skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> It’s my belief that it boils down to a few things: - self learning - dedication

And luck especially with respect to your health and the health of those around you. It's harder to invest in yourself when you are a primary caregiver to a relative.

It's this argument that makes me wonder how anybody can be opposed to some form of universal health care. I heard somebody ask this question once and it's stuck with me: how would you organize society if you knew you would be reborn but have no idea into what situation.
This ignores any effects of market power. Amazon is not bargaining with its workers in the way that you are bargaining with Alice for her apple - a lot of these workers have very few other options to sell their labor. And sitting at home and not working is a false choice in today's America. That inequality in pricing power helps maintain the gap between wages and marginal revenue production of labor - and as OP says, that gap at scale is what makes a billionaire.
I’m really starting to hate this trope, I think everyone should just assume “in mice” unless the title states “in humans” as that is a much rarer event for research papers to be at that stage than mice or other mammals.
Page 160, direct quote:

"violent crime increased 20% from 2012 to 2017"

If you graph the data presented in table 46, the increasing trend – specifically in violent crime since 2012 – becomes very clear.
At least when I was there, my papers were getting thoroughly reviewed and often had to make some adjustments before getting approval. Never occurred to me to make any demands from the reviewers or threaten to resign if my paper doesn't get immediately and unconditionally approved. Seems like she's asking for preferential treatment.
Well it’s clear vegetarian food and the substitutes aren’t cutting it. People still want fried chicken, pork chops, meatballs, etc.

Until we get to a point where literally the only difference between a lab grown filet mignon and a grass fed one is cost, people will be raising animals for mass slaughter.
No doubt most successful startups are built by selling useful things, not exploiting people, but as they grow and encounter new problems the exploitation happens. You don't _become_ a billionaire by exploitation, but it sure does help you _keep on_ being a billionaire.

Facebook, Amazon, Apple and others didn't start out exploiting people, but they sure as hell do exploit at at least some group of people now. Content moderators, warehouse workers, assembly line workers. It's not a neat and clean picture, a lot of those people would themselves say it's a job they decide to do-- and their agency shouldn't be diminished-- but the exploitation does exist and it is real. You at some point just have to listen to people, and enough people in this country are saying its systems are exploiting them.

Simply put: It would be nice to see Paul write an essay about how Facebook should treat their contracted content moderators better, rather than expend his mental energy retorting to a few progressive politicians. I too wish that those politicians understood tech a bit more, but there's lots of people who I wish understood lots of things better. This essay is mostly quite wise and thought-provoking, too bad his grievances color it.
As long as you waited 4 years between storing value in Bitcoin and removing it you _always_ got more value out, no matter what point in time in Bitcoin's entire history you stored it.

And not just a little bit more value..

Is an index fund a store of value? Would you recommend someone store their value there if they wanted it back out in less than 4 years? Gold? Property? Or would you suggest those stores of value are only suitable for longer time frames? How much more value does someone who stored it in Bitcoin 10 years ago have now?
The music in case you're curious:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C78HBp-Youk
There are plenty of people who are difficult to convince to reduce their meat consumption using vegetarian food and meat substitutes alone. Providing choices like this will make it easier to get more folks to reduce meat consumption or go vegetarian.
I'd love to see the DEC alpha at 3nm just to spite x86. Too bad they are long extinct. Intel going down the same road.
How much we enjoyed singing that song in school music classes. And the teachers couldn't even say something, it's Mozart and therefore culture.
Jeff's statement is a lie. I work at Google, and the publication approval process doesn't normally take to weeks. Any Google employee can verify this, and others have, both in this thread and on twitter. There's some documentation that asks for 2 weeks, but it's not followed, and inconsistent application of policy is absolutely a concern in a case like this.

A summary of the events, as best as I can tell, is the normal presubmission review was done. After the paper was approved and submitted, someone, whether this was upper management or some other entity, did some additional review and required that the authors withdraw (?, but retract is the wrong term) the paper.

From what I know, both firsthand and from other sources[0], while not spotless, the issues with the paper were mostly nitpicks and fairly straightforward to resolve. That they weren't even provided until some escalation from Dr. Gebru is strange. That even after they were, sort of, provided, she and her team were not given the option to address them in the paper, is extraordinarily strange.

[0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/comments/k69eq0/n_t...
Ask HN: Why do Americans live in houses made of wood in 21st century?
I've traveled between core London and Heathrow many times, and every time I've taken the train, I've had a faster, more pleasant experience that I would have had in a taxi. Maybe it's different if you're heading to Heathrow from outside Zone 1.
Absolutely right. I stick to niche subreddits that cover my hobbies and lifestyle. Great people. Great content.

