skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think it’s natural to have disagreements and share OP’s search for sites like SSC where we can discuss and learn from each other.
They absolutely have, I didn't mean to suggest "trust is a magic bullet that solves your problems." Of course not, that'd be ridiculous.

I'm saying in a higher trust culture, you'll see better compliance on everything we ought to be doing even without imposing strict rules. That's an advantage, and it means how strict the rules are doesn't necessarily match how people changed their behavior.

That's all.
Even bathroom breaks?
We Monitor Our Services
Yeah, Kevin Murphy's book covers this in great detail.

It was a very satisfactory revelation.
No one with an ounce of self-worth should work long-term for companies that expect them to do exactly what their title implies they should and not a thing more.

You're basically being arbitrarily restricted to learning and enjoying exactly one thing when it would often make more sense in context to become involved in: Customer relations, systems administration, management, software engineering, data science, etc.

Sure, you'll become really good at that one thing, but it'll be at the cost of personal growth and job satisfaction.

> I'm probably gonna get a lot of sh!t for this post...

I mean, yeah. You've basically lampooned anybody who enjoys working in ill-defined cross-disciplinary circumstances as having "[not an] ounce of self-worth".

It sounds like, from your perspective, your field is "the important stuff" and other fields are just balls to be juggled. There's nothing wrong with that, but lots of people don't think that way. To some people, the important stuff is anything that makes their customers happy. To others, it's anything that helps them learn.

And let's dispense with the notion that "doing 3 jobs for the price of one" is an accurate description of having broad rather than narrow responsibilities. One comes at the cost of the other. If you're an equally capable specialist and generalist, and you're capable of genuinely performing those 3 jobs at once, then if you were to specialize you'd be performing the work of 3 average specialists, and you'd be in the same boat as before.

Do what you're best at and try to get the best possible compensation for it, monetary or experiential. It's as simple as that.
I use typora to write markdown on macos and am very happy.

To sync, I use a git repository (you can set a watchpoint on macos and linux to any directory to invoke a command on changes, so I just invoke git and commit).
You have to do the sync via GitHub, which is in and of itself a vendor lock-in in my opinion.

I really don't get why I can't just point to any Git repo for syncing purposes.
A lot of words changed their meaning in time, or have problematic etymology. For example, 'slave' comes from Slav (which comes from 'słowo' a Slavic word for... 'word'). Yet, we know the difference.

In Polish: the word 'kobieta' (woman) comes from 'kobyła' ('mare') and until the 19th century was derogatory (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/kobieta.).
Conversely, the word 'dziwka' (whore) comes from 'dziewka' (an archaic variant of the maid).

Moreover, in many cases, etymology is less known. How should we decide which name to 'rectify'?

...

For names based on scientist surnames, it is tricker. If we give a prize "in honor of X" is controversial if X held view that now we consider abhorrent. (Side note: virtually all people who died more than 100 years ago had such views, to various extent.)
> The point is this: ending a business relationship can take as long, or even longer, than an individual executing on the choice to emigrate to a new region.

There is a massive difference between something which is theoretically possible and something which is actually common.

And I would challenge you to even identify such a situation that didn't come about as a result of regulatory constraints or a government-granted monopoly.

> Ask any bank that has been continuously trying to move off of big iron since the 90s whether switching off of mainframes is, to use your words, a "dramatic high-cost change to your entire organization".

And yet even that isn't as difficult as emigrating, it just requires them to spend 2% of their revenues to migrate when the status quo is only costing them 1% of their revenues.

Meanwhile you've managed to choose an example which is a result of a government-granted monopoly and regulatory constraints. Under a sane copyright system a copyright that predates the 90s would have expired by now and enabled competition. And the reason they're still using mainframes unlike every other industry that has moved away from them is that they're subject to complex regulatory requirements that at the same time makes them change-averse and isolates their own industry from competition which allows them to absorb the inefficiency themselves.

Let the likes of Robinhood do half the things they want to do and see how many banks still using mainframes are left in ten years.

Nor are companies like IBM by any means the most egregious offenders. What they offer is expensive (some might say overpriced), but for the banks it's worth it over the alternative which is nonetheless actually available -- as proven by the fact that some banks don't use mainframes. Which is why even IBM has to keep coming up with better mainframes with faster processors and lower energy consumption and newer features instead of resting on their laurels.

> So, no, incompetent private organizations do not fail and go away. That baseless religious belief of market fundamentalists has no basis in reality.

