skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Google translation of the original German text:

Google is not allowed to sponsor the Conference of Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT) this year. This has been announced by the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM). The reason for this is the dismissal of two AI researchers and allegations of racism. The business relationship is considered paused, but not ended. The British company DeepMind, which belongs to the Google group, is still allowed to participate - the break does not affect relationships with other big tech companies.

Michael Ekstrand, co-chair of the conference sponsors, justifies the decision with the layoffs of Timnit Gebru and Margaret Mitchell, former leaders of the ethics and artificial intelligence (AI) team at Google.
Layoffs reason for a break

Google had made headlines with the dismissal of the two employees in the past few months. The trigger was the planned publication of a paper. Together with colleagues, Gebru criticized the dangers posed by large AI language models. As a result, Google spoke out against publication of the paper as long as Gebru is mentioned as a co-author. Officially, the paper "did not meet the requirements for a publication", but there was suspicion that the company was just trying to get rid of an unpleasant critic. This approach caused unrest among Google employees, and accusations of racism were also loud.

Margaret Mitchel, founder and co-head of the ethical AI team, was fired a short time later for attempting to use automated scripts to find evidence of the discriminatory treatment of her colleague in emails. Google's mail system did not escape this and locked the AI researcher out of the system. Recently, the company announced some internal changes in how it handles its AI teams and their employees, as well as the research results. Suresh Venkatasubramanian, member of the FAccT program committee, announced on Twitter last Friday that he would like to re-examine the framework conditions for sponsorship in the coming year.
Most of the grains we eat are grass so we can technically eat grass.
That’s a great explanation, thank you!
The point stands that this is really thinly veiled (or not veiled at all) racism more than anything, be it against Chinese or Arabs. And apparently it's not even OK to point this out judging by the reactions to this comment and my previous one.

But I also think that the targeting of China is something that is let to happen because it fits some agendas.
Institutional Investor is targeted at people who work in finance, and I think "early" is meant in the sense of being early to trade a particular stock or theme that later becomes popular. So being "early" to GME would mean a month ago, not early relative to the IPO.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lwf920/nasa_i...
The same can be said for central bank money.

Transaction clearance - Artificially kept centralised to keep states control supply.

Privacy - Every bank transaction requires real names.

Artificial scarcity - If everyone tried to withdraw the money from their banking accounts at or around the same time, all the banknotes in circulation would be unable to cover all the demand.
How is it not deplatforming when you campaign to get registrars to deplatform people and then also say they can't be a registrar themselves
> A proper mediocracy

While I think mediocracy is more accurate, I think you meant "meritocracy".
>We've seen the exact same cycles over and over and yet no one seems to "get it".

This is the wrong assumption to start from. You should think of the opposite assumption. These people fully understand Bitcoin and other stupid investments.

I thought long and hard about all of this and there is nothing to "get".

>Worldwide central banks are printing money nonstop, literally by the trillions, which is great if you're in a shitload of debt, but not so hot if you're holding a lot of cash assets. Well you can't "print" another 21,000,000 Bitcoins. And BTC is just the first of the cryptocurrencies. It won't be the last, and it probably won't even be the one the world eventually settles on, but make no mistake, this'll be where humanity goes.

Here is the short story. Everything is up. What makes cryptocurrencies special? That they are entirely fictional? So ultimately, since cryptocurrencies aren't used as currencies and instead treated as assets with 0 return like gold the expectation is that it merely catches up with inflation. If it goes up faster than inflation then it is a bubble purely driven by human irrationality. In other words, Bitcoin is a bubble/speculation sentiment index. You can benchmark any other asset against Bitcoin to mostly "cancel" out the speculation part of the market.

>All these currencies have as much value as a bunch of people think they have. Period. I've never seen someone eat Renminbi and stay alive. Never seen someone build a house out of British Pounds.

I can believe that the value of 1€ is high enough to buy a house and then get smacked in the face by house construction companies who build houses for 200k€.

Meanwhile with Bitcoin that is fair game since there is no company that accepts 4 Bitcoin to buy a house no matter what the current value of Bitcoin is. There is no economy that is making the price sticky by making people consider what you can actually do with the currency. Since you can barely do anything with Bitcoin its value isn't based on the existence of an economy that exchanges it, it is merely based on random thoughts of random people who want a self fulfilling prophecy aka a bubble.
> Because Alabama is a right-to-work state, there is no such requirement that a worker in a unionized workplace pay dues.

I think that is incorrect. AFAIK, you do not have to pay the portion of union dues related to political activity, but you do need to pay the dues relating to workplace bargaining activity.