All of the large subreddits are hot garbage. It's like Twitter intensified.
You bet! Thanks for the kind words.
> Demanding brownies and joints for "medical use" is just straight up dishonest.

100% agree.
Yeah that statement caught my eye also. It's nonsense. They've essentially created a meat-plant: a way to grow meat that does not involve a sentient life form.
Banning striking need not involve forced labor. See the US government's response to federal employees striking: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_Air_Traffic_Con...
Tens of thousands of people having to drop their masks in the same exact spots in airpots for TSA (USA) identification.
I think, given the top comment on this post, your comment is far too credulous about Google's incentives being aligned with scientific rigor alone.
wow! This is really really interesting... I was recently reading about how misleading the term "ergonomics" can be and how we're actually doing harm to our bodies buying "ergonomic" chairs that keep us in the same position for hours on end. I didn't know that detail about how our spines got their nutrients (cool graphic btw). Looking forward to connecting!
Fable isn't just for view logic. Fable is also really handy for writing puzzle solvers/generators for the browser. I used it in https://vowels.io while using regular preact/js for the views. I found that keeping the fable stuff isolated to lib code gave me less friction.
I love the concept. Do you have any tools to combat spammers? Or has that not yet become a problem?
Sure, but they advise pulling up a pager anyway if the content is long.
Seems like awfully political content to me
You are turning a moral judgement ("exploiting") to a more mechanical expression ("using leverage"). For critics of billionaires, the moral judgement is the whole point. Whether the "billionaire problem" belongs in the moral realm or in the dispassionate realm of math or economics is an ideological choice.
"Can you tell me about a hard problem you've solved?" is usually enough to kick off a good dialogue. It gives you a little peek into their approach to solving problems, but also tells you what they think is hard. If you ask good follow up questions, you'll very quickly have a solid understanding of their current experience levels and a rough gauge of their aptitude. A lot of it comes from intuition and experience interviewing and hiring.

Building out a great team is more art than science, and you won't ever hone that craft by throwing coding challenges at your applicants - you just end up with a group of people who are a bit more likely to be very good at jumping through arbitrary hoops.
Interesting thought. How much would that cost? And is it only restaurant direct staff that is compensated or also other industries that are negatively impacted by their closure?
LTV drawn to its logical conclusion leads to exploitation of every worker almost by definition. It is the core of the market economics = exploitation argument.

Profit is simply value extracted from workers.

As opposed to the arbitrage of the subjective preferences of multiple actors. The modern interpretation of how value can just appear.

Those workers who got a return on capital delayed consumption now, for more consumption later. That's a preference. I don't think that's a bad thing. But you can see how over a long time it can generate massive inequality.

But I don't think the fundamental mechanisms of how this occured is particularly exploitive.

Where as LTV pretty much just says it your just stealing value.
Because most chicken sandwiches in the US are breasts and not burgers. Most of the ground up chicken stuff ends up in things like chicken nuggets and cheap chicken fingers.
> This implicitly assumes that "the value of someone else's work" is independent of the context in which that work is done.

Not really, since no one is arguing that this worker-capital relationship should change. That the synergy exists is a good thing.

But the tax burden of the two groups is what’s at issue. On the one side, you have the “they built it, they should keep it” folks. On the other side are those that believe they built it on a foundation of societal investments and the work of others and should pay most of it back in taxes. No one is arguing that they didn’t built something of value.

> If you pay me $100, and I add exactly $100 of value to your business, then you're no better off than if you hadn't hired me at all

Ahh the refrain of the myopic capitalist. In your hypothetical situation, we’re all better off because I’ve gainfully employed someone, added purchasing power to the overall economy and added value to the world since, presumably, the customers who paid me $100 received something they value above $100. To whatever small degree, putting $100 in the hands of my employee who will then spend it also creates more purchasing power for my own customers as that money circulates through the economy.

This is one of the problems with such an individualistic view of capitalism...it utterly disregards benefits that are not directly seen by the individual. We don’t have to become socialist or communist to start to provide greater emphasis on the contribution of workers and society as a whole. We can keep the market forces that allow for efficient allocation of capital while putting policies in place that provide for those who aren’t at the top of hierarchies and whose contributions are less unique. This isn’t about preventing businesses like Amazon from existing, it’s about ensuring that the people who work for Amazon can live a comfortable and dignified life and that Jeff Bezos should only be fabulously wealthy instead of obscenely wealthy.
>Apple's pricing isn't higher than the competition

Back in the Intel days you were paying twice as much for a Macbook laptop that used the same CPU as whatever Windows laptop with similar specs.
Also, compressing could actually be slower for modern computers. Remember when compressing your hard disk made your PC faster, up until disks became faster, then it actually made it slower?

