skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Some in the west think that India is western like democracy, but moves like this indicate that the government there is actually a regressive and almost authoritarian in nature, it society is far from reaching say the level of openness of other modern democracy, and the current government is hell bent on retarding and reversing all tendencies towards achieving a westernized polity.
> Isn't it just a matter of measuring the IO and reproducing it?

No, you also have to understand it.

For a very simple example, suppose that, on initialization, the driver always sends 01 02 03 04 88 99 00 to the hardware, which then replies with 05 06 AA BB 01, and then the driver sends 07 08 11 22 05. What is the meaning of each of these bytes? What should the driver do if the hardware instead replied with 05 06 CC DD 07? Is the AA BB always the same for every device, or is it a calibration constant which it got from somewhere else? Is the last byte some kind of checksum, and if so, how to calculate it? And so on. Even for very simple hardware, reverse engineering the IO can be a lot of guesswork.
Nobody really programs by hand, so I'm not sure what that remark aims towards? The practice of maths and programming are so different I don't know where you think there is any clarity gained from direct comparison.
Brazilian Favelas spring to mind.

Yeah, like that.
Thank you for your thoughtful answer. I pointed the lack of error bars myself, as well as mentioned that I don’t know what other number to divide by, as you noted. I am not trying to be intellectually dishonest.

And I may agree with your analysis - on phone now, can’t really do the reading.

However, we have two sources you claim are only for the cutter incident, whee one quotes 200,000 doses and another 120,000; as you note, the 1/1000 might well be 0.8 or 1.3 in 1000; it may be false but it is definitely bot “patently false”.

On the same note, it’s the internet, and for all you know I am a dog, but I have saved a family members from years of
agony and wrong treatments due to wrong diagnosis after being told “it is patently obvious” that my analysis was wrong. And I have apology letters from department heads at two of the world’s highest ranked hospitals after it turned out I was right and they were wrong.

And you know what? I’m quite sure I probably had a few mathematical errors along the way back then as well. But what they thought was two orders of magnitude more probable evidence towards one direction, turned out to be higher probability in the other (by less than an order of magnitude) and turned out to be what the thought was improbable beyond consideration. (And, I found a few mathematical errors in a three peer reviewed papers they were relying on)

I take issue with people who claim “patently obvious” about things which have about factor of 2 or so (if I take your numbers) without error bars (120000-200000 is a large difference) and without supplying sources, which you didn’t bother until I did.

(And I may not have time to delve into this further - this is merely of historical interest to me, not life and death like that other event).

Also, you may notice this sub thread is basically the only one that actually discusses numbers, others use arbitrary determinations like “most people’s living memory” to discard concerns. Despite advocating vaccines myself, I have a problem with religious zealotry around vaccines, which is what most pro-vaccine people practice - I have a child who could not get vaccines for medical reasons for many years, and I have to explain that, no, vaccines are not perfectly safe on an individual basis, and have not historically been perfectly safe on a population basis (Swedish Pandemrix), even though on a net population basis they are a net positive.

I thank you again for your thoughtful discussion.
The Ben Bernanke example as a lie was a bad example. The Feds and everyone else clearly thought they could control things in 2007. And indeed, they may even have been correct if Paulson as a former Goldman CEO did not hate Bear Sterns and Lehman.
I found this guide to be helpful: https://sourabhbajaj.com/mac-setup/
Because of the mask debacle I would say that Twitter was a better source of information about the pandemic than any major world health organization. I dislike social media more than the average bear. Imagine a crack pot on twitter gets one or two things right before spouting nonsense?

Lying to the public is a dangerous game. It disappoints me that people give these orgs a free pass.
Cute and disturbing, but reading the survey responses (there weren’t a whole lot), the piece seems highly embellished. It reads like a sociopathic mad-lib and I’m not sure there are any valuable takeaways here (particularly insights about a so-called Silent Majority)
Apache OpenMeetings – Video chat, messaging, white board, doc editing and more
I guess I don't understand what meaning you put into "isolation" then.
> As good as GPT-3 is today it will be twice as good within a year, and thousands of times as good within a decade. When they figure out how to marry it with even basic reasoning and memory, it's hard to imagine how that will enhance its powers.

