skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is way older than 2015. I remember passing around a .bat file with it embedded in High School. 2009 era. At that point it was already old.
I disagree that people are vulnerable to it. I honestly can’t think of a single Facebook ad that has ever changed my mind in a topic. Adults are not vulnerable. The point is is so identify and catch the people who are posting conspiracies and getting radicalized before they do something. You can do that if you don’t see it. I doubt some random reader gets radicalized simply from reading things and never engaging in conversations. With those conversations you are now to identify people and actually prevent more radicalization. For example Facebook knows if you make a death threat, via their algorithms as well as flagging by users. Not only that but their algorithms can identify them in private messages sent, and report them to law enforcement. This may shock people but if these people don’t post on Facebook they then create heir own websites, post in chat rooms, recruit their friends. Then you are left with a completely uncontrolled website or app where these people get stuck in an echo chamber.
So, NaN time then...
Speedrunners are very well aware of all the probability based events of the games they play, as well as the odds of those events and any circumstances that can change them [0]. It's called 'luck manipulation'. Usually that's only really useful to tool assisted runs, but on occasion luck manip can be performed by human players.

Regardless, while those in-the-know can recognize that a good run would have been a record if not for an unlucky event, at the end of the day all that matters is your time (or score). Accounting for the randomness is part of the strategy aspect of the sport.

[0] People who speedrun a particular game will also know of any differences in those probabilities across all known versions of the game. These people have studied these games so deeply they usually know more about how they work than the people who made them.
It is way better that way. As someone who lived outside of the UK, I have been watching BBC news, documentaries, series and films for over a decade online. The BBC is probably the most wholesome source of mainstream media that I can imagine.
To point to the BBC as an argument against nationalization makes a very weak case.

Very few media organizations have the kind of international reach as the BBC has. Frankly, that says something about its quality and wholesomeness.
I'm not a US citizen but the only reason I ever watch Fox news and CNN is to get a sense of how bad things are going in the US. They're more like reality shows than news.
Wow, 3 hyperbolic statements in just one comment. To be clear:

-Wolves won't go extinct anytime soon.

-There's no reason to think farmers would pick another "enemy" if they would.

-Livestock is actually important to farmers. No hidden agenda.
First, I think ranchers are paid.

The US has around 18,000 wild wolves. And another 60,000 wolves in Canada. In comparison, all of Scandinavia has maybe 400 or so. IOW, US+Canada has 200x the wolf population in 17x the land area (human population density is roughly the same). While apx 80,000 wolves does not seem enough to be considered "thriving" IMO, they're in no danger of extinction anymore. So while some care should be taken to maintain populations, it seems reasonable to take them off the endangered list.

There are also 10's of thousand mountain lions, 10's of thousand bears, and millions of alligators in the USA. The USA/Canada is not exactly lacking in dangerous apex predators.
Ranked choice voting doesn't eliminate the winner-take-all, zero-sum nature of politics. That's entirely my point. All political power is zero-sum (the more I have the less you have), it doesn't matter what voting system you implement.

So my broader point is that, given that plenty of other countries don't have ranked voting of any kind and plenty of viable 3rd parties, Americans really have no valid policy argument to make as to why they don't have viable 3rd parties. The only arguments that hold any water are cultural.
Australia has done this for a century. It's not that hard. You have official counters and each candidate can appoint scrutineers to observe the count[0]. Scrutineers can challenge how a ballot has been counted: "I think that's actually a 7, not a 1". If the count supervisor agrees, it's changed. If not, then not. If it's ruled impossible to distinguish, the ballot is considered informal and removed from the count entirely.

[0] https://www.abc.net.au/cm/rimage/7570634-3x2-xlarge.jpg?v=6
It keeps the process consistent with filling out the rest of a ballot. Just fill in the little oval with your preference. It lets us use the same tabulation machines also, I presume.
Time is more important than cost wrt fission development and global warming
Simulations counts were times when a safety driver took control of the vechile, and post-incident simulations with the same data show that the AI would have crashed the car without the safety driver. So fair to include them.
Developing Address Handling for Go
Or at least who thought he carried computer science on his shoulders.

He made significant, important contributions. He wasn't the only one. Hoare, Backus, McCarthy... there were a lot of people who made important, fundamental contributions.

Structured programming caught on. Proofs did not, for reasons that would have offended Dijkstra - they took time, and it was actually more valuable (both socially and financially) to produce mostly-working software quickly than to produce proven-correct software slowly.

But he never would have accepted that the real world was that way. He insisted that his approach was correct. As Backus said of him, "This guy’s arrogance takes your breath away."

So: Important contributions? Absolutely. More than anyone else's? Perhaps. Carried computer science on his shoulders? No, but he probably thought he did.
Machine Learning Based Analysis of Finnish World War II Photographers
I signed up for Pro with the $2/mo plan. I agree, $10/mo would be too much, but the ability to do more advanced scripting intrigued me enough to give it a try.

