skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
How do you determine a reputable agency though?

I worked next desk to people running a small ad agency. Because we shared office (and I found them an intern), I got a very good look at how they're working. What I've seen can be summarized as: people who have zero clue or interest in statistics writing "reports", with "graphs" they don't even understand beyond "pointing up = good", proving positive ROI to customers - who also have zero clue or interest in understanding the numbers in the report, and not enough visibility into the whole funnel to independently check attribution. Both the agency and the clients were engaging in a shared and completely unjustified fiction of positive advertising return - and as long as both sides were happy, the money kept flowing.

I've been long since suspecting a lot of advertising on-line looks like that. Every now and then, I see evidence in favor. Like that good ol' Optimizely debacle, where it turned out Optimizely was structurally optimized to help people make invalid A/B tests, that erred on the side of concluding the interventions were working[0]. And sure, big brands with some superstar ad teams probably do this right. But I think there's enough slack in most businesses that advertising spend can get quite far detached from actual ROI without anyone noticing (and with plenty of people happily riding the gravy train).

--

[0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10872359
NUMMI was a success, but that success was not replicated at other GM plants. NUMMI closed during the recession as GM discontinued brands like Pontiac due to severely reduced demand.

Today a large part of the land is a Tesla factory.
Right, if you do science and it turns out your department has a smaller effect on revenue you just lost power/status. So these experiments won't be done at most orgs.
An AI platform that predicts early signs of maternal health risks
Ratio can't be negative, they can either be above of below 1. What you are talking about is "$benefit - $cost", not "$benefit / cost".
>>> If you discovered you were going to die in a year, would you continue to spend all your time being "productive"?

Called to mind an Old Zen Koan. Before Enlightenment: chop wood, carry water. After Enlightenment: chop wood, carry water ;)

If lifecasting were automated, it would form a tremendous data set. The historical antecedents are legion: Vannevar Bush's Memex. Buckminster Fuller's Dymaxion Chronograph. Gordon Bell's MyLifeBits. Yes, even YC's own Justin.tv. Simple daily plain text often works best for me. Re-visiting old entries is gold. Like inviting your younger self over for a cup of tea ;)
> but they will refuse to ask for help until too late.

That's because you're setting that up, perhaps inadvertently, by expecting them to figure it out and ask for help __if__ they need it. You don't even have to explicitly say that's what you expect, it's likely apparent by your demeanor.

There's something about software workplaces that discourages thinking out loud and exploring ideas. Carelessly asking the wrong question in such a place can instantly and permanently red-flag someone as incompetent. It's like people have taken the weird culture from Stackoverflow and ingrained it in their workplace.

Sure "endless" discussions or bike-shedding can be bad, but it's a much worse problem to have an environment where there's no sense of psychological safety for discussions and asking questions.

The OP article, it appears, is proposing a turgid RFC process for deciding things within one organization. That's fine, I guess, if you're a standards body coming up with rules for literally an entire industry, but it's too much for a single team. Sometimes talking things out is good as long as people can be reasonable with each other.
There's been a lot of misinformation spread about what TDP means for modern CPUs. In Intel's case TDP is the steady state power consumption of the CPU in its default configuration while executing a long running workload. Long meaning more than a minute or two. The CPU implements this by keeping an exponentially weighted moving average (EWMA) of the CPU's power consumption. The CPU will modulate its frequency to keep this moving average at-or-below the TDP.

One consequence of using a moving average is that if the CPU has been idle for a long time then starts running a high power workload instantaneous power consumption can momentarily exceed the TDP while the average catches up. This is often misleadingly referred to as "turbo mode" by hardware review sites. It's not a mode, there's no state machine at work here, it's just a natural result of using a moving average. The use of EWMA is meant to model the heat capacity of the cooling solution. When the CPU has been idle for a while and the heatsink is cool, the CPU can afford to use more power while the heatsink warms up.

Another factor which confuses things is motherboard firmware disabling power limits without the user's knowledge. Motherboards marketed to enthusiasts often do this to make the boards look better in review benchmarks. This is where a lot of the "Intel is lying" comes from, but it's really the motherboard manufacturers being underhanded.

The situation on the AMD side is of course a bit different. AMD's power and frequency scaling is both more complex and much less documented than Intel's so it's hard to say exactly what the CPU is doing. What is known is that none of the actual power limits programmed into the CPU align with the TDP listed in the spec. In practice the steady state power consumption of AMD CPUs under load is typically about 1.35x the TDP.