This is Kurzweil's fundamental mistake, which undermines basically everything he is saying: Extrapolating exponential growth trends into the future.

There is absolutely no reason to believe exponential growth trends continue indefinitely. In fact, every single such trend in the past has come to a stop. Exponential growths are always exceptions, not rules.

GPT-3 will not be "thousands of times as good" within a decade. It is a very limited model, and it happens to be doing well at the moment, but it doesn't just keep improving. This approach will hit its fundamental limits at some point, and then the growth just stops.
> In 2007 March was he actually lying?

The question the author should be asking. Effectively timed intervention would have been more helpful at preventing the financial panic than 'prosocial lying', so the mainstream explanation that Bernanke was just wrong has a lot going for it
All fine and well but this tries to draw significant statistical conclusions from a sample of one, and it's unclear if that's even remotely possible or wise. The instant we find a counter example all this nice thinking will have to be trashed.
I get the scepticism, but you're not really supporting your opinions here. The first rocket was madness, the shuttle was madness, landing rockets on sea platform was madness. Sometimes mad ideas work. You'll need more details to guarantee something.
How to Land Your Dream Job Using Relational Algebra
>Currently, however, this promotes large-scale monoculture.

Standardization is a hallmark of efficiency and humanity has lots of mouths to feed. I'm not sure you can really do it any other way.
Nah, there are cable companies that offer 50 mbps upstream, and the DOCSIS 3.1 standard that's currently in use supports much more. They're just stingy.
Re-read the entire thread and look at the usernames again :-)
You are aware of what a symbol picture is? Also, yes, every server and super computer has network components, that still doesn't mean that the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's Sierra and its 4 GPUs per node are accessible from the internet, so your remark is kind of meaningless.
I'd switch to Vivaldi instantly if they dumped Chromium / Blink and the browser didn't contact Google every time it starts.

Mozilla's short-term vision in not offering an easy to use standalone Gecko rendering engine (to prevent others from making competing browsers using Gecko) is a major factor on why Chrome and Chromium browsers rules the roost today. And Firefox keeps losing its market share. It's a good example of greed corrupting open source philosophy. (They seem to have shortsightedly realised this for mobile platforms with GeckoView).

In choosing Chromium / Blink Vivaldi has chosen to sacrifice all the philosophy of the old Opera browser - creating an innovative, blazing fast browser without being a resource hog.

We need more Webkit and Gecko based browsers.
This article seems to confuse various forms of knowledge and discourse.

To follow up on the doctor analogy: First, I expect the doctor to tell me what he finds. For instance, I can't blame him for not finding pathologies for which I don't have a symptom yet.

Secondly, the state of any scientific knowledge is limited. Especially in economy, to explain ongoing new phenomenons is already a prowess, to accurately and convincingly anticipate them is sorcery. I expect economists to have heated debates among themselves, and the state of established knowledge to be lagging behind.

Thirdly, I don't expect my doctor to tell to Congress what he finds. There is a distinction between applying professionally an expertise and political statements. The Chair of the Fed has to do both both, having to analyse the situation accurately and to measure public statements. That goes to the question of how decisions are taken in a democracy.

Finally, as for op-ed, even written by Nobel prized economists, they are labelled as opinions. I appreciate Paul Krugman column, but one feature of weekly opinions is that they inevitably contain contradictions.
Pretty equivalent to linking to the New York Times or CNN, I would say. Their overall leftist bias is pretty obvious but you just read the article and judge for yourself.
ELIZA passes the Turing test. The fundamental issue with the Turing test is that it doesn't even attempt to assess machine intelligence. Instead, it assesses human ability to assess humanity. As walking talking pareidolia machines that anthropomorphise everything from toys to animals, to yes software, we're uniquely terrible at this.