My only issue is that most services do not have enough triggers or abilities to prove useful for the workflows I currently want. For instance, I would like to append to a Dropbox Paper document when I star a github repo, possibly filtered by some logic. Guess what? Even though both APIs would allow this, IFTTT has neither the trigger nor the action I need. This is just one example, but I frequently run across this problem, which is a major inhibitor to me using it more. I don't have a ton of "smart home" devices which is where IFTTT shines the most IMO.

I'm staying on for now to see if I get enough value at $2/mo with the triggers and actions currently available. If I'm not getting much out of it a year from now I'll probably switch fully over to a more programmable solution.
> Roads are literally built for cars to drive on.

No, at least outside of the US roads were there before the car even existed. They were walked on before anything else. Then cars hijacked them, and now people have so long forgotten in the US that they've started writing laws to strengthen their land-grab as if it was always this way.

> Should I be able to walk in front of a bus load of people and delay their commute?

No I don't think you should be able to unreasonably obstruct the highway. You can't do that no matter what vehicle or no vehicle you're in. But crossing is completely reasonable in my mind.
Ah right, thanks, I wasn’t sure if the two were related.
Has to be GAN and related ML developments. They're opening up problem spaces where progress had been largely stalled for decades. I don't think they'll be the ultimate solution in this problem space, but I do think they're an important stepping stone.
In scandinavian countries each party typically belongs to either the red block or blue block.

Some of them do flirt with the idea of switching sides. But it's typically always the red or the blue block that forms a coalition (or minority government with supporting parties from same block).

So you effectively have two sides. And parties are pressured by the media to declare which block they support before each election. And they rarely switch sides.

Which party within a block you vote on, does matter.. because it gives those parties more influence on the government.

But you could also say that what you vote for during the primaries on US elections does matter.. however, at each stage on use election a group that only makes up 30% of the population gets no representation.
A lot of environmentalist are. Nature is to be designed from behind a keyboard, and to be enjoyed from a well maintained trail.
I find interesting the discussion regarding gRPC support for Azure App Service, and the amount of moving parts involved to achieve such support... https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/issues/9020#issuecommen...
Something to know about RWhiteGoose:
https://imgur.com/a/X7qLRXa

And his response:
https://mobile.twitter.com/RWhiteGoose/status/10677075646897...

How these are weighed against one another in evaluating his character is left as an exercise to the reader.
Why are most posts about piracy? If you put your content in youtube, it is there to be downloaded or archived. The platform might not survive the test of time. Torrent sites and legal/fair-use tools such as youtube-dl help preserve humanity. How many times were you able to obtain an obscure book only found in 2 libraries around the world? Or a music album from a once popular orchestra, nowehere to be found in retail channels? Or a TV episode archived and never to be broadcasted or lost in a hurricane?...We as Americans have the duty to preserve humanity and by humanity I mean our individual rights. Let law enforcement to prosecute those who profit from copyrighted works. But information dissemination? how can society move forward like this?
I don't care were the emails came from. If a Russian agent with a secret invisibility cloak powered off the freedom of the countries they invade sneaked into Hunter's room at night, killed his dog, and stole his laptop, I don't care.

Maybe the repairman story is parallel construction maybe it's not, but I think the emails are real and Biden's Campaign response is a pathetic attempt at pointing to a scarecrow. It's as bad as Chinavirus in my hierarchy of sins, it's fuel for America's systemic racism and exceptionalism which are the energy that fuels the reactor that will make this country blow up.
In Australia it's based on the percentage of first preferences.
Dependent type theory has been very useful for automated theorem proving and PLT static analysis (Coq, Agda, Idris are languages that POC'd this).
Right, that makes more sense. I guess my brain didn't parse the sentence correctly.
A lot of the other countries that do not have RCV also have one or more of the following features that help keep a healthy number of parties (not an exhaustive list at all):
- parliamentary system
- proportional representation [0] (e.g. party list systems, mixed member proportional representation [1])
- two-round voting [2] (like France)

RCV is not the only way, but it is _a_ way to foster viable 3rd parties.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation#PR...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed-member_proportional_repr...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed-member_proportional_repr...
I’m ashamed to admit that I spent many hours making my own frame-by-frame gifs in the late 90s/early 2000s and while it’s (I assume) much easier to make a gif today I don’t exactly know how because I’ve never done it. I’m sure I could figure it out but between Giphy and Google every gif I’ve needed in the last 15 years has been at my fingertips.
Intel uses Synopsys Zebu ASIC emulator, which essentially has Xilinx Ultrascale inside.
> why not just ignore it then?

Because it's misleading and/or missing the point. As stated. Why would I want more people to read something that I believe is misleading?

