skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ask HN: Possible to pivot into ML research career without a PhD?
Hi HN. I have a career question.

My brother in law just started a masters program in ML, and is thinking of doing a PhD program after that. He wants to ultimately do ML research at an industry lab (like DeepMind or whatever). He’s not interested in academia, and is worried that he’ll burn out being a graduate student for the next 6ish years.

Would it be plausible for him to get a position as an applied scientist and then ultimately pivot into a research position over the course of a few years? Is that a viable path? Or is a PhD a must for this sort of position? I think he’d be happier working into that position as an IC rather than a student. He’s done some good research already, but doesn’t yet have published work.
As Expected, Wear OS Market Share Leaps into Existence Thanks to Samsung
> Yes, I agree the people who build the robots should share in the wealth of the things they create.

Good! I hope you also agree share people who actually produce the goods are entitled to bigger share?

> I said nothing about seizing or violence. I said democratic ownership. That would be a process of everyone coming together and agreeing on how things work.

I assume "people who create robots" will be tiny minority, so what you are describing is exactly what OP said: bunch of people who create nothing vote to seize the robots (from their creators) and redistribute it (to themselves). All through democratic means, of course!
You can use `wait` to wait for jobs to finish.

some_command &
some_other_command &
wait
Cryptography is not. Cryptocurrencies? Probably most of them.
>Morality doesn't necessarily require deep intellectualism

I don't think that a statement about avoiding pitfalls of anti-intellectualism needs to be read as endorsing the opposite extreme, and I don't making that kind of assumption contributes to constructive conversation.

>To say it simply, there is no proverbial burning building that requires us to farm animals in the way that we currently do.

This response to the burning building example is fascinating and strange to me for a number of reasons. For one I started by providing a simple, clear cut, face value example of a case where doing good means considering how to prioritize wellbeing of different species. And as far as the example itself is concerned, you're just not engaging with it at all, and asking about a different example.

I mean, fair enough, we can get to your chosen example, but I already feel like we're a bit off kilter. If that were not already strange enough, you are saying "there is no proverbial burning building that requires us to farm animals in the way that we currently do." Well, maybe not in your chosen example, but in some other cases there is, quite literally as in the example I just mentioned. And to be clear, it's not just that I want my example to be seen because I think I'm special. It's that if someone says there is no such thing as that proverbial burning burning (e.g. no reason to treat species differently), and I show an example showing exactly that, it would seem important to engage with that example, not just to switch to consideration of other examples.

So I don't know what the disconnect is here. As to your example, well, sure. I think you are right, there is no proverbial burning building requiring harmful farming practices, and in my opinion those should be abolished, as you can argue there is no calculus in which they are neccessary Perfectly true, both in the literal sense, and as a matter of principle that it's a case where you don't have to think of it in terms of tradeoffs. But here again, I am wondering where this is coming from? Do you think "save humans from fire before mice" means ignore harmful farming practices? Where are you getting that?

>Saying that there is an inverse prioritization is not the matter at hand.

Again, very strange to me. I feel like my comments are anchored to reality by the fact that I try to stick closely to responding directly to specific things that someone else said. In this case, the commenter I was replying to was speaking generally about speciesm. I felt this was narrow, and that a more fair characterization about what drives this way of thinking is that it's how to make positive, morally good choices, in contrast to their one-sided view that only talked about it in the negative sense, in terms of inflicting harm.

For some reason, you have come in and decided that me responding directly to that is "not the matter at hand." But again, it very much was, because the subject was speciesm writ large, and I was speaking to that. So I just don't know what you are talking about, at least not without a bit more framing.
You probably make a valid comment about USA, but I would hazard to bet that it is, in fact, the zeitgeist/ cultural / societal climate of the world in general has been stripped of rationality in favour of clickbait, sensationalism and dare I say, value faking (I support X because it makes me a appear to be a better person, but in reality I don't authentically live.). [There is a term for this that I can't think of right now.]
The falling cat phenomenon that helped NASA prepare astronauts for zero gravity
You discovered the one area that doesn't work well yet. Dev tools don't work great because they typically need access to just about everything. They either ask for very broad permissions or the app has to add support for portals - of which there may not be some that they need yet.
The Linux equivalent of foobar2000 is DeaDBeeF which is also quite nice.
https://archive.md/Htyts
The big obstacle for spinning artificial gravity is that it won't really work on a small spacestation. It has been not tried because we never had the option of a so large station where it would make sense to try - I'm not saying that it's not hard, however, the fact that we haven't attempted it is not evidence that it's hard, it's fully explained by the needs and restrictions of our size-limited spacestations like ISS for which each module is limited to a 4.5 meter tube because of launch vehicle limitations.

