skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think this is the crux, in that google is not academia; so naturally a band-gap would arise if your expectations were that it should behave like an academic institution. From their perspective, what requirement is there to publish work that is not well aligned with their goals (optics, financial, etc)?
email aliases exist for good reasons. ;-)
not a bad example nevertheless, but as we are talking about grammar

https://github.com/Perl/perl5/blob/blead/perly.y
> Coverage is more useful for finding chunks of code that aren’t exercised at all by tests.

Right on point. High CC% doesn't tell application is well tested but is an indicator of what isn't covered
test coverage is calculated as % of the locations seen by profiler during the test runs, right ?

This metric completely ignores the fact that every independent conditional doubles the space of the behaviors of the program.

Assuming we have three conditions and three sequential groups of basic blocks chosen corresponding to true (X) and false (~X) values of these conditions, testing A+B+C and ~A+~B+~C code paths gives 100% code coverage but it covers at the very best only 25% of the code behaviors.
Another "hearsay" tale I can relay is from my childhood. We'd play wiffleball very seriously in our neighborhood. To the point that we kept summer stats. The pitchers in those games, those leagues, were little brothers throwing full speed. Because us older boys (10-13) threw too hard. My brother and my friends brother were the main pitchers, at like age 7-8, and went on to be very successful baseball players.
That doesn't mean anything when we have "democrats" like Joe Manchin. Democrats seem like they are only good at raising money and scaring us about the evil Republicans, but when they are empowered by voters they do nothing.

Obamacare was passed with 60 votes, no republicans supported it, and that was the best we could do. Republicans have never had that kind of margin in the Senate and look what they are able to accomplish.

At some point you just have to call democrats out for what they are, controlled opposition.
It appears that this was released intentionally by Dean.
But in case it wasn't, or in case it gets altered/updated - it's been archived [1].

[1] https://archive.is/VpAN8
If they kill old.reddit.com there will be a mass migration to HN.

DIGG-->reddit-->HN
"Family values" as used by republicans always has the implied but not said "of a white, christian, man, who lives in the 1950s" added to it
> Most startups fail, though.

So do most batters in Major League Baseball.
Better tell Apple about the tablets, then.
At google (at least when I was there) they have a hard rule of 120 character lines or something. (I think it varies by language).

I thought the rule was ridiculous - until I realised one of my colleagues had set his computer up with 3 tmux sessions side by side, each perfectly fitting a 120 column code window. He never had to scroll sideways, and he was very productive with his setup. The fact he knew exactly how wide to make his terminals made his workflow much better.

I don’t follow that rule on my own projects, beyond keeping line lengths “reasonable”. But that rule might be on to something.
I mostly heard, yeah it’s not great but I’ve been doing it for so long..

But hey, I’ve been doing it for a while to, so how can I learn to write more beautiful php? And do you only use it for backend since you said “we don’t do php in html anymore”?
There's a number of sources on pandemic research that I consider authoritative, but none I've come to trust to the degree that I do Zeynep Tufekci. She's been the most rational, thoughtful, and proven voice on this since the beginning, and I consider her compiling, editing, and meta-analysis to be the gold standard.
> housing isn't very dense (compared to a typical US city)

Maybe we are thinking of different things but I see the average US city as suburban with 4 people per quarter acre lot. Paris is 10-100x more dense than that. That's why public transit is far more effective there.
"And I don't understand why employees would ever be compensated for the "full value of their labor". When you work for a company, your labor generally only makes sense within the context of the larger organization"

This is a good point. I've never understood why people who claim the full value of their labor is being stolen bother to involve themselves with the purported thieves at all. Why not work independently and take the "full value" of your labor for yourself?

The answer is of course because your Vue.js skills (or what have you) are not very valuable on their own without the whole organization; being capital, management, customers, suppliers, etc...
Abolition don't work, my friend. Are you prepared for the mob running french-fry speakeasies and feuding over moonshine mayonnaise?
one link says she resigned. The other one says she was fired. Which one is it then?
They make the mobile site shitty to use on purpose, so that you download their app and let them harvest even more information about you.
House votes to decriminalize marijuana at federal level
It doesn't matter if she is aggressive or demure, brilliant or stupid. It doesn't really matter if her work changes the world, or benefits mankind. All that matters for her employment status currently is whether Google sees value in paying her salary.

