skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Phoenix does offer a pleasant, streamlined full stack experience, and it does seem kludgey to bake together PHP and Phoenix without good reason.

If I didn't have a team to deal with a large Elixir codebase (a common issue), I'd glue PHP and BEAM together anyway, even going as far as to pass along the "meat and potatoes" backend work to PHP even for socket interactions (or in some asynchronous way, as needed). In that scenario, the Elixir sockets frontend could be fairly minimal, both in terms of codebase and DB interactions, and would possibly not need a lot of code changes over time.
The number of people working minimum wage jobs saying they get zero PTO in the US is astounding.

Intra-EU immigrants, for example, are quite often treated like second rate workers. Maximum work for minimum pay. Come in at 9pm, stay for 2 hours, we need you for an emergency, 20 Yoyos in your pocket, yeah? That kind of thing.

If not for the laws, we'd be treated like disposable trash.
Samsung's Exynos chips have historically been slower or less power-efficient than Qualcomm Snapdragon.
Will Artificial Intelligence Ever Live Up to Its Hype?
From https://adata.org/guide/service-animals-and-emotional-suppor...

"Emotional support animals, comfort animals, and therapy dogs are not service animals under Title II and Title III of the ADA. [...] It does not matter if a person has a note from a doctor that states that the person has a disability and needs to have the animal for emotional support. A doctor’s letter does not turn an animal into a service animal."

This post is about emotional support animals, not service animals. Your animal, who's helping you feel better despite your phobia, is not a service animal. This is exactly because people keep blurring the line between these 2 different situations that airlines, restaurants and other businesses have to implement "a-hole policies".
> This is little more than gossip unless you can point to something specific that people can judge for themselves. Saying “she basically did X” is a clever way to influence how people feel about her.

It's gossip as in I haven't seen anyone confirm the validtiy of https://www.platformer.news/p/the-withering-email-that-got-a... but I've also not seen anyone deny it. In fact, it seems everyone is confirming it unoffically.

From the blog post:

> "What I want to say is stop writing your documents because it doesn’t make a difference."

Is telling your fellow employees to stop working, if their job is writing those documents which I highly suspect it will be.

> Whether she was a good employee is kind of beside the point now.

I think it goes to show the good faith Google tried to have with someone who in my opinion was creating a hostile work envoirment.
Society and laws are constructs, and we constructed them to be this way. We do not need to restart from zero to fix things.

People do those things because the pressure to avoid doing those things is far too weak, and the pressure to be a good person is one of the things that society should provide.
We know large language models are super important to google, and there are lots of competitors.

If they approved the paper the message would be "google thinks language models are a waste of resources and racist". There would be no academic debate on this topic as its been framed as woke and published by a militant activist, so any disagreement would be racist (see prior interactions between this researcher and other researchers [1]).

Thats why the standard process of publishing, peer reviewing, academic critique etc would not work.

Why would their researchers working on language models stay? when they can go to Facebook, OpenAI etc. Why would new researchers join?

[1] https://syncedreview.com/2020/06/30/yann-lecun-quits-twitter...
Considering her previous attacks to anyone who disagrees with her and her previous public feuds, I'd say people may be afraid of being stamped as a racist/sexist because they had to reject her paper. She was a disruptive employee who threatened her employer and the employer didn't accept it. Why is Google obliged to keep her employed?
Dean previously said this [1]

> Timnit responded with an email requiring that a number of conditions be met in order for her to continue working at Google, including revealing the identities of every person who Megan and I had spoken to and consulted as part of the review of the paper and the exact feedback. Timnit wrote that if we didn’t meet these demands, she would leave Google and work on an end date. We accept and respect her decision to resign from Google.

I find it unlikely Dean would lie about that, not least because the email would be easy to find.

Now, were the actions leading up to that effectively a firing, ie Timnit would have been unable to effectively continue in her role? Quite possibly.

[1] https://www.platformer.news/p/the-withering-email-that-got-a...
I think technology-wise, the Sun mafia were the cool kids. Or the Silicon Graphic mafia and even Microsoft.

I was born in 1981, and the "cool" technology places to be when I was growing up were Microsoft, Sun and SiliconGraphics.
Usually those are "accept with minor revisions" or "revise and resubmit". Rarely are they grounds for complete rejection. This is extra true for internal review, since the actual conference review process would provide an additional layer to ensure that the scholarship was strong.
My dad commutes by bike through the winter in the Midwest. It's a whole production to winterize the bike, dress up in specialized gear, etc. Only the elite few, most hardcore bike commuters from the summer are still doing it in the winter. Maybe Oslo is a gentler winter, maybe people there just have stronger constitutions, but I do not see the average Midwesterner doing this ever.
I can't throw a rock without hitting a vintage clothing store. Jeans, concert T-shirts, hipster-ish stuff is like gold. No One Wants SOME Used Clothes Anymore, at least in 2018, I think.
I believed the apps will often get optimised for what can be seen as an issue. If you distribute a desktop app, you'll often not see the results of large datasets people accumulate over time, so the permanence sucks. But if you're running a webapp, then the performance directly impacts your costs / availability. You will have to solve those, or pay for more hardware.
I do perceive some "swinginess" in my performance in Black Ops Cold War, but I'm not positive that it's actually real. Gamblers at the roulette table also perceive trends where in fact there is only random variance.