Another reason why it's not done is because one of the reasons why we have a space station is to do microgravity experiments, and having artificial gravity only hurts that.
How do you get from an individual owning something to everyone owning it?

You have to take it from the individual.
My wife leaves meat out of the fridge for the practically the whole day...
I'm a big fan of these setups but has anybody ever successfully used a minimal-JS setup for anything useful?

I mean, there's apps like Pinboard but React & Redux do handle a lot of complexity and most modern apps demand that complexity.
> so that hate speech against Black, Jewish, LGBTQ, Muslim, and multiracial people would be taken down through an automated system

And what happens when the system takes down quotes from the Quran--which Muslims believe to be not only the inspired, but perfect word of God--as "hate speech."
You're right and still it's pure stubbornness on your part. A waste of energy.

The world won't change because you say so. Just use a dash to separate your constituent parts instead of a plus sign, and you won't have that problem ever again.

(I know someone who has been complaining about exactly this for more than twenty years now. Surprisingly it never seems to get old for him. Some people just need a "standard complaint".)
I think the package he used, also has some kind of pipe authorization access control.
I see this comment and feel so bad for past you!

Why are we treating all sugars as the same? They are not the same.

Some baked goods have sugar in order to feed yeast, rather than humans... Pizza dough, bagels, croissants. Yes these all come in dessert varieties, but it's not the default option.

Especially when you start getting to dumping on fresh fruit, it's like, no, please don't commit yourself to a bland beige life like that! Plants are masters of poisons and trickery, e.g. capsaicin (what makes peppers spicy) makes our mouths burn, but not the mouths of birds—who spread their seeds. Plants use fructose specifically because it's not dextrose and therefore it's hard for bacteria to digest: because they want us to eat this fruit and scatter the pit. Indeed they make the fruit sweet rather rapidly, “now now, it's ready now!”, to signal an optimal “it’s not poisonous! now you-scratch-my-back-I’ll-scratch-yours” moment to us.

Plants even look out for our longer-term health, those bright colors that we find so attractive are usually signaling to us these really important antioxidants that we need. As long as we don't freeze or puree the cell walls into oblivion, the resulting fiber traps some sugars and feeds it not to us but to our gut bacteria, who then don't starve and eat our GI linings...

“let's not eat foods that I know are healthy, to satisfy arbitrary rules I made up to keep myself healthy”... really?

So if zero tolerance is out, what remains?

• Set a low sugar target, “no more than 10% of my calories from sugars.”

• Prefer stuff with a shelf life. If it has an expiration date rather than a nutrition label, great!

• Don't worry about the natural sugar in yogurt, the lactose, unless you're lactose-intolerant. But don't buy the flavored versions as they are sugary enough to classify as desserts for breakfast. Instead do what the Dutch do—buy the plain stuff and cut the sour yourself with added whole grains and fresh fruit.

• “Don't even let it in your house” the other stuff. Guilty pleasures for me include chocolate and jam, I try to make sure that I don't have these in-stock...

• The grocer is a pilgrimage. What I mean is, it's tempting to zigzag your way through and see everything, and this is also why shopping takes forever! But pilgrims usually make a big walk around a structure before diving into the middle for a brief flirtation/unveiling of divinity. A good grocery run too walks around the aisles at the edges, fresh fruit and veg, fresh baked goods, meat and poultry, dairy... And it makes targeted trips into the middle only for things that it needs. You've got a list of the things you'll dip into the middle for, after all, and if your grocery trips are short then if you miss something, you can take another short grocery trip later in the week and still save time and money. Small batch sizes, lean manufacturing!
Red velvet is actually chocolate cake dyed red.
They do! My comment wasn't meant to be cynical. I'm just assuming the majority of a secondary would be to the founders.
> Memory and CPU-wise, Flatpaks are very light containers

Adding to that: it's really worth noting, on "Memory Usage, Startup Time," the author of this article went straight into Snap ("the slowest of all") and doesn't mention Flatpak once. Could it be … it isn't a big deal? Nah, let's move on, Flatpak bad.

They also conveniently use an old version of GNOME Software which predates the recent rework of how it displays permissions, age ratings, and other details. In Fedora 35, GIMP most definitely has a worrisome "Unsafe" message. It's very shiny and new so it would be excusable to miss that if you weren't pretending to be a well-researched hatchet job.
Have ability to believe lies.
Keeping all unvaccinated elderly people under house arrest forever probably wouldn't fly. And the "if they want" thing doesn't work; they, obviously, do _not_ want, and would go out, get infected, and overload the ICUs.

Ultimately it all comes back to the hospitals; if they're overloaded then suddenly things get a _lot_ worse, and people start dying of preventable non-covid things.
They've been raising what, 2 rounds per year at this point?
If they're burning through cash at that rate, it seems like it's time to host stuff on something more sustainable like Digital goddamn Ocean
One of these days Series K will fall through and the amazing future of web platform will shut everyone's websites down
People are talking about the delay as if it might have something to do with side effects. But how does delaying approval change anything? They are not learning anything more about side effects while they sit with no trials running.