There is an endless river of souls being callously, unfairly fired every day. The only reason we are even talking about this one is because it is controversial, and has been blasted out on social media. Gebru seems like a smart cookie to me, but being smart, hardworking, just, kind, or any other number of other adjectives simply doesn't matter. Google, just like every other profit driven company on the planet, only cares about the value you provide. They are only different in degree from companies running sweatshops in SE Asia, and if the law allowed it, there would be _zero_ hesitation to bring that reality back here in the US. People in tech would get whiplash from how fast the industry would pull that u-turn.

We want to believe there is a social contract, that Google, or the tech industry, or America, or some group of people, somewhere, is above the competitive fray, and would not stoop so low as to abuse us for profit. Even at the very heights of privilege in the richest country in the world, working at one of the richest, most enlightened companies in the world, you are still getting exploited, and nothing will change that as it stands today. Google will probably keep investing in AI ethics, as long as people keep believing that actually makes them committed to some kind of standard.
When I was at EFF, I helped run the Cooperative Computing Awards project (https://www.eff.org/awards/coop/), which was funded decades ago by an individual donor and provides cash rewards for finding prime numbers of certain sizes.

Because of EFF's advocacy for cryptography, people always thought that there was a more direct connection between the Mersenne prime search and cryptographic techniques, but the connection is at best distant and tenuous. The record primes that GIMPS finds and that can receive EFF's awards are

* much (much much) bigger than the primes that we use for cryptography

* too big to do almost any kind of practical computation with

* not secret, so couldn't be used as part of a secret key

The distribution or explicit values of Mersenne primes (and, correspondingly, perfect numbers) also don't really help in our assessment of the difficulty of the RSA problem or the security of public-key cryptography, because they aren't closely related to any of the fastest factorization algorithms that apply to arbitrary numbers.

(Mersenne primes are much easier to deterministically test for primality than numbers in general, which is why the record primes that GIMPS finds are Mersenne primes. The runtime complexity of primality-testing algorithms for special-form numbers is sometimes much less than algorithms for an arbitrary number, and this is a great example.)

I think the main contribution of projects like GIMPS to cryptography and computer security lies in getting people more interested in number theory and mathematics in general. Hopefully that will lead to faster improvements in humanity's knowledge of mathematics in ways that lead to more secure public-key algorithms or to better public assessments of the algorithms that we have now. (Although a lot of the important current research on public-key cryptography is not about factorization but rather about elliptic-key systems and post-quantum systems.)

I always felt I had a hard time explaining to people that the awards existed in order to publicize the idea of cooperative distributed computing projects, which were quite novel when EFF's awards were first created, and which were a demonstration of the power of the Internet to help people who've never even met each other work together. (The awards, contrary to the hopes and dreams of math enthusiasts and cranks around the world, didn't anticipate progress through new research or ideas so much through more volunteer computer time.)

Probably today we have ample other demonstrations of that power, and that concept is no longer in much doubt, and the GIMPS project probably no longer even registers for most people as a particularly impressive example. But it is impressive in continuing to set multiple world records on one of the simplest, purest, most basic mathematical problems.
We inlined that bit in the title above.
That also means you can wear them forever though. You could probably wear out 3 cotton items for every one synthetic.
The question though is why shouldn't those workers receive a larger share of their own productivity gains? As we work harder, we should receive more. But since the mid-1970's workers have received only a fraction of their own productivity gains. Most of that value is being sucked upward. It wasn't always this way.
You make the target. I’ll make the bot. Let’s see who wins.

In all seriousness, your suggestion is woefully naive in the face of any serious entity.
Sony patent suggests a possible dual-GPU PS5 Pro model with storage upgrades
How do you guys unit test your business logic located in the SQL code?
The Complexity of Wishes
Great photos. Thank you!
I pretty much agree with all of these but two.

> 1-based indexing is superior to 0-based indexing.

this breaks the identity `arr[idx] == *(arr + idx)`. as a c++ (and sometimes c) dev, I tend to consider "index" and "offset" to be functionally equivalent. hard pass.

> If you use spaces to indent code, or in any way rely on a fixed width font to "line things up", you have a fundamental misunderstanding.

I find "lining things up" to be pretty helpful for spotting mistakes in tedious code (eg, matrix initialization) where you have a bunch of similar lines of code in a row. am I missing your point, or do you just not agree this is useful?
> If a paper is good enough to pass an (external) review process, why should it not be published?

There are many journals that have a poor track record on peer review, and in fact even those that have a generally good track record often have times that it famously failed.

Whether we agree or not, Google want to protect their reputation. Because not every journal will be up to their standards, ensuring that papers do meet a standard is going to be important for them.

They could do this by only allowing submission to certain journals, but this would require an understanding of each journal, its processes reputation, etc. Perhaps easier is just to review papers before they are submitted.

