skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Agreed. It is useful to pass things that a legislature may never pass, like term-limits for legislators.

In Washington State, the initiatives frequently yield legislation that has conflicts/dependency problems with the existing law, something that happens far less-often with bills from within the legislature.

Also agreed that a high signature-number bar is one of the simplest/expedient ways to limit ballot-initiative spam. We have a person who has successfully made it their personal mission/job/source-of-notoriety to place some sort of small-government initiative on the ballot every year.
No the same capacities exist,though perhaps not under the same name, on Android; my S10+ dutifully switched from reporting 4G LTE to 5Ge when AT&T decided on that lie.
This is what funding allows. You don't desperately need to be a super success because you have reserves feeding that growth.
Both forms of “Silence is (not) consent” are true, they just refer to different things.
If you are in a position of authority, silence is effectively consenting to the status quo remaining unaltered.

If you are not in a position of authority, whoever is in that position can’t take your silence as consent of their choices.
You're not understanding the demand side.

>There is no inherent virtue in a '$200k+' number.

Indeed there is. It shows that the value gained by the employer is at least that of $200k+. It is not arbitrary and it is not wholly derived by supply. The cost of labor is set by the labor supply as well as the labor demand.

Not only does a an employee's location not change the employers' demand, the moving also does not change the supply available to employer. Moving or not, the employer could always find a new employee abroad if supply was indeed plentiful.

A less abstract way to look at things is this. The cost of living boost is just a bait to work somewhere. There's no magic to it. Just because you took one deal doesn't mean you should so easily take the opposite deal.
> It allows high-density crowds to continue having high-speed access

Is that an actual problem that affects many users and currently can't be resolved with LTE? I don't disagree that 5G will benefit carriers, but the hype around it being some kind of a revolution for the customer is overblown. The customer's problem is very rarely a technical shortcoming of LTE or the earlier technologies and more about how the service is sold and priced, and so far despite 5G indeed allowing much higher capacity there's no evidence that the industry as a whole is moving away from the user-hostile "data cap" model.

> You can barely make a phone call on NYE.

Isn't that a failure of the switching/call control equipment or the inter-carrier peering as opposed to tower capacity?
this would be a somewhat representative example of such a tree:

https://www.angmohdan.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/languag...

You can find more very easily with a google image search on "human language tree"
If you're not in a place of privilege life is politics.

Hoping from country to country with your pick of jobs isn't privilege?

I'd say it's the opposite. Those without privilege are the ones that don't have that option.
So we just need to encode our data files into a video format? Sure? There’ll be a lot of overhead due to redundancy to account for compression, but it’s free :)
> You could restate my point as "there is no evidence it is in fact useful"

And if you had originally stated your point that way, I would probably pointed out that there is equally no evidence that it will not be useful, if it turns out to be the case.

> ...but it's certainly not obvious that a better model implies an ontological line between itself and reality.

Clearly, I failed to get my point across, to the point where I cannot guess where this question is coming from. Let's see if I can be clearer...

My position on the definitions of words is that they are contingent on our knowledge and that new knowledge can change our definitions (I gave 'energy' as an example, and you appear to have accepted this point a couple of posts back.)

I take the same view of ontologies; the categories we see are contingent on what we know and may change as our knowledge increases. This should not be surprising, given that ontologies are specific cases of words with meanings that nominally pertain to how the world is. There is no implication here that a better model implies an ontological line between itself and reality; rather, the point here is effectively a "so what" reply to your statement, "it's a tenable position to claim [Newtonian mechanics] is just a model, and we accept that model because it's useful." Mutatis mutandis, as they say, and consequently, there is no justification for holding on to old ontologies if new facts suggest a better alternative, any more than there is for models or theories.

> To put it bluntly, is a better model really "more true", i.e. qualitatively different from a worse one?