> Clearly it's not "fine"

Once again missing the point. The prevailing opinion on HN is what will get upvoted, and a lot of other stuff will get downvoted. I have seen that prevailing opinion be hilariously wrong before.

If you want to be heard with an unpopular opinion, you have to make a compelling argument... you can't expect to be upvoted to the top just because you're sharing an opinion. It's rare for a comment to be lukewarm enough for no one to feel strongly enough to downvote it. It's going up, going down, or it's on a thread no one is reading. Downvotes don't mean people hate the person leaving the downvoted comments; it's just a tool for disagreeing with comments.

> This is my last comment on HN.

Because people disagreed with you? People even left explanations, but that wasn't enough.
> They led to conspiracy theories about politicians trafficking children, the "deep state," etc.

Oh no. The horror. Lets shut everything down. Won't you think of the poor politicians? We must do everything possible to protect the reputation of politicians? Are you a journalist because you sound like one. So what about all the nasty things said about putin, xi, erdogan, etc? Should we also censor those? Or are you just talking about protecting politicians of your preferred political party?

> Otherwise, anyone with enough influence to generate these echo chambers can use them to influence large swaths of the public into believing things that have no basis in reality.

So should facebook, youtube, twitter, instagram, etc also shutdown every news organization on their site? For all the talk about "Qanon", the biggest conspiracies peddled are by traditional media. And why stop at social media? Should telephone companies, ISPs, Office Depot, CDNs, etc censor "disinformation"?

It's amazing to shallow logic of authoritarian types. Just because they think "big tech" is on their side.
I mean...wat. The company in question seems to essentially have no intention of spending their cash, yet instead of just paying it out in dividends or stock buy backs they're pumping it all into bictoin (or investing in growth).

This doesn't make sense for a number of reasons. Firstly: The company has no competitive advantage buying bitcoin. If investors in this company wanted to buy bitcoin there's no reason not to just pay a dividend and let the investors buy bitcoin.

Secondly, investors can now no longer invest in MicroStrategy - since the value of your investment in MSTR is now 2/3rd determined by the performance of MSTR, and 1/3rd determined by the performance of bitcoin. Essentially attaching a hugely risky bet on bitcoin to a business analytics company.

Thirdly, even if you do buy their contention that USD is going to go to 0 (which is a wild contention) there are other assets you would buy. Commodoties, Foreign currencies, real estate - hell even Treasury Inflation-Protected bonds would all form part of your portfolio.

Fourthly, you're signing yourself up for this enormous risk of owning bitcoin. You've essentially put a $400m target on your back saying "If you can compromise our security, you could have half a billion dollars!". Now obviously security is important in all asset ownership, but most assets have far more reputable people willing to offer services to secure your possessions (like a bank).

On the other hand though this does make it nice and easy for the CEO to disappear off with half a billion of his investors money in his back pocket. I'm sure glad those investors are in safe hands though - this would be really suspicious if the CEO had previously had to settle accounting fraud charges.
The second vote was still counted, though. It just happened that Bernie had 49% (35 + 14) of the vote vs Trump's 51% (45 + 6) in this example? Just because I don't like the hypothetical results of the vote doesn't mean it is wrong.
Fellow HomeSeer user checking-in here... same thoughts. Thanks for the HomeBridge mention--I hadn't seen that before and it'll be really useful.
Wow thanks for that offer. Grateful, but if I may I will decline - I really want to learn how things work here, and I'm making great progress. At the same time I'm trying to finish three software projects - one that has 60kLoC and started life in 2004. No shortage of stuff to do (and if I can turn one of these into a lifestyle business I'll be well happy)!
Plenty of other governments have first past the post voting and viable 3rd parties. The only argument where this holds water is with executive elections (president, governor).
Government intervention is unavoidable. It's just a matter of choosing the right kind of intervention.
Facebook wouldn't exist without government support and expansionary monetary policy.

We can go to an extreme and point out that to properly decouple state from economics, we'd have to abolish corporate personhood first.
We would need to abolish 'limited liability' legal entities; the real purpose of these entities is to allow individuals to repudiate responsibility for their actions by deflecting blame towards these abstract legal entities. This doesn't make any sense aside from facilitating criminal activity.
Whenever a corporation commits a crime and isn't shut down (which is 100% of the time), that is government interference of the worst kind.
For someone looking at this now it may not seem better than the internet you know. But it was.
> Young generations have been taught for many decades now that we are not in this world together. Nobody pays off your debt. Nobody else will look after your health if you don't do it yourself. Nobody will come and provide you shelter when you become homeless

You picked some extreme examples. We are in this world together. It's called a society. It's unfair, it's cruel,
it's skewed, but to imply everybody is completely on their own is disillusioned. Humans cooperate. Not always willingly, but effectively. This is how we prospered for millennia and occupied every corner of the globe. You're sharing your thoughts now thanks to cooperative work by countless people who built the information age.