Naturally, the union accounting shows that well over 75% of the dues go to these activities that you have to buy with dues, even in a right-to-work state.
That is exactly how I explained multiplication to my 5 years old, right after getting him into programming by playing with profunctor optics
Bitcoin is a naturally occurring Ponzi scheme at this moment though. It is pretty neat one.
Tangential: does anyone know of any studies on:

* the status of “unofficial” languages such as Cantonese, Shanghainese, Hakka, Hokkien, Minnan, or others, inside China, Taiwan, or overseas;

* their usage trends over (say) the last decade.

Such awareness would be crucial to saving extinct languages and ensuring language and cultural diversity.
U.S. Unprepared for Coming AI Threat, National Security Commission Finds
Imposters to Win
In a similar way, if you reduce your meat consumption by 80%, you're 80% of the way to the environmental benefits of a wholly vegan diet. Isn't it easier to convince someone to reduce their meat intake than to eliminate it completely?
Is there a source for this? I watched their testimony to congress and they said they aren't even able to place naked shorts/calls.

You can still get a short interest above 100% without selling naked calls/shorts.
It's the 2020's equivalent of "think of the children".
But he was right about Bitcoin being a naturally occurring Ponzi scheme though.
They seldom do. When you go down that rabbit hole you realize "science" is an industry like every other, subject to the same forces (wanting to be published, to get media coverage, etc).

Reminds me of https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-39054778
It's impossible to predict the future. If everyone holds bitcoin as a store of value then the value should drop as it's not being used for anything one would think. I believe the best outcome is that people start using bitcoin for every day purchases and the hope is that by 2140 the price is relatively stable. Most likely there will be many large holders as there are with real money.

However, someone could maybe do a 51% attack on bitcoin at some point. Maybe there is a unforeseen flaw in bitcoin. Maybe something better comes a long. It's impossible to know.
I'll tell you what's wrong: the mentality of the author of this text

Multiplication has started as repeated addition. That's where the idea came from.

> It is as if there were two types of addition: regular, random, “wild” addition and the specially-bred variety of addition to which we give the name multiplication.

Nobody. Literally nobody said that

Of course, you'll need to forget a bit the idea of repeated multiplication when you get into the rationals/reals/complex numbers, but even there it kinda makes sense

So no, I think this is the kind of teacher that makes the students even more confused and prone to hating math
I don't know what it is about diet research but it seems to really bring out strong opinions on hackernews. Given that we're the target market for Soylent I guess it makes sense.
The article is from 1973. I think exact eras are getting a little muddled here. Altair, Mark-8, SCELBI, these are the sort of home computer that came out shortly AFTER this project was published.
Why cloud automation with Ansible is the future
> There's no inherent reason we want there to be incentives to spend, unless you're some central planner trying to keep the populace invested in society.

You're confusing spending and consumption. Bitcoin holdings don't do anything. They're a nominal amount on a public ledger, and if bitcoins also serve as the medium of exchange this would be subject to the paradox of thrift.

Instead, a healthy economy encourages people to invest. If I have money (or bitcoins) I don't need for immediate purposes, I shouldn't put it under the mattress (or on the blockchain). I should instead loan it out as debt or equity to someone else who wants to expand production in some way, producing a (probable) real return. That's how we become a wealthier society.

A deflating bitcoin is not well-suited for these investments, since a rational holder of bitcoin would probably prefer to continue to hold bitcoin (not doing anything) rather than take an investment with an interest rate less than the expected appreciation on bitcoin. At the same time, bitcoin's volatility is also bad for secondary finance because it becomes difficult to properly value future payments.

Hoarding currency should never be a viable investment strategy. That it is so for bitcoin is evidence for the speculative bubble hypothesis.
Is there an insight we are supposed to gain from this connection?
That documentary drove me nuts, Incouldnt take anything seriously from the moment they compared the impact of meat vs plant on blood fat levels, using black beans vs fried chicken. Yes, fried chicken..
The plant based ones are. But there are some companies that are trying to grow meat out of cultured muscle cells, and that could be an actual solution.
I’m actually advocating the opposite! There are things you can not change, so sulking about it won’t get you anywhere. I’d say “keep fighting”.
Everything about this story is just so frustrating.

- While the GameStop thing should be investigated and the lack of transparency criticized, Robinhood’s stated reason for halting the trades is plausible and corroborated by other people. I suspect their shadiness was because their internal finances are worse than they are letting on. The idea that they were acting as the foot soldiers of hedge funds (who were hardly overexposed to GME anyway) is preposterous.

- Robinhood absolutely deserves to get in legal trouble (like “send the CEO to prison”) for its horrendously predatory “appification” of retail investment[1]. I had a poor opinion of Robinhood and I was still shocked by how horrible their behavior was[2]:

> In 2019, Robinhood rolled out a new cash management feature with an early access waitlist and utilized gamification to reward customers who interacted daily with the application by improving their position on the waitlist. Customers who did not interact daily watched their position on the waitlist precipitously decline, while those who succumbed to the effects of Robinhood's gamification soared up and up the waitlist.

