skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Except this isn’t so much deprecation as removal. Deprecation says “we don’t recommend this any more, and it’ll probably be removed in the future”.

At AWS, I was "put on a pedestal" for stating (in an internal forum) that X was deprecated (I meant it in a sense it was "not recommended anymore" and wasn't updated at all)... The management thought it sent the wrong message (that is, deprecation == removal).

People often associate wrong meaning to deprecation (ironic in my case given Amazon is a Java shop).
As far as I can tell, Urbit seems to be the first true cyberspace cult.

If Scientology was based in the trappings 1940s and 50s pulp sci-fi, Urbit is based in 21st century web culture, crypto/blockchain/libertarianism with an (un)healthy dose of feudalism and fascism thrown in.

All the signs of a cult are there, including arcane terminology and symbolism known only to an elite few, re-definition of commonly accepted terms (false==true etc), and a way to make the founders fabulously wealthy at the expense of newer initiates.

While some of the ideas are interesting, and empowering people to take back their digital lives is a noble goal, swapping digital serfdom from a company like Facebook to the bunch of lunatics behind Urbit doesn’t sound like a good trade.

Strip away the mysticism and deliberately obscurantist language, and I’m not sure there will be much remaining.
contract based testing is for the backend not frontend, you should be using Cypress for the frontend not backend.
Bitcoin is only economical for very large transactions - the energy cost of even a single btc transaction is huge. It doesn't solve the micropayments problem at all.
It's a large graph database that I've prepared myself over two years, as a kind of part-time hobby. It's largely an automated scrape of metadata available on wikipedia, goodreads, ISBNdb etc.

Intersections are sourced from public ratings and reviews across the web. E.g. these books are all liked by one person so are can be made to intersect in the db - https://radicalreads.com/noname-favorite-books/
Seems like he doesn't make money off of wannabees but rather the successful ones, no?
PG has been quite respected in the valley for a while so its surprising to me that people suddenly dislike him.
What was the turning point for you?
> i.e. saving third-party lives, on a non-busy road doing 35 mph in a 30 mph really going to kill anybody?

Yes, the stats show quite clearly that 30mph is the point where pedestrian fatality rates really start climbing. [1]

At 30mph, if you have a collision with a pedestrian there’s a 20% chance the pedestrian dies.

At 35mph it’s 50%

At 40mph it’s 90%

The article mentioned the car was doing over 35mph. Additionally in the U.K. 30mph zones are normally residential areas and city centres, places where pedestrians are very common.

[1] https://www.roadwise.co.uk/using-the-road/speeding/the-chanc...
I love ActivityWatch! I especially like the VSCode extension as it shows me which files I spend the most time in.
Dead millionaire convinced dozens of women to have as many babies as possible (2015)
Roadmap for a Digital Advertising Monopolization Case Against Google [pdf]
I needed to remotely power cycle some USB devices. These "smart hubs" are hard to find and I couldn't get the results I wanted on any hardware I had, so I made a PCB with a solid state relay on the 5V line - problem solved.
That's very weird - on mac, I'd expect bold and 'create link' to be exactly those shortcuts, but with the apple key replacing control...
I am using simple shell script and imagemagick to convert folder full of images and then randomly rotate the pictures. I tried playing with contrast but after dithering and that did not produce good results.
From the article:

>Are such perceptual and cognitive distortions possible?

Is this unknown? I think it's been know for a long time. What is difficult is reliably use it to get a desired result.

FYI, most of the HN crowd here are proles here who are incapable of identifying any truth in Orwell's writings.
I think it depends on the genre. Sci-Hub is hugely popular [0] among academics and the academic publishers allege that they are missing out on a lot of money because of it (Can't find the source now).

[0] https://familyinequality.wordpress.com/2020/01/15/sci-hub-us...
in some schools phones are allowed for educational purposes only
The criticism above is a criticism of how Twitter is handling situation, not how the government should handle it. Just because they're free to do so doesn't mean that it can't be criticised.
More evidence that Seedboxes are better for torrenting than VPNs.
The part of the website that does payment processing and ensures only authorized users can view content isn't free either.
>Starting with $100, your bankroll increases 50% every time you flip heads. But if the coin lands on tails, you lose 40% of your total. Since you’re just as likely to flip heads as tails, it would appear that you should, on average, come out ahead if you played enough times because your potential payoff each time is greater than your potential loss. In economics jargon, the expected utility is positive, so one might assume that taking the bet is a no-brainer.

>Yet in real life, people routinely decline the bet. Paradoxes like these are often used to highlight irrationality or human bias in decision making. But to Peters, it’s simply because people understand it’s a bad deal.

