skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I can somewhat sympathize, although I don't view these arguments as strong since they could mostly be fixed with minimal effort. On the other hand, it's just a personal blog, so if you don't feel like sharing then that's cool too.

* The unpublished posts would require a different workflow; you could easily keep a private repo and a public repo, and publish by pushing from private to public.

* I don't really see a problem with copycats, personally. I personally feel like theme/design is just a minor style thing on top of the content and not even something that you "take credit for". Like, if someone wants to copy everything but the content of my blog, more power to them.

* The security angle is basically adding obscurity, which is a reasonable additional layer, however thin.
How recent an innovation this is depends on your language.

It was added in C++11 so it looks recent there. But the syntax was in Perl 4 back in 1991. And someone who knows programming history can probably find older examples still in other languages.
FYI, HN has its own search engine: https://hn.algolia.com/
The GameStop Short Squeeze Explained with Caveman Logic
If you are concerned about metal oxide dust, then you would want to shut down every blast furnace in the world, and also pave over the Sahara, since it throws millions of tons of iron oxide dust into the air every year: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saharan_dust
Will be interesting to see what effect this has on the price, might extend into all of the risk conversations around Satoshi's stockpile.
EMS launches bridging for Microsoft Teams
Parent mentioned that AI is used to sneak in discrimination through the back door, implying that discrimination wouldn’t be there (or there would be less) without AI.
What’s wrong with 1-prefixed addresses?
>Laws aren’t immutable

You could've fooled me. About the only thing that seems to change laws in places like the EU is when the courts decide to strike something down. Everything else seems to just go ahead the way the EU politicians envisioned. Consequences be damned.
We don't need "more theory". The vast majority of computer science theory goes unapplied in solving real-world problems. While I'm sure this is great for postgrad computer science students, it's not very useful for the every day programmers out there.
Zero-day vulnerability in Desktop Window Manager
> So far, we arguably we haven't observed any.

From the POV of 19th centure physics, the double-slit experiment was quite the glitch.

And one could argue that the consequence of that glitch did not exactly simplify physics.
This implies that the energy required to store wealth in centralized databases is easily calculable.

It also implies that the goal of storing wealth is optimizing for low energy usage, which seems less important than security/safety, ease of transfer, taxation, automation, and other factors.

I’m not making an argument for or against PoW. Just want to point out it’s possible >.6% of humans energy output may in fact go towards banking and payments.
Having mined cryptocurrency a long long time ago when it was still a novelty, it's really good to appreciate just how bad the externalities are for cryptocurrencies. The incentives are created for people to buy the cheapest energy possible and just burn it up for a made up financial instrument [0], even when that comes with a significant carbon footprint. Even if mining is only a tenth as bad as the University of Cambridge thinks [1]. On a much more minor note, it takes up energy generation (renewable and otherwise) and chip production resources that could be spent on actual production instead of yet another financial instrument.

I'd be in favor of banning the trade of all PoW cryptocurrencies for this reason alone. There is no proper way of banning mining in general, and neither should anyone desire to ban specific types of computation. Banning its trade to strongly disincentivize the sheer senseless resource consumption is more important and much more clear cut than any financial arguments to do it.

I realize this would utterly devastate the current cryptocurrency market, but that's the point (at least for anything that isn't proof of stake). We should get this over with before our dependency on it further increases and the environmental damage gets worse.

The zeitgeist around this has changed substantially. PoW cryptocurrencies really aren't credibly grassroots and have been captured by whales. And there really isn't any application of PoW ledger designs outside of cryptocurrencies with significant mindshare either. For all of this - proof-of-stake cryptocurrencies should be an alternative. Not a direct replacement, but able to cover most use cases.

Coinbase was founded under a different zeitgeist and I don't blame them for jumping into this market. But I think that banning PoW cryptocurrencies should be strongly advocated, and once this realization catches up at the right level, they have a significant liability on their hands.

[0]: For the record, all financial instruments are "made up". PoW cryptocurrencies are the only one that come with blatant resource consumption however.

[1]: https://techcrunch.com/2021/03/21/the-debate-about-cryptocur...

(For the record, if a ban on PoW cryptocurrencies would come into effect today I'd lose money over it.)
Dear English speakers of the United States of America, please be advised that
1. The English language is not earthspeak.
2. The town of Bitche has been around for almost 500 years more than when colonies united.
3. Before judging, stop using odious names for your spawn and town names (Sir, I'm going to Bumpass with your daughter, Anna-Lee, it'll be our only stop before reaching you in Satans Kingdom).
For practical purposes, functionals are just infinite-dimensional functions. In practice, a function is always represented numerically using a finite basis (grid, splines, Fourier), so functionals become just high-dimensional functions. At which point we are back to ordinary machine learning. So I’m not sure what’s the point here.
They had the option to exercise whatever options they had vested, yes, subject to the company's normal rules.

