skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is awful. He starts with people giving away money and wanting it to do the most good rather than be wasted and goes from there to trollies running over people, leaving drowning kids to die, butchering people for their organs, and bulldozing cities. This appears to be based on a complete misunderstanding of the realities of chaos and uncertainty.

Just to point out two very real examples that run counter to this thinking:

Recent studies of benefit programs that give college scholarships to top academic performers it was found that these programs are entirely dominated by girls with essentially zero male participation. This was unexpected, unintended, and raises some major issues regarding gender balance and equity. But in the context set up in this talk both of these outcomes are essentially the same and not differentiable.

This is also all hovering near the issue of how best to execute philanthropy. One of the big issues in this space is how much workers involved should be paid. Currently dominant thinking is that charity work as good and wholesome and no money should be wasted and so pay for charity workers tends to be a fraction of what people with similar skills would make at the same or similar jobs in industry. However, experimentation has shown that paying charity workers similar amounts to what people earn in industry jobs results in increased productivity and mission successes. So there is a very interesting open question about exactly how much charity workers should be paid. It seems that in this piece the argument is being made that the entire issue is fundamentally grotesque and immoral.

So the issues related to making philanthropy are real and do not in general involve trollies, drowning children, people as potential organ banks willing or not, or the bulldozing of cities. This is really just another sad and tired example of philosophers completely missing the point of pragmatic action.
Several years back, before they founded FTX, the group Alameda became well known among certain crypto circles. Specifically, the most dangerous waters: the at-that-time-very-few crypto exchanges who provided high leverage services to the general public.

The group would openly declare, sometimes in the form of exchange-run "leader boards", the way they were making a great deal of money very quickly by successfully leverage trading.

My point is that Alameda has long had an underground (if not outright) reputation as one of the biggest players in crypto's highest risk zones. While pharmacology undoubtedly plays a role, in some ways the pattern we see in the downfall here is also as old as the tale of Icarus.
Like most patterns the execution is what matters.

I’ve worked closely on 2 occasions with teams that have stuck together across multiple companies.

They were very high performing and the execs were always brought in with the understanding that they would soon bring in “their guys”.

Worked really well, the teams got to work fast, they had their own playbooks, and they shipped with high quality. It would have taken hundreds of hours to interview each of them in the normal process.
Please don’t create new accounts for the sole purpose of writing comments like this. It makes for neither good nor interesting discussions.
If you say, in all ernestness that my favourite maths equation; 1+1 equals 436 then I can reasonably judge you.

That doesnt make me a triggered little maths fan boy, it makes you an idiot.
Are labour laws that weak in America he can get away with treating workers at his companies so poorly?
Really awesome. I got a weak spot for pixel art. Too bad some things are abit too gory. I am sure my kid would love it.
We're still short and always will be of the vision and endless possibilities of zombo.com
“Lost” can also mean - no longer exists.

If someone says.. we lost 10 men in that battle, it doesn’t mean we never knew who they were.
Is there a form of decentralization not prone to this?

Blockchain certainly seems to trend towards "cartels of giant centralized providers".
Hyperintelligence: Art, AI, and the Limits of Cognition
This post actually confirmed my opinion about functional programming :D. Probably not in the way the author intended.
You seem to be comparing opposite extremes: physical books stored carelessly (in a well-heated and ventilated house, mold shouldn't be a problem) with digital books stored very carefully (you were careful about DRM-free formats, etc.; and if you have stuff from the 80s, you doubtlessly have made backups and transferred it from device to device several times. I have some digital stuff of mine from the 80s and 90s, but I've also lost a lot, in spite of being conscious of the importance of backups).

On average I think what the post says stands. Assuming some minimal, but not very careful upkeep, physical books easily last for 100 years, digital material for much less.

By the way, an anecdote: some time ago, I found a bookshelf in an old house of a branch of my family, which contained books dating more than 100 years back (some were from the 19th century). The house had been abandoned for many years, so the books had been exposed to the elements. Most of the books were softcover, and they crumbled on touch, some of them almost literally crumbled to dust. But the few hardcover ones endured, with moisture stains on the cover but I still have them and they are perfectly readable.

Before that, I usually preferred to buy softcover books because they are lighter, more comfortable to read, cheaper and take less space. Since that day, if I really like a book (or think I'm going to like it, due to author, etc.) I always try to get it in hardcover.
I will say this, I love python, and I hate python the way only someone who loves it can. I think everything you said is accurate.