Unlike Intel, firmware for AMD motherboards does not mess with the CPU's power limit settings unless the user does so explicitly. Presumably this is because AMD's CPU warranty is voided by changing those settings, while Intel's is not.
Why would that modify anyone's behavior? Consumption already has negative environmental externalities, and it doesn't seem to be causing much modification.
They meet in the middle when we talk about layout computation. Layout often flips between needing a globally-optimized solution of some kind(how to pack many boxes given some parameters of box size), and needing a fast, simple dynamic adjustment(same drawing algorithm with different numbers passed in). And what happens is that when the layout gets complex, the simple dynamic adjustment impacts the overall solution. Parts of the layout may also contain their own state, like window positioning. So even in immediate GUI there is retained elements, and vice versa.

It's a complex tangle, all in all.
You're confusing GTK with GNOME.
You realize that academic research can take years or decades to pay off right? Look at nuclear fusion research. Should we give up just because we are still decades away even after decades of research?

I think this is a major problem in our society. We expect immediate profits off of research, but that limits us to research that is less bold and innovative. We should allow our brilliant scientists to follow their passions instead of following grants.
The poster you are replying to didn't suggest hardcoding intcmp into qsort - just making it so the implmentation of qsort is available to the compiler when the comparison function is known (i.e. just like with C++).

When this is done, the compiler can inline qsort, and replace the indirect function call with an inlined version of intcmp, and then things are equivalent.
Yes - keeping an eye on it, waiting for the WebOS client though, as the "DLNA" client built into my OLED works, but not particularly well.
Mostly agree with your comment but linear search through arrays of size less than a few hundred will typically beat more sophisticated structures such as red-black trees or hashtables. This is due to prefetching and avoidance of unpredictable pointer traversals. Asymptotic complexity is only that: asymptotic.

In many programs in many domains the sizes of these data structures will rarely exceed this limit.
I read the thread. I get the idea, and it's nonsense. At scale, nobody cares about negative environmental externalities. If you added an extra one, behavior would not change in any scalable way. And it certainly wouldn't change in greater proportion to the damage it causes.
Can you please elaborate? Your source is just an appeal to authority, but I would really appreciate more evidence to help explain your position.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by message framing.

If you mean marking messages as having been compressed, then absolutely yet. The Pub/Sub messages were tagged with `compress=true|false` so we could update downstream and upstream independently.

If you mean buffering log messages into a batched 'frame', then yes we did do this. We were taking about 500 log entries and compressing them into a single message, which was part of why the compression was so effective.

If you mean something different, then I'm at a loss and very interested in what you meant by the term!
That’s a rather naive way of looking at how corporations work. If you’re the head of marketing and go to the CFO and say “hey, we found a way to get the exact same results we currently get but at half the cost” you can bet you will be rewarded for it.
Not on a mac right now, is there an alternative page that shows the UI, the screenshots on the app store in firefox are tiny.
I used a combination of Google Forms and IFTTT-scheduled emails for that.
Facebook won't win the AI war
Guessing that last 2020 was supposed to be a 2002?
What's important to highlight here is that marketing teams at companies such as Uber are incentivized to pus vendors to drive fraud. Specific example:
Uber works with vendors A, B, C. Marketing team is incentivized to reach a cost per sign-up of $X (Let's say $50 for the sake of this example). Vendor A, running fraud, delivers sign-ups @ 45$ each. Vendor B, clean, delivers them at $55 each. Vendor C @ $65 each. The new baseline from an exec standpoint is $45 each, and every vendor that doesn't deliver at that level is cut. Repeat with multiple vendors.

The solution to this problem is incrementality measurement at the channel level. Every time you scale with a recently onboarded vendor, measure baseline of ALL conversions happening on your app. If this baseline doesn't move, cut the vendor. I say scale and not launch because upon launh, there won't be a visible impact on the global conversions. To be able to spot this spike from baseline, pick a small market than "worldwide". For ex, pick "California", let the new vendor scale in California, and measure spike in California.
> null terminated strings feel like idiomatic C to most people

Doesn't that mean that null terminated strings is idiomatic C? That is, my understanding of the term idiomatic is that it is defined by whatever is most natural to users of a language regardless of whether it is the most performant.
>It blows my mind how successful these dime a dozen drop shipping companies based on instagram are with millenials and gen z, and buying like this will only be more normalized in the future as more people know someone who got something nice from that instagram ad.

Especially with stay-at-home orders due to the pandemic, everyone (well, not everyone... but hyperbole) now has their own drop shipping brands operated out of their basements, all selling the same cheap products off of AliExpress. Will consumers catch on to what is going on? Do they even care?
Good. Advertising is a terrible zero-sum industry that just distorts market activity. It has little place in capitalism or any other system.

Exceptions:

- New products deserve some advertising. I would handle that like the patent system. Demonstrate your product is sufficiently different, and get access to some attention economy time slice.