> In an effort to encourage trading, Robinhood provides lists of securities on its application, including lists of the most-traded securities on Robinhood's platform and the most popular securities traded by Robinhood customers. This is no different than a broker-dealer agent handing a list of securities to a customer, pretending to be surprised when the customer purchases securities from that list, and then proclaiming that he made no recommendations to that customer.

> Robinhood advertisements use young actors and illustrate Robinhood's attempt to lure young, inexperienced investors into using its platform...[f]or example, one such advertisement contains a clip of a young adult saying "I'm a broke college student and investments might help my future tremendously."

Sincerely rotten folks at that company.

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/16/robinhood-reportedly-facing-...

[2] https://www.sec.state.ma.us/sct/current/sctrobinhood/MSD-Rob...
Apple Confirms Comcent as First Community Media Media App
Apple has confirmed Comcent, a Ghanaian-made mobile application that connects community leaders to their constituents, as the first community media app on the Apple App Store, a significant win for the tech ecosystem in Ghana, Chief Executive Officer of Comcent , Kwadwo Dwomo II , has said.

This move has confirmed Apple’s stance as an equal opportunity company that recognizes innovations, irrespective of the race or gender of the developers.
The page on the site with the specific quote by GP is here: https://wellcome.org/grant-funding/people-and-projects/grant...

You may already realize this but if you type

site:wellcome.org "Reducing meat intake, particularly in the USA where meat consumption is highest, should be a global priority."

into Google you'll find it.
Sounds good to me, if you don‘t buy the house because your money is not devalued consistently. House buyers might actually get more use out of it than holding their money, instead of just (or in part) buying it for monetary reasons
If they're really doing this (and I don't particularly doubt it) someone should script up a little bot to search for domain names that are likely to trigger the mechanism. Find word clouds around some of the newer domains like .quest with characters under a certain limit...

...or perhaps that's feeding the beast and namecheap will be thanking us in 5 years when people are knocking down their doors for the hot domains we generated.
Anyone have a clever solution for optionally using new python features while still supporting lower python 3 versions? For packaging purposes. Could put try except blocks everywhere or selectively import 3.10 modules vs <=3.9 modules, for example.

I find that new features aren’t necessary for their functionality, but they often can make code more terse, so having “duplicate” code with the same functionality but without new terseness kind of defeats the purpose. I suppose having two versions of the same module lets you end support for an old version pretty simply, but is that useful?
If someone asked me to name a meat, chicken nuggets would not even come to mind.
No one can say. It depends on many factors: your general health, age, genetic disposition, the composition of the rest of your diet, your general lifestyle (e.g. exercise, drug consumption, social status, mental health, ...).

If you are a homeless drug addict, being a vegan or vegetarian won't help improving your overall health. Likewise, being a well-off employed young individual in a stable and happy relationship who does regular health-checkups is more than enough to counter the daily 250g rare steak...
Ingenuity (the Mars helicopter) has a much more modern processor that isn't particularly radiation hardened, and instead just restarts within milliseconds on any fault (fast enough to recover if it happens in flight). If Ingenuity does well I wouldn't be surprised to see a similar design in a future rover.
> Melvin capital and several other hedge funds engaged in naked short selling, and many backbone clearing houses enabled it via share counter fitting. (naked short selling is illegal)

No they didn't. Naked short selling is different from short selling while the short interest is high.
If you define the reals axiomatically, you still need an existence proof. Which will involve addition and multiplication algorithms.
Ask an Australian.
Ability to import code from private github repos and other places.
I'm not sure the suggestion is call them a co-founder, this is a question about equity. I think it is likely VERY common for early stage employees to get at least some equity.
For some reason Jeff Bezos' laughter came into my head.
This is compounded by the fact that people don't want Bitcoin to change. The very critics of Bitcoin want it to change to be more useful. Isn't it absurd how there are people (HODLers) that insist that it is valuable and should go up and simultaneously insist on keeping the value of Bitcoin down?
I have two banking apps that run just fine under it. Your mileage may vary.
Google should have never started hiring ethical AI researchers. They should have hired AI researchers and made their stuff available to independent ethics researchers.

These independent researchers should be employed by i.e. a university and funded by government funds, maybe even additionally with an AI regulation fee (i.e. like car makers have to pay to certify their cars).

It makes no sense for them to hire their critics and then think they can stay independent. You are basically paying people to shit on your own products. Makes no sense.
I've looked into a few of the studies you mention a while back because of personal interest.