I love writing Python code. I love its standard library and many third party libraries. But I loathe Python’s dependency management, and Python version upgrades are sometimes a huge pain. There are tools to help with this (pyenv or I am fond of asdf for python versions; poetry or pipenv for isolating package dependencies), but they only partially solve the problems and introduce new ones.
Oh man. The single deciding parameter that I'm looking for is not populated. Ethernet speed.
> Product Details

Is this made from paper or from copper wires ?
Marie Kondo [1] is a Japanese organizing (not organization) consultant, author and tv presenter.

She is known for (rather intense) minimalism, and the saying "does it spark joy?" which you are supposed to use to filter out what things you should keep.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Kondo
Inexperienced developers that don't understand what they're doing, armed with a language known best for being worst-in-class at everything except for "running everywhere", is a recipe for disaster, no matter how you spin it.

It feels egregious to implicate "the entire surface area of functional programming" here, when there are other obvious issues at play.
Perl on Rails (2007)
But that's what "errors" are, the're signals.
THC can transfer to milk when hemp is fed to dairy cows
That tool is not a permanent addition to the list of dependencies, but for a single migration effort. As such, it is unnecessary to include it in the standard library.
Personally, I found the opposite to be true. Given more and more applications require constantly polling backend server (not only social apps, e.g. a TODO list, note-taking application, a time tracker, etc.) I much more prefer this behavior being the default.

That said, I still like KDE Plasma more than macOS as a desktop. But this and the proxy icons are two things that I missed the most.
My initial reaction, from an SEng POV, is that visualising code in this way is pointless: the text of the code is the graph of the code. And if you really really value an identity here, use lisp.

So visual coding, for SEng, I think just is pointless. The text isnt the hard part, the hard part the is mental model -- and visuals often impair the quick exploration (etc.) needed to build the mental model.

Likewise, in the YT video introducing this, the creator distinguishes between "code" and your mental model of its execution, as if the latter can and should be ditched. This, of course, is a fallacy as far as SEng is concerned. The whole point is the mental model.

Nevertheless, after watching for longer, the sales pitch here seems directed towards data science (, + DEng perhaps) where applications are often trivial amounts of code.

Coupled with interactive visualisations, this is at least a more plausible use-case.

There the creator's distinction between "how the machine runs your code" and "the problem you're trying to solve" makes more sense. Since practitioners arent building automation systems, apps, etc. they're using code instrumentally to arrive at an outcome.

Also, cf. https://enso.org/docs/developer/enso/enso-philosophy.html
Ask HN: Why do Engineering managers lie in 1:1 meeting?
Instead of laying down facts about my individual performance, he sugarcoats lies. He never appreciates my contributions to the team. Out of 100 wins, if there is 1 loss, he rushes to blame me for everything. In every 1:1, all the losses are discussed over and over to demoralize me. 100 wins are never spoken. Corporate world is soul crushing but have to survive to pay bills.

Y'all folks are lucky who got their own thing going. I envy you.
That makes sense in context - but I think it reinforces the parent's point; if you don't arrive with that context it's just plain weird!
I still think there is a fundamental internal inconsistency here. I agree that people will, for instance, hold the moral belief that their community theater is worth more than five foreign lives. However, explicitly espousing this belief is politically unviable. The "common knowledge" moral view is that all humans are of equal moral worth. EA, as I understand it, is largely pursued by people who internalize this view; who recognize the mismatch and as a result, will prefer to sacrifice their community theater rather than admit inconsistency.
Those user hostile features are what drive me to piracy. No way I'll pay money to have the privilege of installing spyware just so I can stream low-quality video to whatever device the provider deems worthy at that particular moment.

I'll just go on 1337x and in 2 minutes I have an high quality mkv that I can play anywhere I want. I'd happily pay 5-10$ a pop for this, and for indie movies I do make the effort of seeing if there's a way of paying to watch it somewhere, even if I just pay and don't watch it there, and watch the pirated rip anyway.
OTOH it's still relatively common for interesting mathematical work to be put online as scans of handwritten slides...
It's like a modern day floating pyramid scheme. Think of all the poor immigrants it will keep ungainfully enslaved building and running it!
Further Career Development for a Woman
Hi, I'm 27 years old, I've been working in marketing for the last few years and I've gained good experience. I am well versed in the subject and know how to help companies promote their brands, launch social media campaigns, and attract and retain customers.

Unfortunately, I regularly encounter discrimination at work. My male colleagues put pressure on me and prevent me from advancing in my career. There are men in management, and they promote those they like personally or their mistresses. I got terribly tired of it.

I thought about it and decided to start working for myself. I could advise entrepreneurs and small businesses as a business coach. But I don't know where to start. Maybe there are some courses for business coaches that explain what to do. Then I need my first clients. Are there websites for coaches where you can find clients?