Some may say, well what about competition with existing products to bring down cost? Simple, get rid of stupid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopolistic_competition and start selling things in unmarked tubs with a price tag. Cheapest one wins. Of course, there has to be quality control and avoiding regulatory capture with that, but stupid brands are not a good solution to that problem.
I know it's a meme, but it really does seem like most C or C++ code would be better off transitioning to Rust at some point. That includes the entire Linux kernel, web browsers, entire OS's...
That's strange. By including the link you satisfy the "BY" obligation of the license; but what about the "SA" one? Unless your code was being released under an open source license.

As parent said, this is not legal advice -- ask someone qualified to answer.
I always saw ads as a zero sum game. We all have limited dollars and attention. When you advertise, you might slightly change the allocation of attention and dollar to your product.

When everyone advertises, it is back to the same status quo. And when everyone stops advertising it ends up being the same.

I really hope more companies would stop advertising or at least question the value they are getting out of those money pits. Ads created some of most horrible companies the world ever saw (Google, Facebook).
Cool, I hear ya and I agree, I wish there was more nuanced discussion on these topics rather than just "hodl, numbers go up."

It seems to me like you've found an interesting way to play in an adversarial space by selling shovels during a gold rush.
WhatsApp Soundly Beaten by Apple’s Stunning New iMessage Update
How do you wipe this personal data when selling a car?
You mean like for instance the known carcinogen styrene?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Styrene
My Learnings Condensed To: “Dos and Don'ts in DIY Hardware Projects”
Note that the price is mostly due to market segmentation, in your case most of it by the laptop vendor (of course some for Intel, but not that much compared to the laptop vendor)

Xeon with ECC are not that overpriced compared with similar Core without. Likewise, RAM sticks with ECC are cheap to produce (basically just one more chip to populate per side per module). Likewise soldered RAM would simply add maybe $10 or $20 of extra chips.
The first thing I read on the hand drawn version was "free guide". In the "professional" version, my mind glossed over those words completely. I don't know why, other than maybe the pretty pictures at the bottom pulled my eye away.

I'll click on free.
What would you have them do? You can't have privacy only for things you want privacy for, and transparency for things you don't want privacy for.
Option A doesn't stand out. It just looks like "another ad" or another component on a website. Stand out.
India should mandate that all research done in the country with any level of state sponsorship should also be made available through a digital library within six months of publication in any journal.
1) Fully remote.

2) 20 minutes walk.

3) I miss lunch talks with some of my colleagues.

4) Other than that, everything else was an improvement. I am strongly introverted, so just sitting in an open space for half of day increases my stress level; I dread the day I will have to experience that again, unfortunately most jobs in my area are like that.

6) Different people have different needs. Extraverts seem to suffer from not being surrounded by people. Also, for juniors this seems difficult, because it makes it harder to ask for help. So I wouldn't recommend it to everyone. But for people like me, it is incredibly helpful.
It's old news that in copywriting, copy with some misspellings typically performs better. While you may lose some who see the ad as less trustful, people respond to ads that make them feel like they've discovered something secret, new or underground.
Qt3 was GPL (or commercial); with Qt4 LGPL option was added.
My opinion is that this sort of long-term and/or high-risk research and development is precisely what universities and governments (and government grants) are for.
I believe there is some overall culture-rotting efficacy, but it's such a depressing conspiracy: complete coordination failure with real problems, and yet a cartel of marginally negative-ROI ad spending to prop up consumerism?
I'll collect my thoughts on it as I'm still not completely there, but I'll have something when I've got it working.
Ignoring the other points about bounce rate, brand identity, and statistical significance for a second, I think an aspect that's missed a lot is that good design accomplishes a goal. The hand-drawn ad, by this definition, stands out more than the "well-designed" one just by virtue of being visually distinct. Asking a firm to help you design an ad capaign should involve iteration, testing, and refinement as different ideas are tested on your audience. If you ask a firm to take some words and make them look good you're missing out on most of the design process.
This is all discussed in the podcast.

There’s no revenue change even after testing (when you tack on costs of ad delivery).
Yes, there are a number of tools that analyze source code and compare it with "all known source code on the Internet". They usually produce list of matches. For less-than-complete-file matches, usually human review and decision is needed.
Their argument consists of linking an optimizely screenshot.

