenges generalize between languages. If you can handle English, you can handle any other language, and while the easy parts might at least look different at the surface, the hard parts are all the same.
Looks awesome. How does the author monetize? If it is free, someting something.
> You don't get to tell me what my point was and you certainly don't get to argue with me about what my point is.

You said one thing, which I replied to, and now you're claiming it's another thing. I'm not really sure what you expect when you do that.
Lockheed Martin had $51 billion in government contracts in 2017 alone. Their total revenue that year was a whole $54 billion. This article is complaining about Huawei getting $75 billion over many years.
Back in the day, my mother would sell plasma and immediately spend half of it on liver. Plasma may not be free to produce, but it can still be mispriced.
I would argue that the physical town Square no longer exists and that the same space for discussion has been subsumed by Reddit and Twitter and such, even if they also include a more global square.
Fun side note to this: although bullet collisions are trivial, sword collisions are genuinely computationally complex, in the sense that I’m not aware of a single publicly available game engine that ships with a robust real-time solver for sword-sword collisions.

I find this really interesting because it’s a complete inversion of reality, where bullet impacts are vastly more energetic and chaotic than sword clashes. It tells you something about the scale we play games at, maybe.

I don’t see people talking about it, but this has to be a huge part of why sword combat in video games is so much less explored and well-realized than gunfighting. Figuring out why it’s such a hard problem, and exploring the various workarounds and their limitations, is a fun weekend project if you know a little computational geometry. (And it’s probably the work of a few minutes if you know enough formal geometry, I guess.)
> ballistics aren't really computationally complex

I’m not sure I would I agree with this.

Even hitscan projectiles for a game like Call of Duty or Battlefield is intense. Dozens of players running around with high rate of fire machine guns in complex geometric environments. It’s a significant cost.

Ballistic trajectories are pretty complex. Adding primitive bullet drop is definitely a huge increase in computational cost.

And that’s just for fake ballistic. Real bullet ballistics are “solved” empirically. There’s a bunch of formulas with a bunch of coefficients. And real bullets are fired at a real range to calculate the coefficients. It’s crazy complex.

https://www.jbmballistics.com/ballistics/calculators/calcula...
It didn’t really strike me as looking that terrible. I certainly didn’t have the visceral reaction the article describes. I had to watch the trailers again to understand what they were talking about... it’s a film about human-cat hybrids that communicate through interpretive dance and overblown songs, what the fuck do people expect!?

This was my reaction too. "Yep, looks exactly how a Cats screenplay would look."

I think these are all just people coming out of the woodwork who never liked Cats. Or people who haven't seen it on stage and didn't realize how silly and weird it already is.
Better that then the successful plaintiff being left holding the bag when their civil rights are horrifically violated. Excessive force cases can and do result in death and disability not including whatever mental trauma. Better the people that the state that employs law enforcement bear the cost associated with their actions, then victims of civil rights violations are unable to collect against a bankrupt defendant.
Counties can pass ordinances, if that is what you are asking.
According to a poll, the majority of Indians do support the law. Most Muslims do not, but 35% do.

https://news.abplive.com/news/india/abp-cvoter-survey-on-cit...
ABP-CVoter Survey On Citizenship Act: 62% Indians Support CAA, 65% Want Pan-India NRC Too
New Delhi: In the wake of ongoing nationwide protests against the controversial Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), ABP New along with C-Voter brings to you an exclusive survey to find out whether the newly introduced law is for the betterment of the country or not.

The snap poll was carried out on over 3,000 citizens across the country between December 17 to 19 with booster sample of over 500 people each in Assam, the northeast and Muslim community collected during the same period.

The survey stated majority of the people believe that the Citizenship Amendment Act introduced by the Central government is not against the Muslim community. According to the survey, 56 per cent people think that CAA is not against Muslim community and will only rule out illegal immigrants living in the country. However, 32 per cent of the participants feel that the law is against the Muslim community. 8 per cent people, in the survey, said that they do not know about the act, whereas 4 per cent said that CAA is against everyone.

The survey also revealed that among Muslims, 63 per cent were against the act, 35 supported it and 1 per cent said that they they don't know or cannot comment. In the Hindus, 67 per cent supported the Act and 32 per cent opposed it.
> That seems... well, beyond idiotic.

It's been ongoing for twenty-five years at this point. The initial goal was to improve access especially, and entered into force in 1992. Essentially, to prevent the historic case of (e.g.) a nationalised railway forbidding anyone else operating on their infrastructure (so if you want to run a freight service and the nationalised company don't care? trucks it is!). This also vastly simplified cross-border services as it's then possible to apply for track-access on a non-discriminatory basis, which completely changed the face of the European rail freight market.

Note that as of 1 Jan 2019, international and domestic freight and passenger markets are, at a national level, all competitive. The world hasn't fallen apart in most of the EU. I think it's clear plenty did look at the British example and clearly decided to avoid following the British example in many ways.