Did you mean to write that, especially given that, in your previous post, you offered an argument for the proposition that "Newtonian mechanics is false, because, for example, it fails to accurately predict Mercury's orbit." If there is a relevant point here, I think it is that "more true" models are qualitatively better (and quantitatively better, also.)

> Ironically, if it were possible to [show an algorithm that can effectively emulate your brain within an acceptable margin of error], it would be proof there is no "intelligence", only "computability", making the first entirely redundant.

How so? If "intelligence" is a useful concept now (and your objection to "artificial intelligence" seems to be predicated on it being so), when we do not know if the mind is computationally modelable, why would this usefulness necessarily vanish if this turns out to be the case?

> I'll take the seventh.

? - I'm not familiar with this expression.
Wow. This is a really detailed flow. Do you offer consulting services?
In AI, with the humans, nothing changes. See this 1986 comment from John Nagle:

https://www.usenetarchives.com/view.php?id=comp.ai&g=4670&p=...
centralized warehousing is a security threat, not a bonus.

It just paints a big fat target on Toyota that screams "compromise us, we have so much PII it's almost embarrasing"
This is a great idea, I can't wait to see how it turns out. Really a tool that the internet has been lacking as a whole.
For any who are interested in witnessing a fictionalized example of applied Stylometry, I highly suggest the Star Wars Thrawn series by Timothy Zahn. Thrawn's specialty is making tactical inferences based on the physical art pieces created by a culture. It's a really interesting read, but don't take my word for it!
> stop using "decimated" as a synonym for "devastated"

OTOH decimation actually was devastating, the idea that it just means "lose 10% of" really undersells the process of punishing a large group of your army by dividing them into groups of 10 and forcing each group to choose one at random and then the other 9 murder them by stoning.
Google deliberately lies, like when forcing you to enable location history to be able to store home or work addresses in Google Maps - there is no technical reason for this.

The GDPR consent prompt they recently implemented on Google & YouTube is not actually GDPR compliant and does not offer an easy way to opt-out.

I can go on and on. I'm not saying Apple is perfect (a lot of the points you raised are valid), but it's sure as hell better than a company whose entire bottom-line is based on stalking people.
There's not a database of location data that all garage's can access. It's mainly about making it so that car manufacturers can't design car computers in a way that in a way that impedes independent shops from doing repairs without paying the manufacturers for access (think like custom data access protocols, or obfuscation that's only readable after paying Honda a monthly massive fee). This is the battle that farmers are fighting against john deere.

Actually, if the data is only accessible to a few authorized shops, that's when the data is especially likely to be sold. Data is really only valuable in aggregate - if more shops can service cars, then each shop really gets less access to aggregated car data. More choice means less centralization of the data which means it's more difficult to collect enough data for it to be sold.

I think the car manufacturers are the ones who are hoping to monetize the data, and that's why they're trying to restrict access.
glass screen protectors sacrifice themselves on drops, and a three-pack costs $12.
Can't up-vote this hard enough!
Yeah it took me a while to come around to Gammon, he uses a really clickbaity/scammy visual language and marketing copy to get subscribers but if you make it past that to the content, the content is mostly very high quality. The specific video you posted is one of his best.

And right, the classic equation from macro 101 that sums this up is:
P = ( M x V ) / Y

Where price level = money supply x velocity of money / gdp

Velocity is the amount of times a given dollar changes hands on average.

So they are saying that if QE fed reserves never make it out into the real economy via lending or monetized fiscal policy, velocity essentially equals 0 and never affects the price level.

Also on a side not, the other guy George mentions in that video Steve Van Metre is also excellent.
Nice definition of “school”, which is the most efficient method to teach/learn we have.
How can you complain at Apple for making up problems and at the same time criticise Apple for not having a thing everyone else has? If Amazon had it first, Apple didn't make it up. If not having it impresses you then it shouldn't be a point that Alexa had it first, that would be bad. If having what Alexa has impresses you, then Apple should be adding it, and adding it is not bad. You can't have both.