In real life we would create an investment fund for this. We gather the money of many people into the fund and the fund managers would then play the game more than once. If you play it 4 times with two coin flips each the expected ROI is around 7%. However, there is something weird about this game. The expected ROI grows the more money you have. Playing the game 16 times with 4 coin flips would get you an even greater ROI. I don't think such an investment exists in reality because we would run into diminishing returns. Spending too much money will always decrease the ROI. People need a cheap car to drive to work and the car increases their earnings potential significantly but spending twice as much to buy a Tesla doesn't increase their salary beyond what the cheap car got them.
I would argue that NVC emphasizes curiosity because the aim is to understand the feelings and needs (what is alive) in the other person. This requires a deep curiosity and being present in the current moment so that one can connect with what is going on in the other person.

NVC does not encourage immediately asking questions to increase your intellectual understanding of the situation when someone is hurt/upset and it is not yet clear what that person wants from the interaction.

For example, take the author's example sentence: "I’m furious with my husband. He’s never around when I need him.". I would say that it's pretty clear that the person is feeling furious because their need for support isn't being met. What is less clear is what the person wants from me right now. My guess would be that the person wants empathy and understanding of their pain, but it may also be that they want some advice on how to solve the problem they're having with their husband.

Now this is where NVC says it's better to err on the side of the other person wanting empathy by guessing their feelings and needs (and this doesn't have to be done in the "classical" NVC way or even verbally at all depending on the situation). And if it turns out they actually wanted advice then of course it's fine to start asking questions to get a better intellectual understanding of the situation, but jumping immediately to "fixing" mode when the other person hasn't yet received sufficient empathy can be very hurtful.
Damn, I thought it was the "This Old House" guy. RIP Norman Abramson
Somehow remind me of Software 2.0[1]

[1] https://medium.com/@karpathy/software-2-0-a64152b37c35
Creating a Virtual Environment in Python (Ubuntu)
The market is literally fueled by people full of capitalistic greed one-upping each other and forcing others to play by the same rules. It's a capitalistic greed optimization engine. For all benefits we yield from it, it's still fair to call it capitalistic greed and notice the ethical failures the market strongly encourages.
Unlimited is like a Ponzi Scheme
Audits can do that. Maybe a voluntary audit where they can then say they're compliant with NoBullshitForYourMoney.org
Here's another interesting paper [1] on that topic. It shows that synthetically blurred images are significantly more realistic if they're based on recovered radiance maps (HDR).

[1] https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~malik/papers/debevec-malik...
They got 25K stars on Github recently, maybe that is why it was submitted.
This is the least efficient answer. A more efficient answer is an independent entity that simply has the public trust and the capability to verify such claims. I can imagine a non-profit that pulls this off, if the will to execute were there.
I like Affiliate Links for this. It’s above-board, acknowledged, and aligns user, publisher and advertiser value. There’s still some privacy costs, but they’re focused on users that actually take action to engage with the promotion.
> FYI, most of the HN crowd here are proles here who are incapable of identifying any truth in Orwell's writings.

can u elaborate
* 20+ year ==> 50 to 60 year
What’s so wrong with China defending Hong Kong and national security?
> hich wasn't necessarily possible the first time, since this is the first time an init system has tried to accomplish these goals that wasn't already intended for a tightly coupled system like Windows or MacOS

If we ignore similar systems on big iron UNIX and mainframes.
Inattention is hard to measure and results in accidents that are made much worse by excessive speed, which is easy to measure. If the goal is to reduce overall traffic victims, then investing in speed control seems like the low hanging fruit.

The energy of vehicle (thus, the energy absorbed during impact by every object contained or hit) is proportinal with the square of the speed. Meanwhile, the reaction time available to avoid the collision drops linearly with speed, while the braking or turn distance increases more than linearly.

So the overall probability of accidents and their severity increases exponentially with speed.
Well, they got bought by Amazon so basically the whole site is a feature of the Kindle Store at this point.
The bar has been lowered for entry. The bar has continued to lower throughout history. To advance this point, you would need to establish a demarcation point where "this time is different".

Above you suggest that credentialed gatekeepers somehow did a better job of protecting the public from misinformation which results in dangerous violence. A cursory examination of history debunks this.

The Pulitzer prize (a coveted credential) is named for the originator of "yellow journalism". Half truths, mistruths and outright fabrications have always been with us. Look no further than the media's uncritical promotion of Iraqi WMD as a prelude to war. Experts were trotted out to tell us that Saddam had yellow cake etc. Hans Blix was silenced.

If communication can be equated to violence, then the sources of record trumpeting false justifications for war must be the most dangerous and violent of them all. Yet, these are the gatekeepers you suggest are more responsible and accountable. There has been no accountability for this propaganda. Many would suggest that the same methods continue today.

Youtube's censorship is a natural continuation of establishment gatekeeping. A cynic might even suggest that gatekeeping is the purpose of walled gardens.

More of the same, this time is not different. It fits perfectly with historical precedent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism#Hearst_in_Sa...