Most of the conclusions of large scale studies are not very solid and can often be dismissed with correlation is not causation. Your point is valid, but also very often popular health habits align with the view of what a healthy diet is in society. Therefore lower meat intake often is connected to more exercise, more sleep etc. Of course they often try to correct for it, but it still makes many of the conclusions debatable.

There is however one association that seems to hold up for red meat, whether that's a steak or a shitty burger, which is the connection between heme iron and certain form of cancers:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3261306/#:~:tex....

But at the same time the effect is still very small and not well understood.
What is wrong was the immediate jump from "Fat in organs is the fat we eat from food". It seemed a natural and simple explanation at the time.

Now it appears it's not that clear. It's the excess of sugar in everything that overloads your bodies temporary stores of glycogen in the muscles and liver, which is then stored as fat, since your body can easily transform sugars into fats.

To see how that looks you can track the obesity numbers in US, the more "0%!" fat products are propped up with suger over the years, the larger the obesity crowd.

I don't think the final word is out yet, but the _cause_ of fat in your body, is not necessarily the fat that you eat.
I would love for them to sue Cloudflare and bring up the fact that Cloudflare is knowly hosting illegal ddos-for-hire services which forces people to buy DDOS protection.....
Which firms attempted illegal short selling, and what is your specific evidence to support that they did?
There was a several hour period one evening where some “it’s for your own good because of the volatility” message was the first comms from the company on the topic.
I kind of feel this way about biology research too though - yeah the stuff we can technically do is really awesome, but the vast majority of the studies (and the system that encourages it to be this way) just feel so algorithmic. Stories of past discoveries sound way more fun, like scientists used to actually just informally try things to see what would happen.

On the other hand, this could mostly be selection bias on which stories get passed down. I haven't looked into it rigorously, it's just a feeling I sometimes get when I see the cookie cutter study design/grant writing process going on.
I feel like every time it gets used in such a flagrantly meaningless way, it burns some of the power.

There was a time when I was like “okay, diversity inclusion, time to stop thinking.” But this line, “... built on the backs of Cantonese workers”. Should we teach every language of every African culture whose members were abducted in the slave trade? This isn’t feasible, valuable, or sensible. The goal might be, but the means is silly.

The more I’m asked to swallow abject absurdities like this, the more my default heuristic whenever I see the word “diversity” is to shut down and assume bad faith. Which leaves me feeling quite politically homeless, because the other team seems invested in gratuitous xenophobia, and homey just don’t play that.
If this is the case, and it has happened already to the OP.. How could you have confidence going BACK to namecheap for it to happen again..
"Epidemiological study supports assertions of those funding the study"

Does that not seem problematic to you?
In the country I grew up in, the Netherlands, not only is that not common practice, it cannot happen at all. What we have is people can ask the Ministry of Justice for a "Verklaring Omtrent het Gedrag (VOG)", a declaration by the ministerial department that there are no relevant convictions that would get in the way of the job or role they are applying for. If you have no convictions, you get your VOG. If you have convictions but they are not relevant to the job or role you are applying for, you get the exact same VOG that you would if you have no convictions, so that there is no way for employers to know the difference. Your employer is not allowed to ask you directly about a criminal history (at least not in a job interview), they are only allowed to ask for a VOG. Yes, that means you can get a banking license with a criminal history, if the Ministry has decided that that criminal history is irrelevant. With a conviction for fraud, you won't get that license. With a conviction for assault, you might. That seems like a much fairer system to me and I wish more countries would adopt it.
"The advantage of a plant based diet is that it's a lot kinder to the earth and to our animal cousins while also helping you avoid obesity."

Does it actually help avoid obesity? Many of the vegetarians I know are overweight or even obese.
I wonder if the general avoidance of a specific food or ingredient is enough extra conscious effort to generally improve the baseline quality of what that individual is consuming.

Without resorting to an anecdote, my point is that it might simply be easier to accidentally eat healthier food when one has to abide by the contents of the packaging.
They'll keep coming after meat eating with every angle - health, ecology, economics, emotional appeals - but humans can live a long, healthy life with meat in their diet. That doesn't mean industrial burgers daily or portions that look like a carnival hot dog eating contest, but 4 to 6 oz of quality meat from animals is healthy.

I think the US especially would be far better served to appeal to people to reduce portion sizes rather than insist on industrialized plant based food. Minimally processed foods in smaller portions is far more sustainable and healthier than vegan radicalism and scientifically formulated plant-based edible substances.
Agreed. Multiplier and multiplicand are different words but the commutative property says their values can swap equivalently, so . . . what was the author's point again?
Can you explain what you mean?

How does understanding pain relate to how we humans or other animals feel pain?

I don't get your point.
I’m just asking what would be a use case where you would actually need this
I wish ACM would act ethically in regards to SciHub.