Also I think it's worthwhile pointing out the UK's privatisation has been in some ways a success: subsidy now is much lower per-passenger (and lowering this has been a constant goal across all governments since privatisation), and the financial risk of the success is not borne by the government (and as the NAO concluded, no franchises making loses and/or failing would imply everyone is underbidding and the government is losing money as a result)

To me, it's not clear that a return to a nationalised operator would help things in GB; many of the problems come from political imperatives (c.f. "decades as under-funded political football"), and the railway is far more micromanaged by the government today than it ever was under British Rail. By and large the franchising bodies (mostly the DfT) are simply getting the services they ask their contractor for, and passenger should be more directing their annoyance at them; we also have a network that has seen massive growth in passenger numbers and number of services and comparatively little money spent on capacity enhancements to avoid a network run at capacity where a single short-term failure can propagate through large parts of the system. The change that needs to happen is political, and whether ultimate delivery is contracted out is mostly irrelevant.
Do you really think the mercantilist model is sustainable in the long run? It seems to me that it works great for playing catch up, but only if there are nations willing to purchase your goods.

China doesn't have the domestic market they could have if they hadn't weakened their currency by transferring wealth from savers to the exporters.
Google Removed App on Christmas for Metadata Issue
Good note!
I think he read the article. The first sentence was about Wolfenstein 3D, which was his personal experience with that series. The second sentence was about Silas Warner.
This app sounds like a great idea.

I had to do a number of silly school science projects with my daughter while she was growing up, things like a bridge made of toothpicks and glue. These projects, while not really serious science, were experiences we both remember now that she is an adult. One of the best projects was making a short video of the animal life that lived around a local lake.

This was a really fun afternoon and evening where we recorded insects, turtles, birds, and even bats. It was a really nice time to talk about natural science with my young daughter.
Keywords, names, filenames don't retain their meanings from English, so it's not important where they came from. And error messages use the same few English words, but mostly all those keywords, names, filenames. Documentation available in local languages is the only important part here. But documentation and other reading materials is an issue for people who are already many years in programming and the deeper they go into the field, the more necessary it becomes to learn English.
How do you read the source of a closed source library? I mean sure reverse engineering is possible but it’s a bit flippant to suggest that everyone has time to do this. Even if it did not have closed source libraries, it’s a bit much to assume everyone affected can understand the source.

We already know that tencent engages in bad stuff on behalf of the Chinese government (Sesame Credit as a concrete example) so they shouldn’t be presumed innocent right out of the box.

What’s wrong with existing cross platform frameworks? You have to wonder what their agenda is for creating this.
Deferred taxes are different than receiving funds from government. In Huawei’s case, they also received stolen IP and granted a monopoly in certain areas.

I think it’s fair to say that’s “state support”.

Tax deferment is not “support” rather just not burdening the companies directly.
The need to manually turn this system back on is non optimal. A control loop powered by a battery backup should have been able to reset the system once the voltage came back down.
> The Communist Party has 90%+ acceptance rate by the populace.

That statement comes with so many questions. What is meant by “acceptance”? It definitely sounds like a weaker word than say “support” or “approval”. The least favorable interpretation would be that “acceptance” simply means “I don’t currently intend to overthrow the current government ”. If we’re using that definition, trump probably would have a 90%+ “acceptance” rating as well. Definitions aside, getting accurate polls on political topics in totalitarian countries is tricky because the respondents are incentivized/pressured to answer in support of the current regime.
Functional programming design patterns (2015) [video]
If you're paying attention and not too desensitized, you can usually find at least one software bug per day (often a new one).
I thought that was to say "X can't do Y but Z can so X is stupid". You will then get a list of solutions from fans of X.

The most common sighting of this in action is OSs (ask "how do I do Y with Linux" and you'll be pointed at documentation, say "Linux can't do Y but Windows can" and you are more likely to get a couple of pre-baked solutions sent your way, and the same works the other way around and with other OSs) but I've seen it work for scripting languages/environments (powershell, bash, ...), databases (postgres, SQL Server, Oracle, ...) and other tools.
I think that is better explained as

"the Go _community_ is very anti-framework and pro-library"

There is nothing about the language, which is general purpose, that makes it anti-anything really.
I don't understand how that's relevant. You can still release something smaller and less powerful, and still be accessible to beginners.

Why are you arguing about having standard peripherals? It doesn't let people learn about I/O.

I was in highschool and we were given given embedded hardware and were able to program it using assembly and uploading a program into it.

If you give students some very minimal embedded hardware with wifi and some terminal, they should be able to learn using that. Let them install things, maybe setup a 2D interface...

The RPi educational value is only enabled by I/O pins. I'm not sure that's really worthwhile.

The RPi is interesting because it's a powerful but cheap computer. I just wish there was much cheaper hardware to show people you can also do things with smaller stuff.
Modern != better
An introduction to machine learning through polynomial regression
If anyone is tempted to try encrypting their boot partition like I was last week, allow me to save you some trouble.

Yes, GRUB can technically decrypt a LUKS1 partition, but since the kernel isn't running yet, it has to use a standalone (slow) implementation. Takes my laptop 30 seconds to decrypt the boot partition using GRUB, and 2 seconds to decrypt the root partition once the kernel has started (same number of iterations).