I need advice from experienced people in this field.
The issue with the morality of indulgence isn’t that it recognizes that different circumstances allow for different outcomes, it’s that it allows for immoral behavior so long as the calculus works out.

Evade your taxes, no problem if you gave more away to charities than you owed!

Do a little light billion dollars fraud? So long as you saved the trillions of future humanity from an evil AI it’s fine.

Sacrifice your children to the fires of Kronos? Well if you hadn’t the Romans would have killed us all.

You can argue that literally anything is moral that way.
So I don't think people will all necessarily run Mastodon servers

From a business perspective, why would anyone run a Mastodon server? The best answer I can conceive of is reliability. But reliability also implies an interest in "private" communication and/or moderation.

The bottom line is this --- "federation" is not incentivized in any obvious way that I can see. Am I missing something? Lacking this, network growth and long term viability look questionable. It's really a charity operation with people asking for donations to cover costs?

How well does this model work for open source?
Same as the article says to use in Europe. Probably an EU rule that carried over.
Yeah, it doesn't have to be so hacky though. I really don't understand the architectural choices Microsoft made to make it so kludgy to work with, and half the problem is just that Hyper-V is slow and buggy compared to VMware's hypervisor. VMware Workstation just works, quite well, when it gets to use the proper VMware hypervisor.

Given the friction and cost involved in getting that working, it's probably smart to just run Linux bare metal unless you're doing work akin to what led me to that (e.g. needing to work with a Windows corporate environment while configuring Linux test clusters).
Ok, thanks, that's useful! I'm glad Brave is doing well. It's not a product for me, but anything that reduces consolidation in the browser market is welcome.

To my knowledge, the Chrome Web Store user count represents the number of users with the extension installed who have opened Chrome in the past 7 days. So the 10M+ number for MetaMask includes everyone who installed the extension but isn't actually using it.

(The MetaMask reviews are pretty interesting reading. "I lost $3k", "I lost $6k" and so on.)
I'd say 0.1:1 from personal experience. Often you see founders who want to build facebook-but-better type of stuff from day 1. My advice is to avoid first-time tech founders, it's very hard to coach them into adopting the lean startup mindset until they feel the pain.
Hey, maybe when dealing with a runaway trolly or when deciding what worlds to bring into existence you can really nitpick the details but I don't really need to have that sorted out to tell that I prefer 10 people's lives saved compared to 5 or compared to a puppy getting surgery.

If someone can do the math and tell me this charity would on average save X lives while that will save Y with your money, that already helps me a lot compared to just donating to Red Cross or whoever because I saw their ad without considering strong alternatives.
AI space is heating up with the release of Stable Diffusion models and OpenAI.

If you are interested you can start playing with these tech and make things useful for people.

I'm just getting started on this and released the MVP version of Picasa AI[1] and I'm excited about it.

I wanted to build something for a long time and I always postponed it for better time. With the AI trends I feel now is the correct time to jump in.

[1] - https://PicasaAI.com
Mosquito nets and deworming pills were on the better side of it:

>Then you will be delighted/horrified to find out that the effective altruism community doesn't feel the need to make quantifiable justifications for how they spend their own donations, as evidenced by this $20k grant they gave someone to learn to ride a bike and think about AI[1].

>That's about 3853 to 4090 mosquito nets' worth of donations, using GiveWell's numbers for the Against Malaria Foundation

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/CJJDwgyqT4gXktq6g/...
Well the thing about digital data is that it's all represented in an uneven compressed way. Take your average piece of paper with text on it, it's essentially a 2D array of white and black dots. Remove half of all black dots and you can still mostly see what the text was.

Same is true with raw digital representations. Take on the other hand a jpeg which is a bunch of coefficients for sine waves, where every tiny change ripples out to ruin the entire thing. Even the basic 3 byte RGB per pixel representation is already compressed with only 8 bits being used to save 256 values. Flip the MSB and your value is already completely screwed.

An equal encoding to real paper would be using 256 bits to represent each colour, summing up the bits to get integer values. That way you can flip 20 bits and you'll still easily tell what the colour was, without any extra processing.

This of course comes at an exponential increase in storage requirements, plus we can be smarter than just using brute force. Taking a compressed representation and then adding on a few layers of error correction would likely be far more reliable while preserving most of the spatial efficiency. Of course then you need the software for unpacking and correcting to survive as well...
It's kinda funny how over time Hoover gets gayer and gayer as with each passing year that becomes easier to rationalize than why a man who made it to middle age without getting seriously involved with women would decide to keep it that way going forward. And to throw some icing on that cake, as the FBI director he would have surely been privy to all sorts of stories of people who's lives were brought crashing down via the missteps of their spouses and children.
I've occasionally watched colleagues give presentations on functional programming over the years, and while I can see why certain people are drawn to it the stated benefits of functional programming have never seemed that significant to me. The advantages that FP provides aren't likely to be needed by developers that are capable of learning it.
Wow! Bless this man. Now minimize harm by targeting demographics of children who are less likely to grow up to be effectively altruistic!
Anyone with a link to the full email?
> If you say, in all ernestness that my favourite maths equation; 1+1 equals 436 then I can reasonably judge you.

