skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Maybe we should start calling it the "clickbait media". I do see the BBC as a different type of news outlet that generally plays it straight, and the wording of this particular article sounds very responsible to me.

But much of the rest of the media will have a field day with this.
You cannot grow the economy without increasing energy use. For environment and to reduce global warming need to reuse and recycle and use sustainable materials, yet the boost for economy promotes buy and throw.

Economist always promote growth, which grows energy use. Further economist is one science which assume a lot how the world works versus in other sciences that have to measure how the world works.

I would say that Keynesian economics and the environment is not coherent. In the sense that Keynesian economics lowers the interest rate in an artificial way, which promotes economic growth. This economic growth increases consumption.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics
When you're being accused of distributing child pornography, I think this transcends the "there's no such thing as bad publicity" adage...
>That still doesn't mean that it's indecipherable by brilliant people in other field of studies nor that the core parts are particularly hard.

Indecipherable? No. But I wouldn't listen to Einstein on economics for the same reason I wouldn't listen to him on geography, even though I'm sure he'd be able to do very well in it if he applied himself. Just look at how many Nobel Prize winners completely fuck up when they try going outside of their specialty.

>Rather it became hegemonic and unimaginative and only caters to the status quo.

Funnily, most economists I know are quite dissatisfied with the status quo. And you know, every economics research department on the face of Earth has a cohort of "heterodox" economists, who deal exactly in challenging the status quo. The issue is that most of the time alternative theories happen to produce worse predictions than the mainstream. Paraphrasing something some famous economist once said - people aren't utility maximizers, but they sure do act like utility maximizers when prices shift!

>"Oh, so you think the poor can't take care of themselves? How arrogant!"

I'm just saying, it does get a bit ridiculous when American socialists start telling me and other people from my country what we're supposed to think and feel.

>There's no vast pools of ecologist who's entire salary depends on some derivative to pan out or similar.

Most academic economists' salary depends on exactly the same thing as ecologists, namely science funding. You might have a point when you talk about economists in think tanks and hedge funds and whatnot, but those guys aren't usually the ones producing most academic material.
The article said one of the removed videos was their most popular of all time. So I’m not so sure how long tail it was.
Sober look at SPACS; alternatively SPACS better than IPOs
You pretty much nailed it.
You can try https://www.edaboard.com/

> EDAboard.com is an international Electronic Discussion Forum focused on EDA software, circuits, schematics, books, theory, papers, asic, pld, 8051, DSP, Network, RF, Analog Design, PCB, Service Manuals... and a whole lot more!
It's not about compassion and companionship in a broader sense of society. It's about romantic partnership. And the harsh reality is that some people will be alone.

Especially in China, I think it is really fair to say that for economic and demographic reasons, many men will not find love or even companionship in their lifetime - no matter how society changes.

I actually believe this is true in many places.

And is it really a failing of society?
Or is it a liberation of a previously suppressed part of society: women, who are now more free to choose their partner?

I think one can not judge the preferences of potential partners on moral grounds by looking at history. Both women and men have every right to search for economically and socially compatible companions, or any other metric of preference. And if that means that finding a mate becomes more difficult, we have to deal with that.

All this hateful and bitter crap spewed by certain male-only online communities is based on the underlying assumption that everyone deserved to find the ideal partner, when it is obviously not so.

But then, we ALSO can not and should not judge or impede anyone in finding happiness and even love in other ways. AI's, robots, online personas... all these things are just as valid as the skewed preference for high quality men.
So that seems cynical, but in some cases it's true.

Exxon and Apple have more power than Tuvalu.

People get upset because of the nature of democracy, civility, Exxon/Apple are private companies etc. etc.

Apple doesn't have a seat at the UN but they employ zillions of people and sell a lot of gear, which has 'consequence'.

It's just the way it is.
That's not the case here. Updates going back as far as what, March?, with no indication that the update included this, were involved here. What I'm saying is that whether you, or an automated update process are performing the update... You still are susceptible.

Unless, as I said, your idea is to block updates completely, which is... not really viable.

What should these companies have done better for the update side? Sure, there were other controls that could have limited the effectiveness of this once the update was in place, but I'm not seeing anything that would block the update itself.
Are there any in particular that you recommend?
Code reviews. If it is in the diff, you have an issue, so make someone check your work.

Otherwise, secrets as environment variables, do not write them down in files, and change them regularly.
I guess you're getting downvoted because your statement is rather broad.

But narrowing a bit to the feedback loop between data collected by the ad machine and the next ad you see based on that and ongoing data collection-- if Las Vegas casino games are regulated then we can certainly regulate that dangerous practice.
The web is absolutely full of “don't ask; don't tell” child pornography.