> Not to mention that other device like Alexa already have this.

Then don't mention it. What on earth do Android or Lisp or Linux users think will happen when they say "X had it first"? The only sane conclusion is that X is not the reason people avoided Android/Lisp/Linux. That was already clear because people were not tempted over by the presense of X. So if the only point is show gloat or be dismissive and/or scornful, who would want to move to a system which has the same feature but has a public facing community that's more about gloating and scoffing than being welcoming or helping?
On Pixel 4, 4a and 5, assistant does most queries on devices with the Neural processor. I wouldn't be surprised if they bring that capability to speakers too eventually. Though that increases the price of course. HomePod Mini is equivalent to Google Mini or Echo Dot but costs 3x the price. Maybe it's all the Apple Tax but my guess is that they had to put a pretty strong processor to do NLP on-device.
There are procedural ways certain bodies can drag their feet but it is binding. Marijuana was legalized for recreational use through the same process.
By this metric food scenes can only exist in 2-3 cities in the US (or world for that matter). I think food scenes that do one or two things well are totally worthwhile and a huge improvement over bland suburban chains.
The GPLv3 has exactly the same clauses (both 5c and 11) yet Google explicitly allows its engineers to contribute to such projects.

Why? Because this isn't about IP risk, it's about trying to kill the AGPL.
This has been the biggest unexpected benefit of having gone with an SE back in March...
New virtual reality software allows scientists to ‘walk’ inside cells
In most places only men can take walks shirtless...
It was a long regex, made of multiple parts with two OR'd together that looked very similar except for the last few characters. These two parts were trying to match a structured format, think of something like a domain name for example; it's not just [a-z0-9.-]+ since you can't have the - or . at the start or at the end, and maybe the end part has a limited length (say you want to match only short TLDs). I can't really say what these strings were but they had these sorts of restrictions and a range that was a bit larger than what domains can use (like capital letters).

So they had something like this for this structured part:

[a-zA-Z]+[a-zA-Z0-9-.]*[a-zA-Z0-9]?(\.[a-zA-Z]{2,3})?

Actually kind of like that, but with multiple ()? and (){N} wrapping the different layers.

Let's call the regex above STRUCTURED. Now how do you match either one of these structured strings followed by either `.foo` or `.bar`? They had it as:

STRUCTURED\.foo|STRUCTURED\.bar

(again, where STRUCTURED is replaced with the whole long regex from above).
Meaning that the regex engine, as it consumes the first characters that potentially match the structured string, can't tell whether it's in the left or right branch of this OR until it reaches either the `.foo` or `.bar` suffix.

The change I made was simply to match it with:

STRUCTURED(\.foo|\.bar)

In this case the engine can consume each character of the input and make its way through STRUCTURED without having to maintain k branches per character (given as k=2 in the example above but it was much more than that).

I hope the general idea still comes through despite the simplification and required obfuscation.
For you youngun's if you wanted "pictures" you'd have to go to alt.porn.*, choose an interesting title, get a bunch of posts with text data (wait for them to download), cut and paste them into a single text file then uudecode it to a JPEG of something that hopefully will match the title.
Thermogenic Plants
A Deep Learning Approach to Detect Covid-19 Patients from Chest X-Ray Images
Actually, I doubt there was much influence there.

I hung out in talk.origins for a little bit. The usual practice of threads there was to have very, very deep threads with people quoting liberally (i.e., not bothering to trim messages, which is usual custom on Usenet) to reply with a short message. And talk.origins was consistently one of the highest post count groups. If alt.atheism was like talk.origins, then it's mostly the crowd of people it attracted rather than any accident of UI design.
Are you this nonchalant about all daylight criminal activity that you witness?
NASA and JAXA to Send Sample Technology to the Moon and Phobos
RustDesk – Your Remote Desktop Software
Wide angle, no motion blur, is it HDR? I honestly don’t know myself.
Moving to the cloud has changed this mindset somewhat - now there's no longer perpetual licenses, and we can't expect that the application will last forever, there's some consideration given to how application data can be repatriated.