Thinking you can lift yourself up from your bootstraps and only think for yourself is ignoring how interconnected the society where you live is.

Pointing out extreme cases where people put a limit to their compassion doesn't change the fact that you do owe your successes in your life also to the effort of others you have never met.
Taking wolves off the endangered list does not mean open season on hunting any and all wolves with abandon. The wolves of Yellowstone will still be mostly protected.
We're a few months away from introducing Tara premium, which includes access controls for teams and user level permissions (ie contributor, etc), and is based on simple subscription based pricing. It's pretty much what our users have asked for, and we're continuing to listen to their feedback.

That being said, our entire ethos is to have a functional free forever plan, where users can manage their tasks and run their sprints, without worrying about hitting a 10 user limit, limited-time trials or task limits. We're avid supporters of open source, and we believe closed source software should have wider availability. So much of B2B software is behind paywalls, demos and short trials, hence our approach.
So are you saying that we should force a private company to carry speech and eliminate their ability to set standards for what they carry/publish? In this case it is particularly interesting since the reputation of a mailer is dealt with in the aggregate- a few “bad apples” (I will use UCE - unsolicited commercial email as the example here) can ruin the reputation of all the mail received from that source.

Either way it is a slippery slope.
You also need to account for confounding variables, such as geography. Does Phoenix mirror the nation as a whole?
"The more moderate candidates [than Trump] never consolidated..."

Thinking of Trump as a far-right candidate is, in my opinion, a misread. He's operating on a different axis. Many of his policies are center-left: no wars, peace deals, love letters to Kim Jong Un, the First Step Act, massive stimulus, and inner city programs.

His main positions on the right are conservative judges and the border wall. He kind of went crazy on those two things, and did a bunch of other non-partisan crazy things. But overall he doesn't fit into the left/right divide.
Yes, for example, in today's pull request, I added a new file and now in my Typescript file it renders things like this, which I find confusing:
https://imgur.com/a/C82hcMK
I am working at a company that is tracking vehicles using GNSS antennas. When designing the vehicle dynamics model for the Kalman Filters, I found it useful to have a graphical representation (including error ellipses, velocity vectors etc). Turns out that pygame was a great fit for that type of visualization.

Fast forward to two days ago, when I was idly watching George Hotz design a monocular visual SLAM prototype in 11h. Much to my surprise, one of the first things he fires up is pygame for visualization [1]!

[1] https://youtu.be/7Hlb8YX2-W8?t=701
About the JAVA’S INSECURE PARALLELISM book:

“The author examines the synchronization features of Java and finds that they are insecure variants of his earliest ideas in parallel programming published in 1972–73. The claim that Java supports monitors is shown to be false. The author concludes that Java ignores the last twenty-five years of research in parallel programming languages."

Not only Java, btw. It's an ongoing desaster.
RCV is basically just a very quick runoff election; it has the same propensity for extremeness that a runoff does.[1] That said, I think it is very likely that more people will vote for third-party candidates (TPC) under ranked-choice.

You could make the case that TPC will allow for the representation of a wider spectrum of views, or alternatively that TPC are likely to be extremists. Both may be true.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting#Ranked_Choice_Vo...
I have wondered what Dijkstra would have said about that most (from my limited view) verification advances nowadays focus on functional programming (dependant types and so forth). I get the feeling he wasn't too fond of functional programming.

Or maybe he even was able to comment on it, I am not sure how far the field had moved while he was still with us. I have searched for it but could find any comment from him on the subject.
>unproven allegations

This entire thread concerns Mailchimp specifically. Not sure there is a clearer definition of advertising than "unproven allegations".
Incorrect.

From the article you discussed on wiki (Burlington 2009 mayoral race)

> In IRV, there is no tactical incentive for a voter withhold or falsify their second choice.

We can get into the weeds about mathematical details like Monotonicity and Condorcet, but the truth of the matter is that nearly all the time (much more often than First-past-the-post) these measures end up being identical anyway.

I don't think anyone would argue that first-past-the-post would have produced a better candidate in this election than RCV did.
When all the social media platforms started censoring people years ago, most sites started to urge users to subscribe to mailinglists. Looks like now they have come for your mailinglists too. What's next?
The drawback is that it is more complex than a traditional ballot. It's not especially difficult, but given how many people have difficulty with even our current ballots it will cause some additional issues.
A nitpick: in a normal election, half of the Senate faces election, so 6 per state.

It's only double-dissolution elections where all 12 face election at the same time. In those scenarios minor parties and independents are much more likely to get elected, because the quota is halved.

Voting above the line works basically fine. What happened is that the major parties were too lazy to discuss things with many minor parties, who then went off and arranged their own preference deals.
an usually good apology at least!
The java applet was just a telnet client in Java, IIRC. The original was a telnet server.