The long list of companies that have actually failed due to incompetence and gone away would beg to differ.
Found this post also in /r/collapse. Maybe it's a one-off freak event, but reading about this makes me really depressed.
Why did you state this so judgmentally, as though you are in possession of the only truth?

Edit: The parent was edited after I commented.
Between Winthrop and Mazama
AFAIK, some airlines were scheduling _extremely_ few flights of larger aircraft purely to keep currency.
It is very dishonest. Trying to make this into Apple vs Google creates this false reality that only movies get away with.

Nearly two times the size so we can make up a story of selected truths?
Yeah, I'm thinking compulsory distribution for anything above a certain market reach is an easier sell than compulsory sync licenses.
True, though I would count significant socializing within your field or with a distinctly academic bent quite differently from "crushing Bud Light cans around a campfire". Not to say that the latter isn't also a perfectly valid way to spend time, but it's quite different from a social dinner of academics, IMO.
This is very interesting, will check it out. I really just need a reference capability.
The later should be tracked and treated as tax evasion.
I want someone to use GPT-3 to be my D&D GM, or at least an assistant.
If you're using Firefox there is a tweak you can make to not give sites access to your password.[1]

Aside from that, try to avoid using auto fill, just copy the username/email and password from your manager directly.

[1] https://www.ghacks.net/2014/01/08/block-websites-reading-mod...
It seems we are headed to not using words with more than one meaning if one is unpleasant. No room for nuance these days.
Did we *really* do our homework on Covid-19?
Tell HN: Airbnb now opts in your name and photo to data sharing
I received an email today indicating AirBnb will now automatically opt-in user's photo and first name in order to fight discrimination via their "Project Lighthouse"

There is no public content about this change, but if you are logged in you can view this page and opt out:

https://www.airbnb.com/account-settings/privacy-and-sharing/...

Project Lighthouse

If you leave this setting turned on, you’re helping us identify and prevent discrimination from happening on Airbnb—and you’re taking part in an initiative to better understand how and where discrimination happens on platforms like ours.

If you turn this setting off, we won’t use your information, and we’ll remove it from future studies. You can change your mind at any time.

The bit about being opted in was hidden towards the bottom of the email. Feels wrong.
Recent and related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23707920
I'm commenting (as I always do) under my real name. I'm staking my personal reputation, and there is a very real chance that I'll be wrong.
There is an active Clojure study group that just formed, for anybody interested. I've started lab 1 and am finding it incredibly interesting so far.

For anybody who has completed the 2020 spring version (the lab code recently changed), did you have any issues with the lab 1 test script? I think they left out the merging files part when porting to the 2020 version which causes tests to fail.

https://www.reddit.com/r/mit6824clojure/comments/hfm0hk/rmit...
This is the money question, or rephrased "will deaths spike by end of July?". There is so much debate, so much messy data, in a week or two this debate will be over among reasonable people, in a month even extremists will be eating crow. I, like everyone, have my opinion, but soon enough we'll know for sure. People saying "deaths aren't tracking infections" are premature in their assessment by a couple weeks IMO because earlier and more testing is making this peak be shaped differently than the last one.

Sorry to hijack, your actual question is interesting too. I guess that would mean all the increased infection metrics are entirely from increases in testing and we're actually seeing that infection rates have always been way higher and the virus is way way less deadly than previously thought? Or maybe it has mutated and become less deadly?
Not a hill I am going to die on, but I really don't support this movement of politicizing science, nor to take these scientists out of their time context and measure them and their legacy according to recent insights and sensibilities. And how long do we wait? Do we ban Galileo after the Church found him guilty of blasphemy? Or wait a 100 years to see if he was ultimately right?

I fear it is not going to stop at removing their names from prizes and buildings. I think their data sets or scientific contributions are next. As the philosopher of science states: "consider the man and his data set, too.".

We are removing words (blacklist/whitelist, master/slave) and changing names of conferences (NIPS), not because these words are directly sexual or racist, but because some may take them out of context, and they indirectly offend their sensibilities.

From the problematic Pearson article on The Problem of Alien Immigration Into Great Britain, Illustrated by an Examination of Russian and Polish Jewish Children:

> The purport of this memoir is to discuss whether it is desirable in an already crowded country like Great Britain to permit indiscriminate immigration, or, if the conclusion be that it is not, on what grounds discrimination should be based. If there is to be discrimination it may be based on purely quantitative considerations-such as largely rule at present admission of immigrants into the United States, where percentages of each racial element only are admitted per month; or it may be based solely on qualitative considerations-all immigrants up to a certain level of mentality, physique or health may be admitted.