Employees who had been with the company two years or more would have seven years to exercise. Those who had been there between one and two years would have 90 days.

Employees who had not yet been there a year would not have reached the vesting cliff, and would not have had vested options available to exercise.
It's more difficult, but not impossible I think:

On the Bitcoin side you can "wash" it by mixing it with other coins, or deposit/withdraw it through multiple exchanges.

Then on the output side, you can get rid of it through shell companies or through less reputable sites, or into countries that won't extradite criminals.

So - it's definitely harder than normal, but I think you could find a way.
I have no opinion on New York and its implementation of the theory but I think it's indeed very clear that the theory applies to community management.

I manage an instant messaging community of about 10000 stem professionals and you can see negative community feedback loops develop or die down in real time depending on how you act on them. It's evident new members take in the vibe when they arrive and act to reinforce good or bad trends. If you let people make crass jokes, soon they're posting rude comments then insulting each others. If you let people post memes about technical topics, soon it's random tiktok videos, then it's porn. If you let a regular member go off on a newbie who asks a bad question, the next thing you know people are bullying newcomers left and right.

All I wanted was to build a nice virtual gathering spot and meet cool people but now I have to play fascist because the feedback effect is so strong.
Or the simple hammer/rubber hose backdoor. I think encryption is only helpful over short windows. Meaning, delete anything you don't want found because it will get cracked at rest.
Yeah, I'm not saying that import was a mistake or even a good idea done in the wrong way. I use "import" whenever I can in my own code. It could be impossible to import only the particular things one needs, and that trusting tree-shaking is the best we can do. However, it very much seems like a first version to me, and that import statements could be made smart enough to destructure.
Nifty that somebody at least tried!

The paper has been cited only about 40 times in the half-century since it was written, but I found one recent interesting citation:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327127198_The_Monta...

Uncivil remarks uniquely diminished the speaker’s reputation, and had little impact on the reputation of the targets of the attack, the perceived winner of the verbal exchange, the reputation of the speaker’s party, or the sense that the country is moving in the right direction. Incivility made the speaker seem less warm and did less to affect perceptions of dominance or honesty. This warmth deficit explained the reputational costs of incivility.

That's from 2018 and specifically takes recent American politics into account.

I'm skeptical of the study for a variety of reasons, mostly coming down to the issue of what people tell researchers vs what they actually do. But it's good to know that somebody is at least trying.
I assume that Jeff has changed his mind on this because Discourse does not have down-votes (with the caveat that Discourse has a different audience from HN). I wonder what made the difference?
Sure but my point is that, while you could argue that decisions about some topics could be discriminatory by definition, that has nothing to do with AI (and saying that AI is at fault is pure anti-AI FUD).
Yikes. Same level as people using latinx.
Should I be using NPS to measure customer loyalty in SaaS?
FLOSS TTS and STT is badly needed right now. Being able to use voice recognition and speech synthesis should not be restricted to a small oligoply.
Thanks, I didn't know about that and I'll have to look at that some more.

(Technically the third party doctrine would still apply in any case, because this would be a statutory protection rather than a constitutional protection.)
There was no option to flag, otherwise I would have.
I would have done that, if the edit window hadn't closed on my original comment by the time I read his reply.
I think the overall goal assumes that genetics causes Alzheimer's, which is (in my opinion) a questionable assumption. That's not to say that the production of model systems for Alzheimer's will be useful, but will it be worth the tens or hundreds of millions of dollars that this will cost? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
There’s a remarkable amount of hyperbole in this article (but not the original publication). In plain language, this is a project to generate, characterize, and openly share the data for iPSC models (and presumably neurons from them) bearing 100 APOE disease-associated mutations.

It must be remembered that one reason many AD drugs have failed is because models don’t capture the disease accurately and that may well turn out to be the case here.
A professor is under investigation for criticizing the Chinese governmen
> if you receive BTC from one of these addresses as payment for something, do you refuse it?

You cannot refuse a BTC transaction. You could return it in a subsequent transaction, and pay the transaction fee, but I would imagine your address would be forever tainted by a number of illicit address/transaction tracking algorithms.
There are a number of important differences, in fact the only meaningful comparison is that they are selling shares to the public.

The title is wrong, there is no IPO. Presumably "IPO" is meant as "public offering." If there's a place to be specific about these things, isn't this thread it?
They really missed an opportunity by not calling it the Great Vowel Movement
You never explicitly stated, but is your argument that the energy consumption of bitcoin is the negative externality?