AFaICS, the only difference is that the side effects, if any, are delayed exactly as long as the treatments, with all the deaths that would have been prevented accumulating, day by day. At some point the harm from non-treatment exceeds the potential/expected harm of side effects from treatment in people who did not die even though untreated. (Side effects that would have been expected in people who die, instead, probably should not count.) Is that when they approve it? What was achieved?

Also: since they halted the trial, did they pull the treatment from people who were getting it? And still not give any to the control patients? How is that more ethical than continuing the trial?
Being "acquirable" is one of the things you often forego at valuations like this.
I assume you're talking about the pro plan and not the lite plan?
Argentina did the same thing with their local currency tied to the dollar, it initially lowered inflation and a flow of capital came into their country and bringing higher growth. But then the capital kept flowing in because it was felt that they would never or could never break the link with the dollar. So the foreign debt piled up, and went inevitably into assets like property. When the Mexican default happened in the 90's all the money flowed out, the currency peg was broken and after the short deflation, inflation took over again. And thats the way its been.
The point is that crossover/SUVs get good enough MPG. Fuel economy is not the only, or even the primary, consideration when buying a car.
I dont think people disagree that antiquated religious texts do contain a lot of hate speech
> Has it got bigger?

Yep: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_the_United_S...

Doesn't look like enough on its own to justify a change in reporting that much though.
Agreed. Building new products is just useless nowadays. I think this lesson is just useless
> But, because type hints are just window dressing in Python,

Type annotations are not window dressing in a Python workflow using typechecking tools over the final code base, unless you explicitly tell the typechecker to ignore a detected error.

It's true that a type annotated library can't necessarily rely on downstream clients to have type discipline, and some library packages may not be fully annotated, which may create gaps to address.

> If I want to use types to enforce things, I'd prefer to use a language designed for that.

Python's type annotations were designed largely to make Python compatible with a separate existing language designed for that purpose; there's a reason mypy’s domain is mypy-lang.org

> What this article talks about (Protocol) seems to be at least an improvement in that regard, as you can worry about what your function does instead of what your types do.

Protocols are types; specifically, they are structural types.
> To me this is like building a house that can never be expanded,

Or alternatively it's a good application of YAGNI.

There's always a difficult balance between that as a principle and "do work upfront as it will take you longer to do later down the line"

Everyone makes this decision based on client budget, time constraints and a host of other factors. My clients tend to prefer to save money in the short term. That's not uncommon and it's a rational position to take for many.
And at that point, all 0 people will agree on the absurdity of the list
Most of the comments are about the UX, on which I have no comment. On Winamp, though, I thought this was a nostalgia piece!

Hear, hear. My pandemic project was digitizing all the vinyl records I still wanted to listen to, and then selling them on Discogs [1]. I combined those with my CDs, and put it all on a 256GB microSD card for my phone! Even using FLAC instead of MP3, it's plenty of space.

Shuffle randomly and listen in the car. It's better than any radio station, and no subscription fees or commercials.

It's easy to find an Android app that just does this, which is basically the same thing Winamp did back in the day.

It's hard AF to find an app for the Mac that just does this. They all have zillions of other features that get in the way. And no, VLC does not JUST do this; it does a million other things that obscure simple play-my-music functionality. I settled on Elmedia, which is sorta tolerable.

[1] https://medium.com/@virgilhilts/vinyl-records-my-pandemic-pr...
good point - executive vs. legislative
The Copyright Office expands your security research rights
I believe it. I don't think it is a significant problem in OSS that we suddenly need behavior rules but there can still be instances of something like that occurring. The most convincing action was to not release details in my opinion.
As a child my local public library had a series of books with these and similar futuristic artwork.

I loved those books!

By chance does anyone know what they might have been?
> because if at some point you need to render on a client other than a browser -- you have to start from the beginning and write an API now.

The answer lies in the "if" there. The speed and lack of complexity developing server-side with no API is unparalleled to doing client -> api -> backend. Not to mention, you aren't tying yourself into several different JS technologies (Which GraphQL or REST lib? Which view framework? What testing frameworks? And what's the whole backend stack? etc. etc.) I can only speak for LiveView but the whole top-down experience is in Elixir with sprinkles of vanilla JS (the community is big into Tailwind and AlpineJS as well, but not exclusively).

I have real world experience of dev'ing API-first only to have the company nix any plans to open up the API. Adding new features is always a slog as we have to think about if the business logic needs to be on the client, the server, or both... not to mentioning have to update about 18 different places the name of a new field you're adding.