> Here again the question of standard for admission is a very important one. It may be fixed so high that practically few are admitted, but the few may be those who are so much above the average intelligence of a nation, that they are a national gain. Or a community map admit individuals of special craft capacity, as, for example, the Huguenot silk-weavers, German clockmakers, Italian tunnel-workers, or Dutch engravers.

> We cannot disregard the advantages which in the past such immigrants have brought not only to our handicrafts, but to our arts. The argument for the admission of such immigrants has, we fear, been misused in the past in order to obtain a supply of cheap labour, because the foreign immigrants have not been subjected to any rigid entrance tests.

Do we want to forbid, downgrade, or demonize such a speech now?
uBlock Origin is pretty effective for that issue: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ublock-origin...
You have to declare or be able to clearly document what is yours at the time of being hired. You also must keep work and personal separate by 110% without the slightest comingling. If there is no dependency between the two, one cannot claw the other - at least not in the jurisdictions I frequent.
Doesn’t work for the web because without the 3rd party domain there’s no access to 3rd party cookies so the tracker can’t identify you that way.
I believe this was written in reply to someone that agrees with your article's general premise.

Q: What do you call a startup that raises Series C, then immediately kills itself?
A: Fraudulent?
The reason for the lifting of the ban was both for hunting tourism and allowing people to kill elephants that interfere with their livelihoods. If you're killing elephants because they might interfere with your farming, etc., I wouldn't expect to see their tusks removed.

I would imagine that hunters (who have already been issued permits to kill 60 elephants so far, see https://www.reuters.com/article/us-botswana-elephants/botswa... ) would take some part of the elephant as a trophy, so it probably isn't a result of the legal hunting permits.

Just to be pedantic and a bit conspiratorial, poaching is defined as the illegal hunting of an animal. Since lifting a ban on hunting elephants is definitely controversial, I would imagine it's in Botswana's government's interests to be specific in their wording. They've only "ruled out poaching as a reason," they haven't ruled out that these elephants were killed by people.
There's also the rabbit pandemic covered in this recent New Yorker article:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/07/06/the-rabbit-out...
If we write it down on a piece of paper and there is a fire or natural disaster it easily lost or destroyed. If you factor in writing it down on a piece of paper, scanning and making it searchable then it is easier just to input it on an electronic device.
>“Noosing” is a long-standing term used by herpetologists for catching lizards. But for McGee, a Black scientist, the term is unnerving, calling to mind horrific lynchings of Black people by white people in the United States in the 19th and 20th centuries. [...] McGee has urged her colleagues to change the parlance to “lassoing,” which she says also more accurately describes how herpetologists catch lizards with lengths of thread.

So I found a video[1] on what exactly it is, and sure enough, it's literally catching a lizard by tying a noose around its head. If someone is going to be set off by the word "noosing", aren't they going to be set off by the actual act of noosing?

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkcOpPRfeug
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23676975
Tech VC Offers Bitcoin Bounty in Campaign Against Taylor Lorenz
One truth could be that the "bunch of white people" are in fact her colleagues; people she know and work with. Another truth could be that she has fallen into the hands of a racist mob about to lynch her. We don't need to make guesses about what's true and what's prejudice.

Edit: yes, the parent was edited - I added the last sentence.
Difference Between AWS SNS and SQS
You can't talk about rationality whilst talking about a country centric view.

Rational actions are defined by the society that judges it.

Twitter is an American company.

If you feel like you have to "walk on eggshells" then maybe you're not a cultural fit for the company.

If you're working at a company like Twitter, GitHub etc. Then you should have some pretty good career mobility.

These companies aren't the only ones in the world.

If you want to work at a place that will push back against changing master / slave terminology then there's a sizable amount of people that feel the same way.
You definitely don’t understand causal inference of ad attribution if this is what you think.

I’ll give an example from a real experience I worked on before. A client was a large haircut chain and they gave us a data set of individuals that had received a specific ad campaign from them via a loyalty program (so it had a variety of demographic and customer history data).

When we used the transactions data on this cohort to measure specific lift in the ad campaign, it was hugely negative - we thought there must be some kind of bug in the code, stressed out late nights coding and sanity checking everything and finding no issues that could explain it.

Our internal managers said we cannot go back to the client and ask for details or anything until we fix the negative lift because “negative lift isn’t actually possible in real advertising.” (Literal quote from an experienced manager in a well-known advertising analytics firm - I even showed him plenty of research out of Facebook, Google and academia disproving it, but it was totally taboo to mention negative lift).

Finally after some agonizing weeks we had no choice but to go back to the client and ask them to explain the full mechanics of their ad delivery, how people were targeted, to see if there was some bias or something we had no way to account for.