Today's CPUs are very fast, so the trend could have flipped again, that would be an interesting benchmark.
because then you need an api
This is new to me, thank you for sharing! It would fit the bill. Very interesting.

EDIT: Hang on a second, Tom Forbes! Fancy bumping into you here yet again. It's Dan from Marvel!
This is why we're not allowed on Europa.
This is all super interesting. I'm loving learning about all of these different approaches to tackling "sitting". I just wish someone had told me sooner! Looking forward to connecting.
” You can look at which regions introduced mask mandates when and see what statistical result that seems to give on the number of covid cases. There have been an awful lot of studies on this topic”

...all of which written in the spring, when cases were declining across the northern hemisphere. Subsequently, we’ve seen cases go up around the world, and it doesn’t seem to matter much if they have mask mandates, high self-reported mask compliance, or not.

This guy has amassed a huge collection of plots documenting the lack of impact of mask laws on outcomes:

https://mobile.twitter.com/ianmSC
I used to need a number of pairs of "nice" shorts to bike to work in. Then I switched jobs and there was a shower at work, so most of those shorts no longer had a role. I could have put them in storage in case I end up biking to a workplace without a shower again, but I figured they would do more good at the Goodwill.
In your explanation I see the feedback loop that makes it easier for you and your children to stay out of poverty if you're already successful.

I don't see a feedback loop that makes it hard to escape poverty. Why did the high school dropouts drop out in the first place, and why does that make their kid more likely to drop out? Ideally their kid should still have access to public school education, with all the tools needed to go on to become successful themselves.

To be clear I'm not saying there is no poverty feedback loop, just that even taking what you've said about fundamental human preferences at face value it is not inevitable that it stay this way. We can improve our systems to make it easier for people to escape poverty. But this doesn't really have anything to do with billionaires. Many of the issues in these systems are not even for lack of funding, but inefficiently spent funding or other poorly designed incentives or bureaucratic rules that make things more difficult for poor people.
All over Europe you'll see fried/grilled chicken on a bun referred to as a "chicken burger" (often in English, even where that isn't the spoken language). This is even the case in places like KFC.

I'm firmly against this nomenclature, but I suppose these places are set in their old ways for some reason :)
Use lua https://github.com/neovim/neovim/issues/7895#issuecomment-73...
A novel type of microscope that can ‘see’ through an intact skull
> who gives away used clothes that are still in good conditions

In North America I think most people do. Charity/Thrift shops are packed to the brim with used clothing not to mention organizations that very specifically bring used clothing items to those in need.

I believe most people do not keep all their clothing items until they are entirely worn out. Changes in taste, body changes, getting rid of unused items, moving to a location with a different climate etc.

In most cases people are donating the clothes not reselling them. You put it in a bag and drop it off.
Good thing most states weren't drawn to lock up land in a slave vs free state battle that is 150 years over and done with, or this would be a ridiculous comment.
Interesting, thanks for sharing those figures.
You can use lua with neovim for init.lua https://github.com/neovim/neovim/issues/7895#issuecomment-73...
Wow! Thanks, that looks quite useful. Especially that it can work with all kinds of back ends.
Before the introduction of ranking and bots you could spend a few minutes queuing up for a game, get killed in seconds, and repeat ad infinitum. That's not aspirational.
FCC bans in-flight phone calls
True, and well, I feel with the 3rd party ecosystem for matchmaking most people who would consider smurfing do it on a platform like Faceit.

Nice name. :)
That's not under dispute. What's under dispute is:

1) Is the review protocol that requires a two-week review period a peer review process intended to maintain scientific rigor, or an internal controls process intended to prevent unwanted disclosure of trade secrets, PII, etc.?

Repeating the comment at the very top of the thread:

> Maybe different teams are different, but on my previous team within Google AI, we thought the goal of google's pubapproval process was to ensure that internal company IP (eg. details about datasets, details about google compute infra) does not leak to the public, and maybe to shield Google from liability. Nothing more.

If it's not a scientific peer review process, arguments about why scientific peer review is generally anonymous are irrelevant, just like arguments about why, say, code review is generally not anonymous would also be irrelevant. It's a different kind of review process from both of those.