This does also allow them to protect potentially NDA'd info from being accidentally included in a paper given to external reviewers, which is (whether you agree or not) something they will clearly want to do.
> Didn't they champion themselves as the bastions of free speech at one point?

Didn't liberals too?
Nor I, so I contributed to the patreon for a linux port to the M1.
Models do not yet consider the co-dependent nature of the chaotic nature of the whole; stuck in brief stable zone to support advanced civilization.
How do you know they are making him to this. It seems to me Jeff chose to accept leadership position at Google. So managing egos would be first class task to deal with for him.
Jeff Dean did not invent map/reduce
It's fuzzy, and people are disagreeing about which aspect to emphasize.
> widely regarded as a bad move.

By who? You? Because there’s tens (hundreds) of thousands of programmers and thousands of companies working on JavaScript. Just because many here consider JavaScript bad doesn’t mean everyone does. JavaScript has many problems, but it’s not “widely regarded” as bad.
- most pages are redirects: not sure what the problem is.

With respect to this point, I think the author is saying that it's a dated system that introduces a ton of potentially unnecessary link rot. Basically, there's a ton of unnecessary technical debt because there isn't a more automatic way to set up/maintain redirects and instead often multiple manual entries are added for e.g. common misspellings of article names.
Kanban Zone – Focus on the right work, at the right time
As much as negative your comment sounds thats also my impression... in a bunch of /r/ that I follow i see the same accounts posting nothing else but pure propaganda the whole day and in more than on /r/ the same content. It generates an enormous hype just with a single "simple" post with an image and a "propaganda" title.
Looking at the recent history:

2020-11-27 All exponents below 99 million tested at least once.
2020-11-17 All exponents below 98 million tested at least once.
2020-11-17 All exponents below 97 million tested at least once.
2020-11-09 All exponents below 96 million tested at least once.
2020-11-03 All exponents below 95 million tested at least once.
2020-10-24 All exponents below 94 million tested at least once.
2020-10-09 All exponents below 93 million tested at least once.
2020-10-04 All exponents below 92 million tested at least once.
2020-06-20 All exponents below 91 million tested at least once.
2020-04-09 All exponents below 90 million tested at least once.
2020-03-01 All exponents below 89 million tested at least once.

What happened in June/July that caused it to stop, and in October to make it suddenly restart? Did they just switch from sequential to a grouping that checked all but a small portion of each million undone until November?

September 17, 2020 All tests below 53 million verified.

Makes me think part of it is them spending extra time verifying old tests. Just curious 1. if that's all it is and 2. why / whether this was triggered by something. Was there a bug found that raised doubt in previous tests?

EDIT: Formatting
An interesting paper on this subject from just last week if you want to know a bit more:

http://phontron.com/paper/jiang20lmcalibration.pdf
I've spent so much time reading articles and books, and I can only recall / share a tiny tiny fraction of the insights. I'm at a point where I'd rather spend four hours on one valuable article and really absorb / remember it (plus extra time for spaced repetition over the following weeks / months) — vs. normally reading however many articles that quickly fade from memory.
Right. Red is normally for lefties... ("Red" being a reference to communism, I guess).
Do reduce the distraction of YouTube, I stripped off all the suggestions and comments from it. This makes it so YouTube just shows a single video, and doesn't send me down a rabbit hole.

I used stylebot chrome extension with this css:

#masthead-container, .videowall-endscreen, #secondary, .ytd-comments, #upload-info, ytd-video-owner-renderer, .super-title,.ytp-ce-element, #items {
display:none
}

and I used CJS to add this javascript to the page (I did this first, so possibly the css made some of this not needed). Be sure to turn jQuery on.

const $ = jQuery;
function hideThem(){
if(jQuery('.ytd-compact-autoplay-renderer#toggle')[0].checked){
jQuery('.ytd-compact-autoplay-renderer').click();
}
}
hideThem();

$(document).ready(()=>{
hideThem();
});
At this point? Nah, in my view it started with Reagan's "welfare queens" (demonize the recipients of "large government"), which is going on 40 years ago. And that's just because it happened within my lifetime. One can probably go back further, perhaps to Earl Butz from the Nixon administration.
The admins can put messages and links in the new sidebar though.
For both Python and Go I use descriptive (often long) names and ~90-char line limit, and use linebreaks liberally to reconcile the two
If protein folding has been solved, can DeepMind be used to engineer new prions for study and/or weapon use?
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.