And of course - they told us all these individuals had been given a physical coupon as they were leaving from a haircut. OMG! The physical mechanics of a haircut means you are obviously not coming back for another one for say 3-4 weeks on average, and you also won’t have perfect customer retention, so basically there is no way this kind of campaign can produce positive lift unless you build a statistical model that successfully controls for the built in customer churn and the mechanical delay period before the ad treatment could possibly causally effect people’s next haircut choice.

This is just a drop in the bucket of strange things advertisers do. Often they won’t tell you targeting details like this, because they believe their method of targeting (even as simple as a coupon for loyalty rewards members) is some type of proprietary technique. This gets really really bad with firms that run their own digital advertising. If they are targeting “upper income people who just bought a BMW” via The Trade Desk, that’ll hugely skew any attribution modeling if they refuse to tell you they did that. A ton of the quant work of ad attribution is trying to automatically control for as many of these glaring omissions from the client as you can, since they often lie, refuse to tell you, or are actually wrong about the targeting they believed they used.

In short, measuring whether it was the ad’s effect that led to that macro increase or decrease in revenue is no easier than the general problem of causal inference from non-random trial data lacking clean splits, and often is much harder.
> At the University of South Carolina, officials on 19 June moved to remove the name of physician J. Marion Sims from a women’s dormitory. He is known for inventing the Sims vaginal speculum.

Honestly, unless it’s a pure coincidence that they chose the women’s dormitory for the obstetrics doctor, that seems somewhat offensive to begin with. You’re not being clever.
I think this helped me in getting the job I currently have at Amazon. At the time at least, the interview for new grads was done entirely online. I performed much better in this than any of the other on sites I did because I could focus exclusively on the problem at hand.

After a few years of experience that I've gained, I don't think it would matter much, but as a new grad there is a lot more stress and you likely haven't worked in a professional setting so you're not entirely certain what is expected of you and how "good" the interviewer is themselves.
These companies already know they aren't getting consent from users.

GDPR's requirements are pretty clear in this regard and personalisation for advertising can't be a legitimate interest. Every business in the advertising community has seeked legal counseling regarding GDPR, make no mistake about it. They simply hope that they'll be ignored for long enough.

> if only enforcement would actually happen

It does happen. Maybe not as fast as people would like, investigations and lawsuits take a while, data protection authorities are probably understaffed. Google was fined multiple times already — and they might take this as the cost of doing business, but sooner or later they will be hit with that maximum 4% of global profits if they don't adapt and they are adapting.
In this metaphor, diversity is a consumable resource. It is a store of exergy.

You can extract work by connecting reservoirs; in the process, the difference is destroyed.

And as you note, if isolation between reservoirs is imperfect, then work is actually required to maintain the difference.

So then, in this metaphor --

1. Monoculture is just the end-state: The exergy has been spent; the Markov Chain has mixed.

2. Diversity is celebrated because it still contains potential; the exergy has not yet been spent. Yet paradoxically, the work is released only via the mixing process that destroys it.

3. Unity in diversity is beautiful either (a) for the same reason we prefer youth to old age -- because it contains potential -- or (b) because it demonstrates the existence of energy flows into the system (without which it would not exist).

To elaborate on (3b): When diversity is sustainable (rather than just harvested), it is a true (costly) sign of an underlying energy flow, and it is really that underlying flow that is beautiful (i.e., life-giving).

Of course, in a larger scheme the flow must itself come from some process of entropy production. For example: We may worship the Sun (and the Void) for pumping through Earth the energy that creates biodiversity, and celebrate that diversity, yet its existence is paid for by the slow death of the Sun (as it equalizes with Void).
How You Should Read Research Papers According to Andrew Ng
Side note: With Corona and the rise of biotechnology, I hope we'll see some excellent courses in natural / hard science in the near future. I'd love to switch into the SynBio industry, but lack the willingness for another university degree. I also strongly prefer remote learning over onsite lectures.
Of course, you'd need some onside presence for lab work. That's the tricky and costly part. Still, if the future is bio, then demand will skyrocket.
Excellent work. Thanks for putting all this together.
> the traditional American crossbuck, the simple X-shaped railroad sign that warns drivers to yield to an oncoming train.

I would guess that roadway signage in the US runs about
80:20 textual:symbolic, but that the EU runs about 20:80,
with much heavier use of symbols, and use of text only
to modify or explain something not covered by the available
symbolic palette. Could any EU->US or US->EU migratory
drivers make their own estimates?