2) In practice, is the two-week review period actually expected / enforced? Other Googlers, including people in her organization, are saying that the two week requirement is a guideline, not a hard rule, and submissions on short notice are regularly accepted without complaint:

https://twitter.com/le_roux_nicolas/status/13346245318860718...

https://twitter.com/ItsNeuronal/status/1334636596113510400

https://twitter.com/lizthegrey/status/1334659334689570817

(I don't work for Google, but I work for another very IP-leak-sensitive employer that does ML stuff, and we have a two-week review period on publications. The two-week rule exists for the purpose of not causing last-minute work for people, but if you miss it, it's totally permissible to bug folks to get it approved, and if they do, it's not considered "someone with a fat finger." It certainly doesn't exist for the purpose of peer review - it's assumed that the venue you're submitting to will do review, and I think everyone understands that someone from your own employer isn't going to be a fair peer reviewer anyway. There is a "technical reviewer" of your choice, but basically they just make sure you're not embarrassing yourself and the company, and there's no requirement for how deeply they review. I think I've gone through the process twice and missed the deadlines both times.)

So, if this "rule" exists on paper, but only exists in practice for her, then this is the textbook definition of unfairness.
In essence, I am not experiencing something similar, no. While we're both experiencing similar general outcomes from quarantine such as social isolation, the exact cause of why those outcomes put such pressure on me is both precisely identified and vanishingly rare. It is definitely unrelated to the above story and to your experiences. (I don't intend in any way to diminish you or your experiences with this reply, and I wish I were more able to be of use.)
Why wait when you can bring back Jazelle for WebAssembly?
That's a pretty well-worded statement from Al. Sounds reasonable to me. There's no RCT to definitively prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that it will prevent someone who has received the vaccine from transmitting virus to another person under any circumstances, no matter how unusual.

Remember the claims at the start of this thread were:

"They [vaccines] do not—and are not meant to—prevent people from contracting and spreading the virus. They only reduce the symptoms."

Albert isn't saying any of that stuff, so why on earth would I disagree with him?

Article goes on to say "In November, Pfizer announced that its vaccine candidate had been shown to be more than 90 percent effective at preventing COVID-19"

Aaaaaand so we're back at my comment before this one. What do they mean by 'prevent?' Because they're saying it 'prevents' COVID-19, just like the CDC did in the quote I shared that svrb got so angry at me about.

You guys are saying the vaccine does nothing to prevent people from getting SARS-CoV-2, but the CDC, and the articles you yourself are sending me are saying that the damn thing 'prevents' COVID-19, which is an infection with SARS-CoV-2.

Is the vaccine magically making people asymptomatic while an infection rages inside of them? Is it preventing a virus that destroys lung tissue from somehow showing any outward signs of dyspnea? Is it somehow blocking a cytokine storm? I don't think so, that's how Dexamethosone is being used to treat this, not vaccines. Maybe in the long run by shifting Th1/Th2 response or something, but that would have quickly become apparent in the routine labs done in the process of clinical trials. Does it magically break up thromboemboli in the bloodstream? How would a vaccine prevent kidney damage from showing up in someone with a raging, yet completely asymptomatic infection?

What is the mechanism by which a vaccine would allow a raging infection to occur inside of someone, while showing zero outward signs of it? Because if it's knocking down levels of active virus in the body by triggering a robust T and B-cell response, it's reducing viral shedding, and it's reducing transmission. That's the same thing that all the papers you have shared with me so far have indicated.

What do you want me to say?

Don't sneeze on grandma until she gets vaccinated. I said that earlier.
Fair enough. I'm glad that we seem to be largely on the same page on the subject, then. As for the "common perspective", I usually refer to that as consensus and, indeed, it is very hard - in some cases, I would say, excruciatingly hard - to achieve. Unfortunately, such is life ...
If you are implying those attributes are unique to coders, or that all coders have them, i'd have to politely disagree with both points.

Coding might imply a capacity to do other complex jobs, but not to become an expert in said field. There's only one way to do that, with time and effort.
A leading AI ethics researcher says she’s been fired from Google
The research itself does say “This finding contradicts lay beliefs and prominent scientific theories alike”¹, though “On the basis of the high statistical power and the consistent results across samples and analytical designs, we must conclude that birth order does not have a lasting effect on broad personality traits outside of the intellectual domain.” (end of the abstract’s first paragraph https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4655522/#idm140...).

¹Last sentence of §Significance https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4655522/#idm140...
this seems like a placeholder, some kind of lorem ipsum of mozart where the final text was never delivered for some reason - you know like those companies nowadays which use, instead of lorem ipsum, any number of profanities before the real text drops in (at least until the customer finds out).
There's an inherent tension, on the one hand, we cant afford to pay the wages of a 100 billion pound a year industry out of tax revenue. On the other hand we completely fucked up any of the potential ways we could have avoided doing that.
You missed my point - there are not 33 but billions (an infinite number, really) of wrong protein structures. There is only one right structure, not 66.

Also important - verifying that a given model has a signature that matches the established techniques is far easier than using those techniques to generate the complete model from scratch.