First of all energy is not fungible, not in time and not in space. There are times where consuming electricity is actually beneficial for renewables and the environment. I think the main mental block people have is that are trained to "save electricity" and that "all energy usage is negative." I would argue that using electricity during periods of wind or solar oversupply is actually positive for the environment. Because of this non-fungibility of energy, proof of work mining can be a positive sum game for the environment. Let me explain:

Back in the days where all our electricity came from fossil fuels, I completely agree that marginal electricity usage was bad for the environment. However I think that thought has persisted with us even though it is no longer true 100% of the time. With renewables sometimes the marginal cost of electricity to our environment is near 0 or even negative (eg, during periods of higher winds and lower demand)

I predict that in the future as bitcoin mining becomes more and more of an efficiency game that you will see bitcoin mining be kind of a load balancer for the grid, effectively turning off during peak demand (or low supply) times and contributing to the base load during regular times. Of course this would be distributed across the globe, and you would see more plants running midday (with solar oversupply) and overnight (with wind oversupply) than you would during early morning and evening peak hours.

For example, it may even help the economics of building new wind plants. Eg, currently it may not be profitable to build a new wind plant because base load is too low that the excess power generated would need to be sold off at 0 or even negative prices. However if bitcoin mining could be turned on during these times and off during periods of high demand, there will need to be fewer peaker plants in operation and it would positively affect the economics of opening a new wind plant.

Bitcoin mining only cares about the cost of electricity at a given time, it is not like most other electricity demands that are very time based. With the large variance of electricity generation by renewables, I think bitcoin can in the future help smooth demand according to the real supply/demand curve.

It's kind of like a different implementation of the Tesla utility grid batteries. Instead of deploying power, you force the grid to build more renewable capacity (that the miners are paying for) that you use except in peak periods, where you turn off and effectively provide the grid with more power.

Here are 2 articles of a bitcoin mining company doing just this:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-01/bitcoin-m...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2020/05/21/ho...
Can one even refuse it? If someone just sends tainted coin to my address, am I screwed?
He actually put in $300k, so his shares are worth around 2.4 billion now
It seems like email is the main feature with few people still using non-podcast RSS readers. This seems like a way to make enough people stop using it to justify shutting it down entirely.
The problem is that this option is to buy AZ's current vaccine that have a high probability of being ineffective in 18 months. EU is not saying that it won't buy from AZ, but as of now it's not well spent money to buy their current one to be delivered in 18 months. By then all companies will have new better vaccines and the EU would have to fork up a shitload of money on the new AZ vaccine and just write the old of as another loss while the AZ execs get another fat bonus paid by the EU citizens.
https://oversightboard.com/
I know nothing of the implementation, but hypothetically a compiler could translate:

p++

to instructions that effectively do:

p = enc(dec(p)+1)

Without exposing p outside the CPU. The implementation described (seems to be) new instructions for incrementing and dereferencing pointers.
Income tax rates apply to any income from work, including contracted temporary work (including specifically "authorship works" which IT services generally fell under and which get 20% "normalized expenses", though if your actual costs are higher, you _can_ document expenses instead). Method of calculation is slightly different because of expenses and treatment of gross income, but rates are the same by law.

They are, however, not treated as employees (which have a lot of protections like minimum hourly wage, maximum working hours, maximum daily and weekly overtime hours, minimum number of paid vacation days, sick leave coverage at 60% of salary...). For freelancers, this does cause trouble with the pension fund employees not wanting to count your contributions toward your pension, but it depends heavily on who deals with processing your forms.
Exploring the Porous Boundaries Between Theology and Philosophy
Color of Change hiring its first CTO
https://www.ledger.com/academy/difference-between-segwit-and...
Have similar experiences - it amazes me how the (assuming India) call center folks are trained to be so good at seeing the diagnosed problem, hitting keys to re-provision thier equipment.. while pushing 'unknown blame on your owned equipment, we can't peer into your modem' - um it's a moto docsis 3 compliant, do I need to get in touch with.. oh check your speed now.. it's getting faster magically.

'The latter offers 200/200 Mbps service for $40/month' - wish that was here.

Paying about $40 per month or 25MB and getting 15-19 the past two weeks - using comcast's speed test portal.
>"...upvote and report to mods."

This to me seems like the best approach.
Plastic Recycling is a Scam [video]
And in Brian had simply bought bitcoins with his $10.000 in 2012, when the price was $4-$12 per piece?

He could have bought 833-2500 bitcoins, with a current value of $5.2500.000 - $157.500.000.