Spaces such as Reddit's r/gonewild are no doubt also full of technical child pornography, but who is to tell? 4chan has a strong stance against clear child pornography and has lead to many an arrest of those that attempt to post that, but I very often see images posted that certainly plausibly could be, but there is no way to tell and age estimation is not that reliable.
Spotify's Worst Feature
You wouldn't even be here if your dad didn't go after your mom. What's dystopian about the drive to perpetuate the species? That's the most basic function of any lifeform.
Soon you will be able to read three articles for free each month, more if you register. Anyway here's a list of free icon sets you can use in your projects. Tomorrow I will post 15 best free fonts you could use. Cheers.
Yes and no, bought an EA game on Steam sale recently and starting it opens an Origin modal asking to update. AFAIK the options were 'update' 'auto update' and 'offline'. Offline did not work at all as you need to login in the next step.

Spent a while considering whether to just return the game, eventually gave in, updated, and made an Origin account.
all of this tech and no mention of warm hats. anyone living in cold countries know most of the heat is lost through the hat.

and drafts! any draft will make you cold, even if you heat your home at a high 24C
Any fortune 500 company that's been around for more than a decade probably has one of every enterprise software product running somewhere. When I worked at a big bank, when we acquired any company, large or small, the software stack they used usually just got bottled up where they were, and the client list on the vendor's website just got updated to the new company name.

I mean that company list has "smith barney" which doesn't exist anymore.
What exactly does it say about TRUE gender inequality in the world if it is expected that the users of this technology would be higher than 75% men? Is it that women do not have these emotional needs or that their needs are already being met?
It's okay that person had to solve really tough programming interview questions on a whiteboard to get that gig.
Best of all, it promises it's anonymous if you install the app.
What does this have to do with this incident? Do you think attackers having to scan 10 or more open source repo hosts for leaks is impractical?

If so, maybe that's a worse situation? After all, if it's harder for attackers to scan, it must be harder for"white hats" looking for leaks to report?

If anything, this might make companies increase the risk they associate with open sourcing their code. This wouldn't have happened if solar winds were not uploading anything at all to github...
In the foreign language vein, are there any for those who speak German?
By we, if you mean a few rich people in the west, sure.
> It may sound strange to promote the use of synthetic clothing on a blog like Low-tech Magazine. However, both natural and synthetic materials have their advantages and drawbacks, and both can be a sustainable choice - even though synthetic clothes are made from fossil fuels. This is especially true when the clothing is used as a substitute for a heating system; the energy saved by lowering the thermostat is much larger than the energy required to manufacture the garments. Indeed, these high-insulating garments demonstrate how valuable fossil fuels are as a material, and how foolish we are to simply burn them.

I love it when a writer anticipates my questions and immediately addresses it in the text.
I find it awkward that people don’t understand this: experts, researchers, doctors, WHO, CDC, they are not “in charge of” viruses.

They don’t represent the virus. They have no direct control over the virus. They are not, like, negotiating a talk or anything. The thing don’t even qualify as life by our definitions.

Those experts just happens to know how best to handle it. Whether that handling instruction is ideal or compatible with the society up to 2019/11, that’s entirely beyond their control and out of their normal scope of interest.

Is this that hard to comprehend?
The fake upvote counter animations they recently introduced are pretty awkward.
Awesome, I agree completely! Have read the first book and about to read the second.
> Do you think there is room for various kinds philosophical thought within Computer Science itself? Honest question.

Yes, of course!

Many areas of computer science grew out of various areas of philosophy, and that's still true.

I guess my main thesis in this thread is that, today, philosophers need STEM in order to do good philosophy more than STEM folks need philosophy to do good engineering/science. "More than" is comparative, not absolute, and of course STEM folks can benefit tremendously by interacting with philosophers (see: the first line of my top-level post).

> But pursuing a graduate Comp Sci degree is something I've considered on and off.

There are some great CS departments that interact heavily with Philosophy departments. Carnegie Mellon even has a joint PhD program: http://logic.cmu.edu/
> lift off gas to correct

Good in an FWD car, but this could kill you if you're driving RWD - lift-off oversteer is a common thing, so you really want to _reduce_ throttle input without completely cutting it.
Sophistication is how the hackers hide their tracks and exfiltrate the stuff after they have come in. Coming in can be a simple stuff, or can be a zero day vulnerability.
> completely dismissing the evidence GP offers

I don't see any evidence for the "apparent feminization of human societies", because that term is just incendiary bullshit and doesn't mean anything.
https://electronics.stackexchange.com/ is pretty decent
That assumes they want to help those people.