It's also worth noting that this is only half of the complaints that you see on message boards about this game. The other half, or maybe the majority, is people saying, "I just want to be able to get high and use off-meta weapons and not lose to sweats (i.e. people who are trying) all night." This type of complaint is fundamentally a request to be matched against lower skilled players, and has nothing to do with the swinginess of matchmaking.
> People bluff but you generally have to be prepared to walk if your bluff is called.

Then you aren't bluffing.
Sorry, I think my writing was a bit muddled (common occurrence). I love those businesses I mentioned. And the 3 you mentioned too. I 100% agree they have added a lot of value to me and the world. What I was trying to say is that to make billions, you need to 1) create a lot of value and 2) have some broken legal system that you are operating in. Maybe for the latter "exploiting" is the wrong word. But the government needs to have created a situation where you can somehow reap a disproportionate reward. Linus created Linux and Git, which have created unimaginable value, but he didn't do #2 which was to use the unjust IP system to make billions of dollars.

In other words. Lyft is a product of hard work and innovation multiplied by corruption and bad government in the taxi industry. The value created by Lyft comes from the former, but the value captured by Lyft is just as dependent on the latter as well. Nothing wrong with that—it's still a big net win for society, but maybe we could do a better job at refactoring our laws so we can get the value without the unnatural inequities. After all, I know a lot of these people and while they are almost all smarter than me, none of them is 10x smarter than me (well maybe pg).

In response to your 3 examples:

* Tesla

Carbons were subsidized and solar/electric better tech. Automotive industry is highly regulated and innovation was sloooow. Elon and company are the best of the best (a shareholder), but still I'm not going to pretend that the business opportunity would be so great if the governments around the world hadn't been creating corruption after corruption (look at the car dealership stuff with the states as a tiny but egregious example).

* Twilio

Oh man the telecom infra went from magic to just rotten in the past few decades. I don't know enough about government here to comment, but I suspect something bad here.

* Stripe

The amount of protection the finance and banking industry has (and their symbiotic relationship with the government) made me sick so many times. Finally someone had the stamina and determination to solve that. But Stripe isn't hitting $100B if US Government wasn't letting the finance industry sit on its ass for 3 decades with protective legislation.
> I've believed since college that math is the worst taught of all academic subjects. I never had a math professor that engaged the class, and practical applications were never mentioned.

Nearly all math textbooks and lectures mention practical applications. The problem rather seems to be that you have/had a different understanding of "practical" than your math professor.
I'm only tangencially related to the project, but I do have a spare machine running the software.

Yes, there was a big push to re-verify old abandoned tests. First, understand that the project requires multiple tests results from each exponent - I believe it needs a triplicate confirmation (ie 3 different computers have to run the same test and all have to match) At some point, they developed a new, different algorithm that can do the check in one go (but it's more expensive computationally). However, most of the pre-existing work was done using the type of calculation that needed the triplicate check.

There were a lot of exponents where some computer claimed one of the "verification tests" (ie it was already rejected as a prime, but we needed 2 more computers to verify), but then stopped mid way (it's pretty common since these primality tests take about 3-5 days on a modern fast threadripper - so it could take up to a month on slower machines from years ago).

It's very unlikely that these exponents signified primes (since they were already verified to NOT be prime by 1 computer, and it's just the rechecks that are pending) These abandoned exponents formed a huge amount of "leftovers" that people didn't want as work units because they are most likely not prime, and if you were hunting for primes, these are not the work you want to do.

So at some point, the project said they wanted a big push into picking up abandoned re-verifications and giving them a much higher priority to computers that could complete the test in a few days [either by finishing off what was left of the triplicate check, or by using the new algorithm that just needed one pass] - thus getting them out of the queue once and for all for good. If you have a fast computer (ie modern day i9, threadripper, xeon, anything with AVX512, etc) chances are you were assigned this type of rechecking task unless you rejected the work units.

It's not just the gap you noticed in June, this whole project of looking for and verifying old exponents has been ongoing for the bulk of 2020.

Another idea is that the project is always trying out new number techniques and algorithms and always looking for new instruction sets to use etc - a change or tweek in algorithm could cause this kind of "pause" as well, the client computers don't make the shift all at once (there's likely some verification, where a small subset of clients run both algorithms in parallel to see if the results are the same, etc) and then machines are moved onto the new algorithm as verifications are complete, etc.