Turing was a genius, but that doesn't make every thought experiment he transcribed - especially in the later stage of his life where he was drugged, alone and suicidally depressed - true.
Doing a hybrid approach which is basically swap to off-chip ram shouldn't be too hard.
That's body/mind dualism, which went out of fashion with Freud.

Your brain also just "creates the illusion" of understanding. It's slightly better it to the outside world, and a lot better to itself. But it's really just a matter of degree.
Ah i feel sad looking at the comments, most trying to fan their arguments against huffpost specifically, but ignoring the FDI norms.
We are also known for seeing patterns where they don't exist. If someone is going to make claims about the neural network's reasoning they should corroborate it with statistical analysis of its performance
Yep, it's 180,000 tons.

Which would still feed 18,000,000 million people in Africa for a year.
Also the <title> tag is often different from the readable title in <h1> (the HN bookmarklet picks up the title tag). And that's throughout many news organizations. CNN does that all the time.
Even if that’s true then close Huffpost by finding evidence for those claims.

Not by adding a retroactive FDI cap and destroying foreign future investment.

Of course, the fact that the government didn’t do the correct thing indicates that Huffpost is hardly an influence operation, but that this government wouldn’t survive too long with independent media dominating the airwaves and Whatsapp as opposed to their lackeys.
> The machines have always commanded a premium for things that enthusiasts don’t see value in (I.e. anything beyond numeric spec sheet values), so most critics completely miss the point of them.

It's not just intangibles. I really like using Macs, but my latest computer is a Dell XPS 17. This is not a cheap computer if you get the 4k screen, 64GB of RAM and the good graphics card. At those prices, you should consider the MBP16. The MBP is better built, has a better finish and just feels nicer.

Thing is, Dell will sell me an XPS 17 with a shitty screen because I don't care about the difference and would rather optimise battery life. I can get 3rd party RAM and SSDs. I can get a lesser graphics card because I don't need that either. I can get a more recent Intel CPU. And I can get the lesser model with a greater than 25% discount (they wouldn't sell me the better models with a discount though).

I think some of the Apple Tax, is them not willing you sell you a machine closer to your needs, not allowing some user replaceable parts and not having discounts.
I think the definition of democracy exclude many countries today. One of the major point of democracy which I was taught in my social class was that we need enough choices in our parties and candidates. India doesn't have that. There are only two significant political parties at the central level and one of them has been weakened too much to be a competitor anymore.

There was a question in my exam about this too. Why are x countries not democratic despite having public elections?

Real democracy needs more than two parties.
Which x86 boards would you recommend?
Nobody programs by hand ANY MORE. Everybody did in the age of punchcards.
> In order for me to be born,

> Isn't that a quote from a book?

The good book isn't it? I can't say for sure or say who or when, but it seemed familiar to me too; I think it's biblical, but I'm pretty far from an authority on it.

(Specifically that part of the sentence/the structure I mean, not that the whole thing is plagiarised.)
I've come to believe that economics is essentially a fraudulent field of study, akin to social psychology. The result of the growing influence of those trained in the field is that much of our economy is now similarly fraudulent.

I think a lot of people, including major stakeholders, know this to be true, or at least feel it to be true, but are willing to continue acting as if it isn't, because the very act of re-evaluating the fundamentals of the field will cause both existential and market crises which will be too painful to endure.
All India related topics have started attracting these kind of comments lately...
so no more clickbait articles then.. thanks india
I agree. Or lacanian psychoanalysts, pure structure, no (imaginary) meaning (like maths, or functional programming, no side effects), which I like. Book of Kohelet / Ecclesiastes seems similar to Book of Changes/ I ching.
> If economists hadn’t given up on knowledge oh about a century ago or so,