In reality they just want to help themselves in the easiest way they can.
For < $100/year, Microsoft will sell you hosted Exchange (and you can use it with up to 900 domains [0]), 1 TB of storage, 2 installable copies of Office, and Office 365 on-line.

That's _much_ better than trying to host my own email server.

[0] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/office365/servicedescriptio...
I always wondered why YouTube was required to be quite strict with policing such matters but many pornography websites somehow remain quite operational despite the vast amount of obviously infringing material.
i don't think reddit is hosting underage porn, and im sure there is some subreddit somewhere that has questionable content (the same as there is copyrighted material somewhere deep on youtube) but i don't think that it is so widespread.
I think you misunderstand the purpose of money. A true worker is not actually supposed to reach wealth.
Agreed; the plot is all about who knows what about who else, and the subtlety of the ways that Smiley makes breakthroughs means that the film feels rushed and confusing by comparison.
Also, while neither actor really looks the way that Smiley is described in the book, Guiness gets the behaviour right in ways that Oldman can't manage.

Thinking about it, this kind of plot – about who knows what and about who – is the kind of thing that David Fincher is really into (as described very well in Every Frame A Painting at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPAloq5MCUA). I wonder if we'll ever see him do an adaptation of something by Le Carré?
Genuine question: how do you scale content moderation to millions of posts without hiring millions of workers at astronomical cost (who can make mistakes, like we’ve seen with DMCA take down notices, YouTube censorship when not justified, AppStore censorship,even GitHub made these mistakes, etc... some of these mistakes ruin peoples’ livelihoods).

Is there a “right way” to do this that protects everyone?
Apple likes it when the products they sell work properly and would like to hear about it when common third party products are causing that to not happen.
> too much can ruin your sexual health and distort your ideas of what sex should be.

If men actually believed that what they saw in porn was real, the only jobs they'd ever want would be plumber and pizza delivery guy.
Shameless plug: I run getmakerlog.com, it’s a fantastic community for developers and creators.
Nice! I'd like to see that.
Show HN: The hiring tool you've always wanted
See also "nation state".
Evariste is a screening tool I built for startups to bypass expensive recruiters, and ensure that their first employees are: intelligent, creative, and determined. Find your "A" Players quickly.

My name is Joshua Baker, and I'm a founder as well. I always found first hires to be incredibly crucial for determining the success of a startup. So I built Evariste's internal algorithm. It finds key clusters of successful people's personalities (personalities, IQs, and over a dozen other psychometrical analysis tools), to help startups find their first "A" Players. Here's a soft landing page for any founders interested in using our tool to ensure quality in your first hires.
Fundamentally, they're driven by politicians who want to get re-elected. So, they try to steer these agencies into doing something positive for the people. Of course, there's a ton of corruption and waste along the way, but at least the core goal is to do good and not to get as rich as quickly as possible, which seems to be an operating principle of most private enterprises.
Right. And these people did.
> That's just logistics - it comes after your philosophical understanding of the item. We don't have to monitor things that aren't bad. We monitor nuclear proliferation because we've already made a philosophical judgement on it. It came first.

But professional philosophers do not all agree on the morality of developing nuclear weapons, nor do those who do agree have particularly convincing answers about how to actually denuclearize. So I'm not exactly sure how professional philosophy is supposed to solve this problem -- they don't agree, and even those that do offer no particularly useful solutions.

"Software Needs Philosophers" is NOT the same as "software engineers should abide by a strict code of ethics that aligns with my personal ethics". The latter is simply equivalent to the observation that "the world would be better if only I had perfect fiat".

Sans such fiat, you need politics. And, again, philosophers do philosophy. Not politics.

Regarding the rest of the post, the USA is run by business people and lawyers. To look at who occupies the major seats of power in government and business but then conclude otherwise requires a tremendous amount of mental gymnastics. Lots of relatively powerless people do things that are crucial to society -- factory workers, migrant farm workers, etc.

Do you really think better philosophy would prevent software engineers from working on ethically dubious projects? I seriously doubt it. I also doubt that putting technologists in charge of everyone would result in a wonderful utopia. But don't blame the state of the world on technologists when business people and lawyers are the ones setting the rules and leading the teams that play by those rules.

Anyways, this is all quite far afield from the original thesis of my top-level post, which was simply that professional philosophers need STEM professionals in order to do philosophy, perhaps more so than STEM professionals need philosophy to do good engineering/science.