EDIT: As I wrote this post, I started remembering more about the different algorithms the projects used. All of the text above can be check with the prime95 forums, where they discuss these algorithm changes, the push to re-verify, etc.
> not secret

Clearly, no smaller primes are secret either, nor are they so numerous that iterating over them is computationally difficult. And mathematically, anyone can discover primes. Why does it matter whether primes are secret?
>Is it hypothetical that a business that a retail business offers their employees lavish benefits and sells commodity products will be put out of business by lower prices from Walmart/Target/Amazon/Best Buy/etc?

None of your examples are headquartered in California, nor would any of these companies stop operating in the most populous state in the US with its largest economy were worker protections put in place.

>Is it hypothetical that manufacturing facilities relocated to China to be able to sell products at cheaper prices than their competitors?

The hollowing out of the industrial core was a bipartisan decision made in the 1990s with full support of Democrats, so its a bit rich to say "if we don't let them treat people bad, they'll make it even worse than we already helped them make it." The same power that them globalize manufacturing can force its return to the U.S. Again, every other developed country with a strong industrial base engages in this kind of protectionism for strategic and national security reasons. Germany is again, here, a salient example.

>Does not mean that one of the two parties in the US is not trying at least a little bit.

You keep insisting this without providing evidence of its reality. What major worker protections have been advanced and put into law by Democrats since the Obama presidency?
That's exactly what I meant with "And worse, they can't just go and do something about it on their own, even if they take full responsibility, everything is tightly controlled."
Let me introduce you to the needle and thread. People have been making quilts for a lot longer than this long-arm sewing machine you speak of. I mean, I guess my grandmother's arms were long, and she could reach all the way to the other side of the table she quilted from. Don't think she'd take too kindly to being referred to as the sewing machine though.

T-shirts already have a front and back. You just need some long running stitches to join two shirts together. Shove them with the amount of batting you want, and then another running stitch to seal them up.
One thing I don't understand about this situation is which of the following was she denied:

(1) the substance of the feedback and actionable specifics (e.g. "you didn't cite X")

(2) the actual text of the feedback (if it was given in written form)

If she was denied (1), I agree that is grossly unfair. If she was denied (2) but granted (1), I don't think that is so unreasonable. If feedback is anonymous, sharing its exact text can give away who gave it (you can often work out who wrote something just from the style of language the author used, especially if these are people you know and work closely with.)

If she was given actionable specifics ("add a cite to X"), then knowing who it came from and the exact text of it is irrelevant and I don't think she has a right to it. If she was denied actionable specifics, that is grossly unfair to her. I think one difficulty is that her account makes it sound like she was denied that, Dean's makes it sound like she wasn't, I wasn't there so I don't know whose account is more accurate.
Of course he was vague. This just happened, tensions are high, and no doubt Timnit is talking to an employment lawyer to find out what both parties' right and obligations are, and I'm sure Google's lawyers are also getting all their ducks in a row.

This is spin at best, gaslighting at worst. We'll never get the full story (and should we? it is an internal company matter made public, after all)..
I live in Vancouver which has been building up its downtown core and discouraging people driving to downtown through various measures like taxes, reducing lanes, etc.

I used to drive in from the suburbs for work. I spent a lot of money downtown. Expensive dinners, evenings at the bar, or show/concert/sports/event, bought all my clothes, electronics, gifts, office supplies, dentist, some food shopping, haircut, insurance, doctor, RMT, physio, acupuncture. I did as many errands downtown as possible.

Now that I'm working from home due to the virus I haven't been back. When the office opens I won't go back. If they force me I'll find a new job where I can work remote. Now I spend all my money where I live.
Ask HN: What kind of life awaits the first General AIs that are created?
As best as I can see their most likely prospects lie in being full-time 24/7/365 Uber/Lyft/Waymo/Taxi drivers. Or perhaps unmanned war apparatus (fighter jets, Helicopters, Tanks etc)?

This is, of course, assuming that these tasks require an General AI to carry out at same level as human beings.
Yeah! The best students learn alone! That's also why the best athletes don't use coaches. Wait, that's not right. Hang on.

Even though all real learning is at least 80% internal and must be owned-and-operated by the student... maybe there's a role for spoonfed knowledge. Certainly there's a role for teachers (disagreeing with "good students learn alone"), even if morale-management and goal-setting is a surprisingly large fraction of it. But even spoonfed knowledge is helpful. For example, as far as I can tell, most good mathematicians have a lot of spoonfed knowledge as part of their learning history (but they also have even more self-guided exploration, and even the spoonfed stuff you gotta chew on it and digest it).