> That doesnt make me a triggered little maths fan boy, it makes you an idiot.

Toucheous Grassous!
TechMagic has an extensive portfolio of HR tech projects. We’ve worked with startups and enterprises. And we’re loyal adepts of a data-driven approach to decision-making for a business of any scale. We always do our research.

Working within the HR tech industry, we collected some interesting numbers that will be useful for anyone involved with the HR technology market in Europe and USA. And it would be a crime not to share them.
The presentation is "nice", but not even close to what it needs to be for making any assumptions on the result. Questions that are necessary to be clarified:

1) What is your source? - the slides only state it's the biggest platform.
2) How do you compensate, that your dataset only represents x% of the real offers?
3) If you think you have a reasonable share of the job offers, how do you justify this assumption?

These are the main questions, that I would ask if you tell me to use it as business information - all the technical stuff is secondary. But there are more:

4) How do you compensate a change in recruitment strategy? You are just looking at one platform.
5) What makes you sure, that every item in your dataset is interpreted correctly? Can you somehow make sure, that your parsing and reformating is always correct? Can you verify that? Can you detect if not?
6) Can you detect a change on the website itself, e.g. new categories, differences in job description?

Also my experience is different, with getting a ton of job offers currently, directly via business network, I'm willing to look at a statistics based bigger picture that changes my mind. But the interpretation and the harsh change, together with these open questions make me believe that you more likely have a technical problem. So my advise would be, spend a lot more slides on the data and not the acquisition, because all acquisition effort is useless if you can not verify your data and results.
It’s a relatively simple RF transmission protocol. We might as well try to ban FM radios from certain countries.
I really dislike when programming books are overly terse with their code examples. This is a problem I've struggled with since I was a child learning to code.

When I'm learning a new concept, I need to be able to clearly see the steps. Even if I do understand how to read and write in the abbreviated coding style, the extra step of mentally decoding it into it's more verbose form takes mental energy away from the absorption of new knowledge.

Clearly, this book is written for an advanced audience, but at the same time it's trying to teach an unfamiliar concept to that advanced audience.

Does anyone else here share my sentiment?

It makes me think of this software I saw once that would take a math-problem, and solve it for you, showing you the steps along the way to the solution. I want something like that for this kind of code.
Seems like Bostrom isn't thinking big enough. If we could invent time travel and seed life earlier in the universe, figure out a way to slow down entropy and star death and make the current universe last longer, or create new universes wholesale, we can get far bigger total life numbers than that. Alternatively, since what we really care about is QALYs, not lives, making even just one person truly immortal gives us a literal infinity that outweighs the value of all mortal sentient creatures that can ever exist.

This also implies every fictional supervillain who ever tried to achieve immortality was the morally best possible person, no matter what evil they performed in the attempt, even if they failed. Since no probability is ever 0, and any small number multiplied by infinity is still infinity, trying to achieve immortality is the maximally good thing any person can do.
H2 Science Coalition is a good source of information on where and how hydrogen makes sense as part of net zero goals:

https://h2sciencecoalition.com/principles/

Green Hydrogen is just about to take off, and make lots of money and headlines, so it'll be important to not let that success be hijacked and diverted into areas where it's not helpful.
Who Will Win the Race to Generate Electricity from Ocean Tides?
You jest, but that would absolutely make sense if you were a psychopath with the singular goal of finding a cure for cancer. Now use this same mindset but change the goal for something saner along the lines of "maximize healthy+happy lifespan for everyone", and then you won't sell cigarettes in playgrounds, since that harms the goal.
Falcon heavy has been under development at spaceX since 2006 and has cost them about $37B :)
You might need to read up on the repugnant inclusion. It compares a small population of high individual welfare with a large population of lower welfare. If you assume the desirability of each option to be the product of individual welfare and population size, each population of high welfare has an equally appealing alternative population of many people living just above the point of not wanting to exist.

Utilitarianism requires additional assumptions to decide between many people in subsistence and few people living carefree.

You are introducing (I suspect) such an addictional constraint, comparable to the Pareto criterion that forbids making individuals worse off in a trade off. However, accepting/demanding/proscribing such trade offs that accept making someone worse off are central to most utilitarian theories.