You're writing this as if everybody knows what you're referring to, but I really don't. What are you referring to? What does it mean for someone to "give up on knowledge"?
That still seems like a wild literal over-interpretation. If we think like a physicist we can say that prosocial lying is wrong yet still understand that the mathematician will consider it okay in the limit case.
I don't think we could have gotten here any other way, and I'm very glad to be able to eat every day - but if we keep rapidly converting good land into bad, we're going to end up worse off than we were before Haber & Bosch gave us an alternative to famine.
The article seems to take it as given that Bernankie was lying in 2007 rather than just mistaken. In case this is obviously true, what piece of evidence am I missing?
It seems to me that not being able to filter people for things like race is an antipattern designed to increase engagement. IE waste my time trying to find what I want. Unless you're willing to not optimize your income, I doubt you'll be able to solve online dating.
How many years left till everyone run arm on server side too anyway?
I don't believe that's what the parent post meant. The state of the art climate modelling predictions output confidence intervals.

If you quote the low end of the confidence interval, and claim that climate change is a manageable inconvenience, you'll be (justifiably) called out by climate scientists.

If you quote the high end of the confidence interval, and elicit a picture of catastrophic consequences, mass migrations, or even runaway greenhouse effects, the climate scientists are suspiciously aloof. Even if you add zealous insistence that not a single country in the world will benefit from the warming; and that we're hurtling towards becoming the next Venus.
(Aside: I love your username, haha.)

They do it because, unlike our profession, it's hard to find out when you're wrong right away so they read a lot of competing theories and know that the models are only pale comparisons to all the swirling forces and incentives. What's the likelihood of the DPRK giving up their nukes in the next 5 years? 0.1%? Well if they do it will have massive ramifications on Asian and global security. Moving billions of dollars around. And so on.

So they hedge. And the usually use squishy language when they talk to the public. But for finance professionals they talk more in terms of distributions of outcomes or possible complications. It's a messy science.
If nothing else, this teaches us about the true value of eloquence.
Recommended books for a self taught software developer
I'm a self taught developer (of 4 years) and have been working professionally as a developer (working mostly with Python and JavaScript) for the past 2 years.

As an autodidact, I feel I'm lacking knowledge in many of the core principles of software engineering and computer science. I often find myself having great ideas for projects, packages and implementations but find myself running into roadblocks and frustration when trying to express them.

Book recommendations appreciated!
Later in the article he tones it down and says there's exceptional cases where it's okay for a doctor to lie.
The regex thing doesn't make any sense as the asterisk isn't even a wildcard.

I think the only system he's likely to have used at that time which used the asterisk as a wildcard is CP/M. It was definitely less ubiquitous as it is today.
> Does a strong argument exists for this?

No. At that level of concentration the opposite is true:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopoly

On top of that, massive multinational companies can have extremely influential lobbying groups and can demand subsidies from governments.
If you're willing to experiment there's this thread on pixls.us[0] that might be interesting to follow:

> rustrated with heavy dependencies and slow libraries, i’ve been experimenting with some game technology to render raw image pipelines. in particular, i’m using SDL2 and vulkan. to spur some discussion, here is a random collection of bits you may find interesting or not.

> also please note this is just a rough prototype bashed together with very little care and lots of hardcoded things just to demonstrate what’s overall possible or not.

Since that is SDL2/Vulkan based you might get something out of the discussion there

[0] https://discuss.pixls.us/t/processing-that-sucks-less/13016
That's very depressing to hear to be honest.
>whatever facts presented are either cherry-picked or irrelevant.

>Look what japan did.

>Look what the dutch did.

>Look, the US was altruistic enough to give them indipendence.

>Look, the US even trains their military.

You responeded with a bunch of whatabout and called the US an ally.

Would you call the US an ally of south america too? (And ignore all the horrible hegemonic involvement.)

Why do you only cherry-pick Venezuela as an example and not Cuba, where mixed races living peacefully, side by side?

How does rioting promote marxism or socialism?

(>Look at all this right-wing brainfuck.)
> Proper maintenance gets you a long way.

One thing I discovered recently is that vehicle maintenance and regular inspections are not a requirement in the US for it to be street-worthy, I found that surprising given how important cars are there in many cities.