The appeal to experts and technocracy is a separate error worthy of another discussion.
The fact that Hong Kong was coerced and forced into this "nation" (China is not a nation nor a nation-state) using false promises, threats and lies about ethnical and cultural similarity. Hongkongers are a separate group from what people call Chinese (which mostly meant Han in ethnocultural contexts and is now moving to mean 'the new Chinese person'), they speak a different language and have their own culture, ideas about politics and governance, etc.
echoing other sentiments here,

I fail to see what you guys are doing differently. I freelanced for several years on different platforms and I would see the same issues.

1. no vetting -> race to the bottom and clients who think $17 /hr is an appropriate salary for a senior engineer

2. vetting -> great at first. clients are coming in but over time the new jobs go to new people coming in at lower salaries. My previous clients and success on the platform never seems to make a difference getting new work. In the end I'm stuck charging $50-55 at best.

In the end, I found a colleague who didn't want to write software so much anymore and preferred networking. He'd hook me up clients for 10% and that worked great for me. The last one he referred to me became business partners and I'm CTO of our startup.

That said. Instead of vague promises about solving freelancing. how about a few explicit problems that you guys have solved that demonstrate that this isn't just more marketing.
And crossing a border?
> Deep learning is closer to linear regression than it’s to human capabilities.

Quantitatively perhaps, in that deep learning is equivalent to many neurons, whereas a least squares model is only equivalent to a single neuron. Other than that there is not much evidence that a human brain is qualitatively different.
Note that you can still export a CSV of your books, (although this is not all the data that is present).

Here https://www.goodreads.com/review/import
They are probably referring to the kool aid drinkers
Interesting. They could do a better UI, mobile responsive, but their db is pretty big.
Yeah, I bet the mysterious German word was "sonst". "wenn-dann-sonst" ("if-then-else") totally makes sense in German, but also as the default-case in a switch-case-like statement (which is the context mentioned in the article). From that point of view it's a bit of a shame that "switch-case-default" didn't end up as "switch-case-else" ;)
It has not been all that long that we had technologies we could put into cars to determine if a driver was paying attention; though exactly what that is is also subject to interpretation

With my Tesla I am able to have it chime if I exceed the speed limit by a set amount and even if a light turns green.

however the big danger is still cell phone usage and no one wants to take the step of disabling them while moving and the technology is there.
I think someone on Tweakers.net mentioned it was only rolled out to certain regions. I don't own one myself though so I wouldn't know.
In that case, they must have no clue what ‘proles’ is short for.
Without regulation that won't ever happen.

Because you, a paying customer, are worth the most to the advertisers.
True. Web “Advertising” is a poison that is shredding society apart.
Bitcoin didn’t “solve” the micropayment problem.

Compared to Visa, Bitcoin solved micropayments only if micro refers to the daily transaction volume.
Other than Ubuntu being the favoured WSL distro.
Microsoft SSO is a shit show. You login and it says wait logging you off. Then you have to try again.
That’s not different from pre-Internet era, though. Subscriptions were never anonymous.
Believe it or not, Goodreads is actually owned by Amazon.
Goodreads recommendations are only really useful if you match the demographic mass of their membership. And since they've tied in with Kindle so heavily, that leans hard towards suggesting historical romances and Oprah's Book Club fodder.
When I studied AI in uni in the cold cold (cold) winter of AI and this kind of input was really significant, but most problems we consider ML now are vastly more complex and other problems can be addressed by things that are no longer considered AI at all (while they were back then).

It is funny how my uni top research (on 1m$ computers) neural nets are considered to make no sense anymore. That went a lot faster than programming.
Yeh -- I do agree, though I suppose that shows that the HN demographic is broader than the stereotype of software. The fertility one's quite fun.
It doesn't.

Freelancing works pretty good, just the companies suck.

Luckily, we don't need the middle man as freelancers.
Ah yes I'm working on a fix for this right now : )
How are you defining "efficiency" here?
> For this to happen people are going to have to open their wallets, pay for the services they use, and support independent businesses.

Crowdfunding is probably the best solution, if it can be made to work - it would allow for some kind of monetization on a voluntary basis, while preserving free access for most users. But I don't know of any site that really uses it successfully, aside from Wikipedia.
Graphic calculators are extremely expensive for what they provide (compared to a cheap phone). Only thing holding them up is regulation (ie. being allowed in class and at certain exams), because otherwise, even a cheap phone can emulate a classical calculator (eg. hp 49g for us RPN fans), not to mention more advance tools (from apps to wolfram alpha).
It’s because the average person has so many passwords in various formats that they forget. But that person most likely has access to their email.
Instead of taking the user on a password reset journey, just shortcut to login.
The attack vector is restricted to email no matter what.
People say this kind of thing a lot. Find the balance between making sure you have what you need and making sure you are not trying to have more than you will ever need.