I'm planning on replacing this mess with a systemd-boot EFI image and secure boot using my own PK.
How dare China, a communist government, give a private company billions of dollars in tax breaks? Here in America, where we value free markets and democracy, we always tax our companies heavily, at the tax rate that Nature demands.

This is why we can't let communism come to America - the Reds just want to lower our corporate tax rates.
Lockheed Martin got contracts of which perhaps 5-8% (2.6B to 4B) is profit, this is more direct funding. $75 billion in tax breaks etc is more like a 750B contract in terms of growth potential. Which is why I am saying this is such a huge amount of money rather than unfair or anything.

PS: Oddly, when bidding large federal contracts you include profit margin as a line item. Past 8% is possible, but starts to raise red flags.
I love this feature. Regular users use mouse anyway, and power users have a shortcut instead of pressing tab several tabs to pick an option.
Never made a mistake with it.
Outlined button is activated by space and the filled button is activated by enter.
Every part of my computer, which I built myself, gets its drivers from Windows Update. Drivers have been pushed from Windows Update since... forever? Granted, I always install a more recent version myself.
Perhaps I'm wrong to frame it as a privacy issue, but I have a large problem with allowing people to be harassed for lawful actions. If the law says I can do something, and I do it, I shouldn't be required to explain why I did it.

I have no problem with people not wanting drones flying over their properties, and I have no problem with a collective decision that people's privacy should supersede the right to fly drones in public airspace (indeed, I'd probably agree with it). But that should be enforced by a change in law, not by an demand that someone justify their supposedly legal actions.
You can do the "single binary" thing with Rust if you use musl.
I gripe about ads a lot. As you can probably tell, I’m not a fan of them.
>it checks sites are "safe" (as according to Google's standards) running every website you visit through their servers.

It only sends a partial hash of the url/domain. It's not feasible to deduce browsing history from the hash.
no, we are victims of how Google and other companies are allowed to design their systems because the regulations are nonexistent or outdated.... forget about the drawer this is just stupid to think that it is a big problem.
This falls in the same realm as the self driving car that they have been working on for years. They are big enough that they have the resources to investigate many areas of interest but nothing says anything will come of it. I'll wait to get excited until I see iRockets begin to launch.
Not too well, no. Off-the-rack basically requires good luck and a good eye for how a suit's supposed to fit to find something that works well enough to still be tailored some (rather than extensively, or simply being hopeless) so it'll look alright.

Even shirts, if the sizing's not two-dimensional (trim, slim, regular, loose, or some similar range of cut types aside from just S/M/L/XL and so on—so Large Slim as a size, rather than just large, for example) you're not even gonna get close to an alright fit, most likely. Good dress shirts provide more detailed measurements, but even there, made-to-measure will give you noticeably better fit than off the rack.
I don't think those informal understandings should stay so informal. If it's the fact that having your paper due by 4:20 is fine, then let it be 4:20, although the midnight deadline is likely something most people wouldn't do if they had to collect submissions in person, and so in this scenario we have automation possibly enabling more flexibility in student schedules. If students need extra room to pass the bar and it is a meaningful relaxation of rules, then let it be known so that the matter can be studied.

Why? Because empathy at scale works in ways which breeds hostility among groups and it creates an unhealthy incentive to compete over a teacher; it's not really reasonable to expect people to be immune to race or class or sex. Further, if the rules are strict then people need to know rather than _some_ people getting the discretionary treatment and others not.
I'm not sure that I agree with that. We now live in a global world where the issues effecting people have shifting from a local and state level to a national and global level. Therefore, in order for the reach of a modern day town "town square" to be comparable to those in the past, it would also need to be national or globabl.
>> That’s not what I said.

To clarify, the sentence you quote referred to my interpretation of Pollock's outlook, not to something you said.

I'm guessing you misunderstood my comment as a personal attack on you and you chose to escalate? Otherwise I can't explain the sudden personal tone of your comment. Did I cause confusion by using "you" and "yours" in the general sense?
That trillion dollars for “defense” also includes keeping global shipping lanes open and maintaining a military able to respond to existing treaty commitments across Europe. Seems to be a reasonable deal for some of they money to stay here in US companies if we’re paying for so much of others’ security abroad.
The only thing that is needed is death; everything else is optional. So I reject your anti-life philosophy that “more not needed stuff is worse than less not needed stuff.” Because the category of “not needed stuff” includes precious life itself, as well as everything that makes it worth living, and of course an endless variety of worthless and pernicious nonsense.

If that makes me a baddy, so be it.
StyleGAN in WebAssembly Using Tensor4
The problem with such generic reminders is that they could easily affect the flow of conversation by being automatically plastered asymmetrically across any forum or social media network at very low cost. For a small amount of money I could essentially pick at random five amendments out of the bill of rights and concern troll them on social media forums while ignoring the others. There's no alarm bell that goes off when someone does that.

To counter this you could make at least one concrete link between your list of potential concerns to the OP's comment about Occupy.
We, collectively as the software industry, have the power to fix this. The fact that awful software still exists demonstrates we don’t care or want to fix it. It’s not a popular opinion here, but software developers/designers are responsible for bad software.