He choose to do more than "HODL" and go through the hard work of building a product and a company, which in my book, makes him a true hero. Even though he went the casino/shitcoin rout later...
oh boy, wait until you hear about Tesla
That's why we need centralized exchanges like coinbase to enable off chain transactions within their walled garden. Then we can have the worst of both worlds.
The world is full of inferior products and standards that ended up winning because of early mover advantages. There’s even a name for it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worse_is_better
> He's actively covering up Epstein's crimes.

As Andrew_nenakhov said, you can repeat this all you want. Specifically this is the most ridiculous accusation which has been debunked to death. You might want to try going over the actual facts again.

> All it does is taint the movement.

If the perception of a "taint" is based on lies spread by a bunch of idiots on Twitter and some "journalists", this is not Stallman's fault. As for "the movement" itself, Stallman is a thought leader and an uncompromising idealist who left MIT to pursue it. He is the kind of person people like Eben Moglen [1] considered a giant. Stallman's statement speaks volumes about his character.

Unless the damage and the harm inflicted upon him by the mob and the lies is fully repaired, I do not care about whatever actually valid reason someone might have to get him to step down.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKxzK9xtSXM
Young kenyans hackers and their steampunk mechanical arm [video]
I don't agree with the general tone of most of the comments at all. A lot of people seem to conflate holding people accountable for lies that damage other people's reputation or honor with authoritarianism or lack of freedom.

Letting that kind of lying go unpunished does not enhance freedom. It destroys discourse and it destroys people's respect for governance. If these laws were simply a tool for corruption, then Singapore would be the most corrupt, dysfunctional place on earth. It clearly isn't.

I think actually the opposite is true. When you let people libel and lie with impunity you destroy any respect for leadership, truth and politicians itself will stop holding themselves to any standard, because after all anyone can slander you anyway, so why even bother.

It seems to have become common in Western discourse to conflate truth with power. Any speech against individuals who hold a position of power is legitimate, any defense from people in position of power is illegitimate and tyrannical. This cannot be right because the end result is that no legitimate exercise of power is even possible. Someone who posts on Facebook is not automatically the hero of the people, and the Prime Minister is not automatically wrong.
>>> we've seen ways AI can allow discrimination through the back door.

>> we've seen ways AI can allow discrimination through the back door.

> Do you have any concrete examples of these, in particular where the use of statistics or AI enables more discrimination than using human decisions?

Here's a concrete example:

https://towardsdatascience.com/racist-data-human-bias-is-inf...

> An AI program called COMPAS has been used by a Wisconsin court to predict the likelihood that convicts will reoffend. An investigative piece by ProPublica last year found that this risk assessment system was biased against black prisoners, incorrectly flagging them as being more likely to reoffend than white prisoners (45% to 24% respectively). These predictions have led to defendants being handed longer sentences, as in the case of Wisconsin v. Loomis.

Also, I'd dispute your injection of the "more racist than humans" framing (which is also moving the goalposts a bit). The problem with racist algorithms isn't necessarily their "degree of racism" but the fact that they mask very real racism behind a veneer of false computerized "objectivity."
But he makes pretty books!

The CTO gave me his copy of a "New Kind of Science". I don't know why. It sat on my office shelf for years, hopefully convincing a few people that I was thoughtful and intelligent. It sure looked good, inside and out.
You're using the Portuguese transliteration of the eñe. And if you were doing it with an Italian or French transliteration, you could write "agno."

(That said, it's one that's so common it's worth learning the keyboard shortcut for. On a Mac it's "opt-n, n".)
>> Limiting use of AI reduces interest of the public and young researchers and engineers, contributes to brain drain and limits availability of large datasets that are an important asset for AI development.

I disagree. As a senior-year PhD student, I am relieved that the EU is taking a stance on this matter and hope that others in the West will follow suit (it's probably too late for China). I am relieved because I personally have grave concerns about the uses of AI in society and have thought for some time that some kind of formal and official framework is needed. AI researchers haven't yet managed to establish such a framework, so legislators have stepped in. The framework still seems pretty "green" and like it will take a lot of development and improvement, but that a first step was made is important.

So in fact you might say that having a legal framework in place makes AI research more attractive, because the student is not left to wonder about the ethics of her research on her own.

As to the availability of large datasets- how do you see that this would be affected by the legislation being considered?

I should also point out that the reliance on large datasets is a bug, not a feature, of the currently dominant AI techniques and that an alternative is sorely needed. If large datasets became less easily available, that would give a good incentive to researchers to go do something new, rather than throw a ton of data to an old benchmark to improve it by 0.2%.
Netscape might have died, but it kickstarted the internet revolution in a major way.
It's a pity as it ranks #1 in this site about economic freedom: https://www.heritage.org/index/

I wonder if there are better lists that sort countries by actual freedom?