Having cloud apps come with APIs as the only customisation points helps with our business users - we tell them that they need to chose a product that does what they want, as we won't be able to bend things around for them like we used to.
> Because they predicted other, different, stuff?

In fact, yes. Prediction is a skill, skills can be developed and different predictors will have varying levels of skillfulness.

The biggest contributor IIRC is Fermi-ization: the skill of decomposing big hard predictions into many smaller predictions.

For example: what are the components of the question? They might include:

- The likelihood of deaths due to combat action. That can in turn include predictions of the relative effects of ship armour, weapons effectiveness, preparedness for combat conditions and so on.

- The number of people involved. If a skirmish involves a hundred ships on each side, 2 deaths is a very low estimate. How many ships are in the area? How many could reach it by December 31st? How many would be likely to be sent?

- The causes of conflict. What are the triggering events, and how likely are they to occur?

I'm sure smarter and better-qualified folks than me can argue all the details, but that's the point. You don't accept the question as a coin-flip with no priors. You go prior-hunting.
I have to ask the same question: why do we tolerate this Russophobia, where "Russia" is used as a boogeyman to solve the internal political problems, and redirect the outrage away from the real issues facing our societies?

This whole issue has been so old, it's been one of the story plots in a popular 1980s British TV show called Yes, Prime Minister:

- Why don't you expel 76 Soviet diplomats? That has been our practice in the past, when we wished to ensure that the press lose interest in something?

- I can do that?!

- It must be a story that nobody can disprove.

- And which will be believed even if it's denied!

https://twitter.com/rusembmalta/status/980521180460388352

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FW10zLDI3Eg

(Yes, Prime Minister, "Official Secrets", 1987)
Looking for strengths isn't the same as lowering the bar. If you have specific requirements, you will maintain those requirements. But, the goal is to push aside weaknesses that don't matter (such as nerves during an interview, or lack of truly unrelated knowledge).

Instead, the goal should be to ensure _qualified_ candidates can demonstrate the strengths they have in meeting your requirements.

So basically, there are two pieces to looking for strengths:

1. Determine which requirements truly matter. Even for highly technical jobs, interview skills are not what makes a successful employee.

2. Find ways for those who meet the bar to demonstrate that fact.
16 Psyche is the sort of place I was picturing as a source of gold. I didn't know we knew enough about its structure to say that the gold (if present) would be difficult to get at, but that sounds like an interesting problem.

In retrospect I guess it makes sense that if 16 Psyche is a chunk of planetary core, then the sort of impact that created it would likely have turned it molten, and its internal weak gravity may then have caused all the heavy metals to sink to the middle before it cools.

At any rate, gold mining sounds like an easier problem than, say, trying to manufacture stainless steel in space in a way that makes economic sense. (We'll probably get there eventually if we're going to have any kind of real space economy, but bootstrapping is going to be hard.)
Something before getting into A2DP codecs is to make sure your device is using A2DP and not HFP (headset mode). Many bluetooth headphones have a microphone built in so that they can be used in headset mode, and depending on your distro and your bluetooth card, the OS may default to HFP mode. In my case, Ubuntu required me to change the Bluetooth mode every time I connected a bluetooth headphone set up until the 19.10 update.
You can shop around for 529, to find the right rate/plan. I got mine in MI but I don't live there
Why would the error the same in absolute sense instead of relative to the gear ratio?
Privilege isn't a binary thing, it exists along many dimensions.

I'd hope you could understand that just because someone has a finite set of options doesn't mean they can't be impacted significantly by political policy due to society putting less value on who they are or where they come from.
The Next Paradigm Shift in Programming [video]
To me, the difference almost feels like Chinese is an acoustic instrument that has more flavor in how its played and Japanese feels more like a digital instrument in how its programmed.
I did skip many details in this video as Transformer architecture is itself a big topic. I would suggest breaking down this paper into 2 components.