This sheds some new light...
Macromedia Announce Flash 1.0 – 1996
--write-auto-sub (thanks)
How many of these are click farms used for taking over subs for marketing?
It's not just an echo chamber, there's actual data:

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/11/14/americans-s...

https://news.gallup.com/poll/323582/support-legal-marijuana-...

That's not to say people who oppose the legislation's vote doesn't matter, but it's overturned by the majority that favor it.
> Warren Buffet doesn't directly exploit anyone

FWIW He has a significant stake in a company (Berkshire Hathaway) that does own a series of companies that engage in questionable practices. And he is uniquely in a position to stop that practice and chooses not to.

https://publicintegrity.org/business/warren-buffetts-mobile-...
Analogies and perceptions work in the mind only.
My philosophy is that my life is not important, I'm not unique, and I'm not influenced by ads, so I might be wrong, but tech companies are literally wasting their cpu time and database space storing info about me.

So they can store all they want while I enjoy their free products.
So you want to avoid 2c in taxes?? Ok. And there are still a variety of options to get somewhere. Including waking, cycling, scooter, hoping, etc...
As a counter-counterpoint, anti-China voices seems to have calmed dramatically right after the US election ended. Suggesting there was much more anti-China astroturfing around election season. Which is expected considering Trump's entire platform was anti-China, and there's much more anti-China shills than pro-China shills.

I too have noticed more pro-China voices on worldnews, but I've monitored and tagged via redditprotools and from my observation these pro-China regulars have been participating for a while, they just used to be more drowned out (suppressed by downvotes) by relatively more dominant anti-China voice. For example, the amount of anti-China users who also actively posted in /r/hongkong has dramatically reduced - hundreds of thousands of low effort HK virtue signallers lost interest. The conversation is balanced now or returned to pre HK drama / post tradewar balance, where pro-China views occasionally get positive reception, whereas before they'd be lucky to be downvoted but controversial.

There's still handful of anti-China HKers/TWers making substantive posts, but mostly indian nationalists or generic anti-China-lifers shitposting now. Bluntly, most anti-China voices are low-effort, ignorant haters with poor boilerplate China-bad rhetoric. Pro-China voices are typically Chinese national, or diaspora or adjacent, they have actual experience and knowledge on Chinese related issues from Chinese perspective. At the end of the day /r/50k sino users can't out astroturf 500k /r/hongkong, 200k /r/china and comparably numerous india nationalist. But they do have better rhetoric and are more invested in the debate compared to lol chinabad tier commentary turned persecution complexes because their debunked GFW banned words copypasta didn't cost 50c shills social credit points. Being anti-China isn't immunity from being unhinged.
They might have enough of a PR budget to make the Google version of the story stick. But, its concerning that, if what you say is true, they are hoping to make that work by leveraging the public's ignorance of how the Google specific process works. Its also not the smartest move, since Google is important enough and public goodwill towards tech is low enough that journalists will have a field day looking for evidence of double standards/a cover up. And they're not making it too difficult for the journalists if that evidence is found in the top comment on a hacker news post.
> Since the only way this happens is by funding founders who go on to build big successes, you're confirming what pg said.

He seems to be trying to make a general statement about billionaires or becoming a billionaire, but he's really only talking about a certain kind of potential billionaire that's suitable input for the VC business. His working definition of exploitation also seems to be far more limited in scope than the one the "mistaken" "politicians" use. Even someone who's kind and considerate to everyone around them can build system that exploits people.
In France, the government sets the number of 2nd year medical school seats available. Anyone can sign up for year 1, but only the top N students at the end of year exam make it to the second year.

This stands in stark contrast with the USA where the AMA calls the shots. In effect, the doctors control the supply of doctors.
It seems there's not even an glimmer of an understanding of even basic Marxist analysis here.

If you sell stuff or services to people, you have to pay for that stuff or services, unless you create them yourself out of thin air.

If you pay some people for stuff or services and then resell them to other people, you could:

* sell them for less than you paid
* sell them for whatever you paid
* sell them for more than you paid

If you sell them for more than you paid, the question arises as to why anyone would pay you more when they could have paid someone else less. There are lots of possible answers:

* you bought in bulk but will sell small
* you did a bunch of work to make the stuff/services available
* you did a bunch of work to find customers
* you did a bunch of work transforming the inputs

So, the question about exploitation really comes down to: do you make more profit than can be justified by whatever work that you personally put in?

In the case of anyone who makes US$1B or more by selling stuff/services that other people produce, I think it's fairly clear most of the time that they have exploited those other people: that is, their profit (vastly) exceeds the value of the work they themselves did.