Which itself is, admittedly, quite far afield from the original article :)
The article accurately paints a picture of the problems with SEO. But then it makes an odd jump and blames Google for it, and seems to suggest legal action be taken against Google to force it to do better.

That's... weird.

Creating an algorithm, that searches the entirety of the web to find the answers to your questions is not easy. But I honestly believe that this is one thing Google is trying its hardest to do. They want to serve the best possible answers. And they're in a battle against an army of content creators who want to game the system.

What's especially weird about the article's anti-Google conclusion is that they acknowledge that it's a game of whack-a-mole. Google improves the algorithm. SEO writers find a way to game it. Google improves again. Etc.

What, exactly, would they like Google to do differently?

There's a lot of reasons to criticize Google. But I don't think the search engine itself is one of them. If anyone could do better, they would be by now.
Sure, but with the already significant climate changes yields are affected. Some regions turn toward irrigation, and it'll eventually run out, and it already affects non-agriculture water usage in many regions. (In India. But China's megacities also consume more water than what the natural replacement rate of the regional water table.)

I'm not saying everyone has to go all in on vertical farming, but there's value in food safety.
Less sympathetic plaintiffs?
^^ Most underrated comment here lol
> The only reason people are tolerating more lockdowns and more quarantines and masks are because the vaccine which is being deployed now is going to end all of that.

FYI - there's no concrete data out yet that suggests the vaccine will stop transmission of the virus. The vaccine is only to reduce symptoms from turning severe. They hope it can reduce transmission, but those studies aren't complete. Also kids and young teens are not going to be vaccinated until probably summer.

> First it was 14 days to slow the spread and flatten the curve and somehow they stretched that for a year into wait for the vaccine

14 days was the optimistic scenario in which people actually follow rules. Many people did not and do not follow the rules.
The sophistication was in reference to the malware which made use of SolarWind's certificate, wasn't it?

I don't see the need for this editorialised submission title.
I'm at my computer for 8 hours. I can't be productive anywhere close to that amount of time, and it's been that way forever. Once in a while I'll have a spike of 1 - 7 days where I can sit and bang out code 12 hours a day. This is usually the culmination of some long period of rumination that grows into an understanding of some large task that I finally just sit and knock out. After that, I'm weary and I have to rest (for 3 months).
You did your very best to not address anything I said. The fact that we live in sensational times does not make factual descriptions of events sensationalized. This is not normal.
Are the authors suggesting the weak credentials were the only part of the attack? Or are they suggesting they were the first part in a rather sophisticated supply chain attack?

The credentials by themselves don’t give execute privileges, or persistence, or in fact any access to non-SolarWinds systems. So both can be true.
Should that matter? If you do monopoly while having a better product you should still be charge with monopoly. That is you should be forced to gain market share fairly even if your product is better then the competition.
Hot-store is more expensive than cold-store. For law enforcement purposes, they can have it shipped out to magnetic tape and dropped in a dry cave somewhere.
I think they focused more on real-world performance that wouldn’t have been represented so well.

Things like lots of floating point ability for JavaScript (which has no integer types) or optimizing ref counting (obj-c and swift do this a lot).

I imagine those things wouldn’t impact traditional benchmarks.
Both Google and YouTube contain stolen and illegal content. There are lots of full length pirate movies on YT for instance. It doesn’t make it right but I just mean all companies should be equally judged by rules and regulations
The live thread feature is alright.

The stickers you can give out is a cool monetization.

RPAN is pretty cool.
> It also involves extended arguments over the statements that follow from these axioms even amongst philosophers who agree the axioms are true.

It is certainly not that uncommon for people to publish claims arising from mistakes in logic, but it is rare for any dispute over them to become extended, as they can be resolved by reason. While it is possible to disagree over the meaning of words, or even of which axioms of logic to accept (such as over axiom B in modal logic), these are still issues of what to take as axiomatic.

Edit - On reflection, I can think of cases, such as Searle's non-sequitur of a response to the 'systems reply' to his 'Chinese Room' argument, that have not been promptly eliminated. In the cases I can think of, however, there are unstated assumptions being made - and any such assumption is implicitly axiomatic, as, being unstated, it could not have been derived from other axioms.

> I don't think arguing from an axiom you hold to be true turns the argument anecdotal.

Indeed - nominally, one is merely presenting a deduction of what a set of propositions imply - but no-one persues philosophy just to do that.

When reading papers, I have learned to make note of the points where the language turns to what is likely, plausible or conceivable, as this is often close to the crux of the matter. It is here that one might find what Daniel Dennett has called the Philosopher's Syndrome: "mistaking a failure of the imagination for an insight into necessity."