1. Transformer
2. How to apply the Transformer to image data

As for the first one, I made a video to go through Transformer architecture, if you're interested
https://youtu.be/ELTGIye424E

For the second one, what you need to code except for the Transformer is a pre-processing pipeline to break an image into a sequence of patches.
I really wish of a future where I can just point my phone at one of my cast devices to cast to it.
American English is defined by usage. It has no official standards body setting its rules, unlike some other languages.

Irregardless, the fact that so many are bothered by this reality really begs the question: why are unravel and ravel held to a completely different standard? Get off my lawn.

Edit: grammar.
I think part of the value that senior people (those of us who have been in the industry for decades) bring is the wisdom of when a system has gone from uncool to dangerously unmaintainable.

Part of me wonders if it's because we old-timers ourselves know what it's like to be on that specific journey personally.
You can have privilege in job selection without privilege in certain other things that America would deny you while Canada would grant you...
The blueprint for life, neatly folded
I had a brief occasion to use NNTP twelve or thirteen years ago, where my university was still using NNTP for course discussion boards.

It was awesome. You had a good choice of clients to read and post (instead of a half-baked webapp), and everything was incredibly snappy.

We have fallen so far. There's no money in building protocols and money in apps, so people build apps instead.
They don’t tie your request to your Apple ID and you can opt out of any recording being stored. Presumably this would make it impossible for a government body to subpoena your recordings, which as we’ve seen with Alexa is entirely possible.
> For an archive this is a big no-no. Respect the source material!

Though I'm also curious, that's perhaps not the tone I would have used when asking. After all, better a censored archive than no archive.

I'm just speculating, but it may be the policy of usenetarchives.com, in order to accept their upload.

Censoring seems to be done around email addresses, names, and offensive words. Perhaps, this is done to reduce the chances of people later asking for the posts to be taken down entirely.

For example, I believe the takedown by Google of comp.lang.lisp and comp.lang.forth commented elsewhere was done because there was offensive content present. The Google support request that mentioned that reason was taken down, but it's what I remember.
Salaries aren't determined by value (though that's often the cap) they are determined by supply and demand.

Open it up to WFH anywhere and your supply just went way up. Some random person in WY is likely willing to work for Google for much less than 20% below bay area salaries.
To satisfy the "third place" you might look into storing these files in Amazon S3 Glacier, which is about $1/TB/month, so long as you don't read them back. (Retrieval is delayed, batched, and expensive.)

It would take some engineering: I might store each optical disk image as a compressed image file, for example (zstd would be good for the large amount of data), to avoid metadata charges. Fun to think about.
The "reach" gesture was actually introduced with the iPhone 6 Plus, due to its larger size.
The primary use case is watching a movie or listening to music with headphones. Can’t charge and listen without an extra dongle. Apples solution is BT headphone they sell but it’s a bad pattern.
This might be a great opportunity for many small startups. Big companies are too full of bloat to see this is a bad choice with even worse optics. Startups have the advantage of common sense and now need to only compete with much lower offers from larger companies. There's a bunch of startups that probably done care where or when you work.
I read "companies do this or that" but it's teams that make hiring decisions. Whether companies or teams are prepared for remote colleagues or not it's up to them.

Yes, pandemic has made everyone remote but we can't just ignore the fact that Bay area was paying premium because they wanted "locals" (or at least those willing to become locals). Otherwise why bother restrict hiring to a single region/country/continent?

I know that it feels anachronistic to fight remote teams right now, but the truth is, regardless of the merits of both form of working some managers/teams/companies have preference for one or the other, simple as that.

Employees also don't automatically become ideal remote colleagues overnight. So, maybe it is a good idea to attach a cost to the change from being in office to being remote so that the decision balances both ways.