The company I work for actual has a LiveView widget that is embedded on their client's apps. I can't speak very well to it since I only just started working there and don't actually start until next week, haha.

But ya, I'll also echo the whole idea that a lot of companies don't need mobile apps. I'm certainly one of those people who uses the browser on my phone whenever I can.
> So does GHB.

No, the only way to die via GHB is to overdose on it. Alcohol instead sets you body on fire with inflammation and such inflammation attacks all tissues including vital ones which I mentioned and will repeat: heart, liver, kidneys, arteries, pancreas...

> You retort to my argument was that the data set for GHB was much smaller. How does that not matter with your argument?

Because we know that the cause for all that damage is inflammation, between alcohol and G only the former causes inflammation.

> Also, GHB is associated with cognitive changes and potential brain damage. So you might come back for more, but you won't be the same person:

Leave aside the brain, except for physical phenomenons such as blood, plaques, cancer....we really don't know what happens in there or why. We can't even predict our own thoughts 10 seconds from now..leave alone complex things such as cognition on a general scale and most importantly the ability to measure it.

Also let's assume we did know, say all that we know today is effectively what happens in the brain. Given that premise we also have to take for good the data that we have about the depression/anxiety epidemic, which is very widespread according to today's research.

Today research also tells us that prolonged anxiety/depression causes damage to the body, reduces cognition and IQ and trims years off a person's life.

Well, considering all the above...both alcohol and G seem a better alternative than becoming subject to the depression epidemic which causes both a reduction in quality of life, as well as a reduction in quantity of life. Alcohol is superior in terms of quality of life, unfortunately it also shortens quantity of life, but G has them both beaten because it prevents depression AND doesn't cause inflammation to tissues, so G is better for both quality and quantity of life.

Of course if you are a person who is naturally on cloud 9 all the time and essentially immune to the depression epidemic (meaning that you are essentially clueless about the world), then you are better off not taking anything.

But at that point you are also better off not leaving the house because leaving the house also has risks, and why would you take risks if you are essentially a buddha who is always on cloud 9 and perfectly happy and content the way things are and everything else is pushing on a string?

So even if we allowed for a perfect knowledge of our brains, if we take into consideration the median urban Western citizen who is always on the brink of depression then G is better than alcohol and all the other drugs used to solve depression, both prescribed (benzo, SSRIs...) and those used for self-medication purposes (alcohol, cocaine, MDMA, crack, weed..)
The majority of the population of Earth does, but ok…
The root problem with JWST was not being able to get the money in the first place. That led to budgeting shenanigans responsible for much of the project delay. The single telescope came within a whisker of being scrapped by Congress.

If you gave projects like Webb the kind of budget that now gets eaten by human space flight, you could have telescopes filling half the sky. But NASA has to work within the really severe funding constraints imposed by the white elephant that is ISS.
I know this sounds crazy, but hear me out, I just use statically typed languages when I require static types.
Do you think that 20 cheap telescopes give the same benefit as one great one?

Like if I gave you 20 shitty 360p cameras to shoot a movie would it look as good as if I gave you one Arri Alexa?
Easy Ways to Show Effort in Your Relationships
It’s less the individuals at NASA, and more the bureaucratic structure of government agencies that’s the problem.
> I don't think anything else could better express just how bad the government is at deploying capital than the sentence above.

Not really. This is a great expression of how hard it is to deploy capital in a one-off manner, to a strict budget.

Contrast this space telescope with the series of Earth-observation satellites launched by the National Reconnaissance Office. By amortizing development costs over at least half a dozen launches, the NRO keeps putting up classified payloads.

SpaceX's success isn't exactly organizational genius, it's that its plan from the outset has been to rapidly iterate with the expectation that the first half-dozen of anything will fail in interesting ways. Were JWT being built to a SpaceX standard, there wouldn't be one telescope -- there would be a dozen.
Build a site like hacker news using flask. I say flask instead of Django because it’s more light weight. I would also recommend doing something math heavy like following the stock market (even if you don’t spend actual money) just to learn the ins and outs and what’s slow/etc in python (spoiler: use numpy.)

Those are the two things I did, I came from PHP and until a 2.5 years ago I never touched python but I work with it full time (also react, which I didn’t know at all when I started.)

What you build isn’t all that important, or the language. Most languages can be picked up on the job. But doing some personal projects + a couple leet code or project Euler problems a week will make one a good programmer in 3 months. You want the personal projects to act as a portfolio you can show off to recruiters though.
Seems like you could say the same thing about every snippet e.g. running jobs is the original purpose of a shell, (3) can be achieved using job specifications (%n), and using the `jobs` command for oversight.
If you're familiar with the classic "Windows Destruction" series, you'll be pleased to hear that there is also a fairly recent Red Star Destruction entry as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9BOYttRtN0