Agreed, though, that a lot of articles like this are clickbaity and, like sugar, give you a sensation of learning rather than what you really need. This particular article, I think, contains a mish-mash of good advice and, uh, pureed pap. It's certainly not worst-of-breed.
Maybe when we had nothing else to do, but I feel modern life is quite distracting. It can be hard for people to get in touch with their feelings, physical needs, etc
>I'm not sure how many of the current admins read HN

there are DOZENS of us
alot of workshops (metal, wood) buy rags for finishing work, etc. At $2/lb it adds up pretty fast.
> tl;dr WE WILL TAKE ALL YOUR CLOTHES. :)

Tell me more. Can I mail you a box?
But you’ll be shaking your head in a Jaguar, hopefully. (Personally I’m not into cars so all this seems silly to me!)
My understand, based only on having watched Yannic Kilcher's video, is that they had in the order of 10k training cases. So not a lot.

But they added a ton of highly domain specific features. And since it's essentially a natural phenomenon, I would expect the signal to be relatively strong.

I recommend the video, or any video from Yannic:

https://youtu.be/B9PL__gVxLI
Fun exercise - we look thru old photos (5yrs, 10yrs, 20yrs) and see if we can find any of the same clothing, then, do a new family photo. Same clothes, same pose, similar setting, different year.
Taxing billionares I think means more like taxing the multimilionares. If you look at what democrats proposed was a raise in taxes for income of over 1M+ or something of the sorts.

Billionares could be taxed more as a penalty of parking their money in a safe fiscal heaven and it is very doable if a concerted effort is made.
Glad there are people on here who "get it".
There was a series of essays about esoteric language features posted here a few weeks ago, and one of them was exactly what you're talking about. It was a functional language, with the ability to mark functions as involving I/O, non-terminating, or (I think) arbitrary custom "colors."

It was an academic language, but very interesting. Sadly, I don't remember the name. Maybe somebody else can post the link.
I've seen Urs reject papers out of Tech Infra that he thought were not interesting enough
It has a timetable primarily because

- due to all the merging in and out throughout the system, trains need to be in the right place at the right time or merging delays will cascade throughout the system

- for purposes of employee scheduling, you need to make sure that the right employees are in the right place at the right time; generally a train leaving a terminal is being driven by a crew that had to come in from somewhere else.
> However, it might make her choose not to fight them on the resignation.

How can she fight? Just curious, the US is almost completely an at will employment. Fighting to get your name dirted that you didn't resign but were fired, seems odd. Google seems to saving face for her if anything.
Yeah, I've noticed a big gap in interviewee's perception of what interviews are supposed to be like, vs what I look for when conducting an interview. Often times, I see people on reddit asking questions along the lines of "I've an interview coming up, what leetcode thing should I cram", but that really misses the picture that a good interview is nothing like a teacher marking a scantron school test.

The crazy part is that some of these interviewees even have work experience and ought to know better!
The position of Paris was to try to improve access to the bus system rather than the metro system. Last year only 3% of the metro network was accessible whereas 70% of the bus network was
Source in french: https://actu.fr/ile-de-france/paris_75056/3-metro-paris-acce...
Thanks for writing! I haven't had a chance to read it yet, but I'm always looking for new opinions here. Looking forward to going through it :)
In most cases, yes. In this case, because the paper was about bias in Google's AI models, it might not be just a business decision because the racial bias described in that paper might result in a disparate impact on users, which could be in violation of state or federal law.
Can you provide evidence that the wax is failing and not some simpler explanation like "you can pasterize the product plastic and all" or just basic home canning issues? Wax is used everywhere for water/air proofing but somehow only fails in food?
Dean says the paper was submitted for review on the day it was due to be published; Gebru says they had notified "PR & Policy 2 months before".

Wait, really? That’s an important detail if true. The one-day timeline was a central part of the narrative surrounding this story. Notifying them two months ahead of time makes this a completely different situation.

I’m a bit skeptical. Could this claim be verified somehow? Since it’s very public news at this point, we may as well try to be rigorous.
Not sure why anyone that is financially independent would take an office job with a crappy manager to begin with. But surely it would be better system if your country had laws that regulates this, instead of every individual needing to save up a million bucks as ”fuck you money”.
Does anyone really think the deep pockets of the TLAs haven't already done at least this well, especially with photonics at least? All the theoretical fundamentals have been known for decades. If COTS parts can do this then a focused research program begun decades ago will have already achieved what is public today. Public demonstration to me is just a proof-of-concept validating that state actors achieved parity with it quite a while ago.
Everyone knew about this decades ago. It was even taught in schools as just basic facts and science before it became political.
That's very nice! TiddlyWiki was the first thing I looked at, but couldn't find a good way to publish it on the web. Thanks for the Drift link!
Php has been dead for years.