12 vs 24 clicks is not significant, it could’ve gone either way. Also given this minuscule sample, it’s easy to conduct p-hacking to get the desired outcome
Accelerating JPEG Coding with Multiple Threads
I'll also mention: this is a problem that goes up every ladder. Marketing individual contributor wants to show good performance to their manager, so delivering rides for cheap is good. Marketing manager is in the same boat with the CMO. CMO -> Board -> VC (VC will be happy to see great efficiency on the customer acquisition side). VC -> LPs (LPs will be excited about customer acquisition efficiency). A limited number of people are actually deeply concerned with this, and that's why it's taking so long for the top KPIs to change from "cost per action" to "incremental impact and incremental ROI".
Do you happen to know why there's no plural form for the borrowed nouns ending in "o", like "radio"? Russian treats these words as neuter, which usually replaces the "o" with an "a" to form the plural (e.g. window), why doesn't it do it here?
That's the entire point.
I don't wonder if the US has gotten too big to work well for the people nowadays.
> A very basic port to X11 was done at some point, and that's what Debian has in the archive today

So, no?
C++ for Swift Developers
Ken Burns' Vietnam. Understanding the conflict in Indo-China is to understand America

Recently felt shook by the American Masters: Keith Haring episode. Died way too young. And that creative energy of Downtown NYC 1981 is just a memory now ;)

https://www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/keith-haring-docume...
Depends. Are you sticking with that company or do you want to shop your resume around?
Author here! A few others have pointed this out, but to restate: in our situation, compression was costing us almost nothing.

60TB of logs was 60 days worth of retention, so 1TB a day. That means we process about 11MB/s on average, peaking at 100MB/s.

A single CPU core can manage 100MB/s of compression, so if you assume we compress and decompress in multiple places, let's say we're paying about 4 CPU cores constantly for this.

That's a pretty worse case scenario, and it would cost us $37.50/month on GCP for those cores, in order to save about 100x that amount.

The takeaway (for me at least) is that compressing an in-flight transfer is almost always worthwhile if you're working in the cloud and the transfer will eventually be stored somewhere. The economics of CPU vs the total amount of data storage cost is a no brainer.

Hope that makes sense!
Erik Demaine has a wonderful collection of videos on youtube around Geometry, Algorithms and their intersection.

The Geometry of Origami https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUnNkHGXefA
We’re attempting to undergo a culture and operating model change shifting from gate keeping to focus on outcomes. Please wish us luck.

I work at a company that has a management team that historically thinks they need to prioritize initiatives for the organization. A little over a year ago we had a conversation with the management team and explained we would like them to focus on outcomes instead of telling us specifically what to do. It didn’t go over well, they basically ignored the entire conversation and told us what to do.

We are one year later and now undergoing a shift to focusing the organization on outcomes using OKRs and spotify style agile. People are starting to get it now and we’re having a lot of discussions with the very same leaders on a more individual basis which I think helps.

One thing is for certain, people (and culture) are hard to change.
No one is going to half the cost, and executives don't in general do any sort of cost reduction activities for two reasons. First, they would be fighting diminishing returns since there is only so much reduce-able cost. Second, they might in reality only be able to do a small cost reduction, then they are doubly screwed as they will reach diminishing returns faster. If the company mandates cost reduction executives will just fire a few hundred or thousand employees because that is deterministic, easy, and instant savings. They will just restaff when the cost reduction campaign is over.
> Reward: get people to love your services for relevant suggestions. Believe it or not, there are people outside the extra privacy-conscious bubble who do not at all mind their devices listening.

Like I already pointed out this is nonsense.

Always on listening even with perfect parsing would INCREDIBLY noisy. There are a million and one reasons for a term to come up in speech. The simplest conversation could surface hundreds of targeting terms.

Meanwhile they literally own the device and the services most people use. They have your search, they have your email, they have social graphs. They can literally make inferences before you even think to talk about them with other people! (and we've seen this happen before with things like disease and pregnancy reveals)

We're at the point where most people's cell phones hold more personal data than they could even recall on demand.

So why on earth would they go and muddy all that easily weighted data with noisy data like everything you say, literally every other form of interaction is already giving them better more concise information about you...

-

> There is no proof it happens, and no proof it doesn’t happen, because it’s non-trivial to detect based on network activity. The only evidence is observing content relevant to what was being spoken about being suggested across apps.

I can't believe people are entertaining this kind of stuff on HN.

You make an unreasonable claim... then act like because you yourself can't prove your unreasonable claim it should be entertained? What?

That's not how that works. You have no actual proof for your unreasonable claim... then that's it. It ends there. The burden doesn't suddenly fall on others to prove the contrary!

Come back with even a modicum of proof. Literally any real proof other than anecdotes where the ad companies who literally have almost all the data in your life anyways are able to come up with topics you're interested in... and maybe someone will entertain this.

And no, talking about something and getting an ad for it after is not proof any more than having a leaf fall on your head while you stand under in a mid-autumn forest right after you whispered "gravity" is proof that the forest is listening to your words.
Well, to start, the tens of billions of people in total that have been fed over the past century by modern farming. The tens of billions total that have been pulled from poverty over the last 50 years. The billions right now getting vastly better medical care than their ancestors.

What percentage of people would you claim worldwide or over the past 100 years are worse off as a result of science and economic advances? Care to list why they're worse off in total?