I find it’s people who have more than enough that say that generally.

I think the takeaway is don’t look for your value in the way others see you. You will never be good enough.

“If you worship money and things, if they are where you tap real meaning in life, then you will never have enough, never feel you have enough. It’s the truth. Worship your body and beauty and sexual allure and you will always feel ugly. And when time and age start showing, you will die a million deaths before they finally grieve you.”
Love the idea! My one suggestion would be to add the ability to filter out children's books from the results. After I added Hitchhiker's Guide, Children of Time, and the Iliad, the majority of my recommendations were children's books. Or, maybe the tool is telling me something...
The alignment is imperfect at best. How many “review” sites do you see out there with reviews that are shallow (to put it politely) and consist primarily of gigantic “check price on Amazon” buttons?

If you ban ads and monetize only via affiliate links, I think you’ll see a lot more poorly written, often algorithmically generated content shilling for affiliate clicks.
Goodreads hasn't changed in 10 years
I don't mind no changes to the UI at all. The Goodreads UI is information-dense and very powerful to use on a desktop/laptop. Alternatives, like the Readng site linked to in the posted article, are often examples of that annoying trend in web design UI where the limitations of mobile-phone touchscreens are forced on all users.

Where Goodreads has really failed to change is something not easily visible in pithy screenshots: there are a lot of bugs and missing functionality with regard to book metadata, but these flaws are something you don't quite grasp unless you become a Goodreads Librarian.
While I agree with you that deep learning works very well for a certain class of problems and that some criticism directed towards it is misguided, there are also some arguments for the opposite side.

I normally do not feel the need to comment about deep learning, because it is only tangentially related to some of my past projects, but I can also understand those who might want to comment negatively, because I have seen many cases of managers who did not understand at all how exactly certain problems can be solved, but nevertheless they pushed vigorously for the use of deep learning to replace other better suited solutions, because they believed it to be a modern and universally better method.

So there were times when I was tired of seeing one more attempt to misuse deep learning and to have to explain and demonstrate once more which solution is better.

Obviously, any such opinions, about which method is better in a certain case, should be proved with numerical results from tests or simulations, not with guesses, but some times that requires a lot of work to implement both methods, even if you are pretty sure about which will be the result.
Like for everybody else here apparently, this page was useless to me. It didn't make clear what it is about, and after I wasted 20 minutes reading through it, I was no closer to the message than before.

Basically it's a lot of name dropping of concepts and keeps promising to get to something later which it then doesn't (within my time frame).

I loathe web pages like this, where the whole design is guided by flashy optics but they then don't deliver anything.

That said, people here appear to fundamentally agree that the riskiest part should be done first. So I would like to present the opposite view so we can start a discussion.

You will probably not be able to do the riskiest part first because you are missing infrastructure. So, if you strictly adhere to the dogma of doing the risky stuff first, you may make rash decisions about the structure of the final product, when you really don't know anything about it yet. You might pull in frameworks and tooling which later turn out to be a bad choice, creating additional stress to replace later.

Personally, I have been grappling with this for decades. Watching myself I usually tend to do easy infrastructure first. This has two major reasons. First it gives me time to think about how to actually approach the risky parts.

Second, if I then fail in the risky part, the work was not for nothing but I at least got the reusable infrastructure code out of it.

Third, it buys me time to gain understanding of the problem space.

Fourth, and this is particularly important for open source projects, it gives me a steady stream of successes after each puzzle piece gets finished. Without this stream of successes motivation fizzles and projects die.

There are risks with doing it this way, but I think you shouldn't unfairly just discard the whole idea. After all people are doing it like this all over the world. That probably means there is some kind of evolutionary background to it and it was actually better than the other approach.

I think a good rule of thumb is that you limit the risk about WHAT you are doing, not HOW you are doing it. By the time you tell your engineers what you are doing, it should be basically risk free.

To me it appears obvious that failure is too often blamed on engineers when it was really management failure.
Here's a direct link to the results section of the study:

https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/12/01/2014704117#sec...
I wonder if openstreetmaps (which has more crowdsourced contributions) could help in these cases... it seems to have far more options in the ways a road can be "tagged" and then used for directions
This makes absolutely no sense and has no relation to any economic variables. Goodreads isn’t some struggling self-funded startup — it’s owned by Amazon.com. The acquisition was a deal that should have never been approved, if the Obama administration had been anything beyond completely impotent at protecting us from monopoly games:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/apr/02/amazon-purchas...

I would like to understand the true strategic interest behind this. Is Amazon simply penny-pinching now that they’ve successfully obliterated the market for both new and used books online? There’s way more to this story than appears on the surface.
Check if a game has IAPs before paying the full price, and skip it if it does.

I think one of the Dead Space games was the first EA title to both be full price and have IAPs for materials you could also slooowly grind?

Also Devil May Cry 5.