Here in Italy cars must go through this inspection in their fourth year and then every two years, by law. Not doing that can get your vehicle confiscated. Same for insurance, it's illegal to drive without one.
I think you lose a lot of granularity when you just measure a farm by size.

A 20,000 acre “farm” that only grazes a few thousand head of cattle because it’s practically desert could be much less productive than a 100 acre farm in the most fertile region of the world.

So it wouldn’t surprise me that the smaller farms feed an outsized proportion of the population.
These seem fairly comprehensible:

https://www.cgtn.com

https://english.cctv.com

http://en.cncnews.cn
50% off on LinkTree alternative (code: blackfriday)
I moved as much of my home automation as I could to ZigBee and have been planning to set up an "IoT" SSID.

But the first step is to defang/block any device that tries to call home to its maker (which is why most of my non-ZigBee devices run Tasmota firmware).
I guess either wealthy collectors, or creationist fanatics.
The guardian laying the groundwork for another Kulak genocide I see.
Buying a $500,000 machine (that has massive throughout) makes sense when you’re farming 10,000 acres, but not so much when it’s 20 acres.
Any reason why you want to swap? Just curious
Use $_SERVER['REQUEST_METHOD'] and $_SERVER['REQUEST_URI']to handle your routing
I wonder how many GPT-3 bots are running around already on HN and reddit (perhaps hooked up to PRAW) as experiments. It's very meta, since GPT-3 (GTP-2?) was partially/wholly trained on the reddit corpus of text. Very strange to think about. There are probably armies of sockpuppets already in the wild shoving various political agendas down people's throats.
A fair strategy, but not one that inspires a lot of confidence.
Economies are very strongly affected by public sentiment, so it's understandable that economists would want to manage that sentiment such that the bumps in the road don't cause wild swings in the market and destabilise the economy.

Yes, it's very paternalistic, but it's also how you maintain order and the smooth running of things in big societies (provided you're doing it in good faith - but that's a very different discussion).

This is also why defense and foreign policy are filled with liars: We need them to lie about the right things. It's not a problem until your society is destabilised by other factors such as income inequality or rampant corruption, after which point they only serve to further undermine the public trust in the institution.
sigh I was assuming you'd fill in the blanks. Join, lurk, upvote, comment, post. The process takes/took several months. My first post was not "buy this now!" it was "I built this for you, what do you think?" I couldn't have been more polite, respective and meek.
You have to differentiate between consensus rules and how the blockchain is secured.

Verifying if the consensus rules hold is equally simple in both POS and POW. But with Bitcoin's POW, the hashrate is part of the consensus rules by requiring the hash of the output block having a certain property which can only be attained in a timely manner with enough processing power and luck (in that sense, also in POW a block proposer is chosen "randomly").

With POS, you don't have the hashrate. But you have the stake which (in Ethereum's POS) is lost if you try to vote for more than one possible new block for the chain. Which is a direct economic incentive to behave correctly.
You're right - snip for the lazy:

> Just as doctors must be honest, so too must we. Deception is not always wrong – there are extraordinary cases when we understand a doctor’s need to lie. I imagine doctors overstate their confidence to children before a particularly complicated surgery. Sometimes – very rarely – it may be the best option among only very bad options. Deception should be a last resort, not the rule. As we look to the future, the field of economics must cease it’s cavalier compliance with lying – even with perceived prosocial lying.

I find this statement rather odd and clearly incompatible with the very specific claim that "we fervently and unequivocally condemn deceit of any kind in the medical field". Well, do we or don't we?

In any case, you're correct that the article taken as a whole is a bit more careful. In my comment I'm telescoping in a bit on the one claim about doctors and the role our intuitions about honesty in the medical field are supposed to play in the argument.
The piece never refers to a "so-called Silent Majority". It's called "Manifesto of the Silent Minority".
And white SV programmers don't have a sense of entitlement?
Yeah, that's the one!