skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I was wondering if there's much utility in reading and learning about the ways higher ups set up and/or manipulate the socio-economic systems. I personally feel pretty much like a cog in the machine that can't really influence the machine overall, just play my part in it. I recently came across the book "Seeing like a state" in the podcast Balaji S did with Lex Fridman. Though it's intellectually interesting to learn about how the state works and what alternative think tanks propound (ex communism, libertarianism), delving into history I have found that things happen in really grand ways (i.e. an idea works only if there's a whole load of people behind it) and often these circumstances arise out of happenstance. Being a CS geek, I feel kind of pigeonholed into a role in society that learning about the state, economic theories etc feels unneeded and maybe even a waste of time. From history, it feels like it's the liberal arts or the army types that affect economic and geopolitical changes.
Recruiters are salespeople. Toxic positivity, undue flattery, etc are all part of their toolbox. It's ultimately on the candidate to perform due diligence on the organization, like with any product.
TN visas have some advantages. There are no yearly caps and it can be renewed indefinitely. Also easier to get a new job. One disadvantage is it is not dual intent.
You are only focusing on half of the passage I quoted. They also voiced opposition to censorship. I wasn't calling out their opposition to cancellation. I was saying those two views shouldn't coexist because being against cancellation is a form of censorship.
You are likely putting "actual science" on a pedestal here
I would really like to see a transparent result of the re-allow-Trump-poll. It might as well have been a bunch of bots.
Same game as always, but now the other team now has the ball.

With a propaganda weapon as powerful as Twitter, it's probably better for everybody if it's destroyed, rather than continues to be used/abused to escalate political divisions by either side of the great divide. And that seems to be the way things are going.

It should never have been taken so seriously to begin with.
In order presented: Yes. No. You mean, it is not obvious? I am motivated by curiosity.

A claim was made that is not supported. It isn't unreasonable to request such a claim to be validated by demonstration.

Personally, I have not seen an increase in "hate" or violence or bigotry or any other -ism or -ist. I've seen people disagree in a much more whole-hearted way, while at the same time, seeing prompts for reducing the strength of language. For example, you get a pop up if you write "I think you are stupid" but not "I think you are silly."

Quid pro quo: what is _actually_ motivating you to comment like this?
No, it's the dilapidated mall full of geezers getting their daily walks that the Zuck creepily stares at for ad revenue
This, I was permanently exhausted. On a bit of whim, I bought a Chinese SpO2 sleep monitor - which then lead to a conversation with my GP and access to further tests, and ultimately a CPAP.
Nothing in the technique described here allows to identify an individual directly or indirectly because 'identifiers' are not unique and really no different than standard 'last-modified' dates. Even if they were unique further data would have to be collected in order to be able to identify individuals and turn everything into personal data.

What the technique may fall foul of, though, are cookie laws.
IPhones do local facial recognition in the Photos app. I don’t expect a security camera to be as powerful as an iPhone but if that is the main thing it is doing, it is not an unreasonable thing to expect it to do.
Fusion power is 'approaching' reality thanks to a magnetic field breakthrough
do they have pages for comments yet
> They're old school C++ programmers or embedded devs or something. Now they want to learn how to build a modern web app in 2022.

Start here: https://webtoolkit.eu
Something I wanted to discuss - the bandwagon effect.

If you want to do layoffs you will be best suited doing them at the same time as all the other companies. That’s because normally layoffs bust morale and lead not only to the ejection of the people you wanted gone, but also to the departure of the people you wanted to stay. However when everyone is doing layoffs at the same time there is nowhere for your good employees to go.

Is this effect real, or am I seeing things?
https://www.newsweek.com/activists-accuse-elon-musk-banning-... mentions a few, although there are far more.
I've noticed the ChatGPT is much better at gathering "deep information" in the model compared to 003-instruct. While this could be solved with better prompt engineering on the 003 model, giving the same prompt to ChatGPT has given me much better results.
Were you expecting a recruiter to say "Yeah things aren't great. I expect layoffs in the next few months" .? If so that's honestly on you. They would get fired for saying that. Of course they are never going to
The issue might be he isn't hanging out with enough real people and instead just drinking the koolaid of those @'ing him. Lil bit of the ol' chronically online sickness.
Why wouldn't Twitter (or similarly large companies) have open-sourced their a/b testing suite? It's not like the math there is proprietary.

I mean, I'm sure the parameters to the math are proprietary. But the basic math seems simple enough.
> using Tesla car owners as unpaid betatesters

Almost right.

Charging Tesla owners to beta test their autonomous driving software.
Is it worth using Python's re.compile?
It does kind of seem like he's addicted to dancing on the edge of cliffs
The worst thing is that he's getting angry over it and walking into the open arms of the Republicans instead of staying neutral.
And you'd still have the choice to install it or not. Android still allows their users to sideload apps, and it hasn't been the apocalypse.

The core idea is choice.
> It's the same rationale as in prison - you don't want to end up at the bottom of the dominance hierarchy.

The simple fact that you think it's not a problem to somewhat approvingly compare schools to prisons is already a bad sign. Schools shouldn't be like prisons. Prisons shouldn't be like prisons either, but that's another story...
I view a database that needs to go down for maintenance as "IT dysfunction".
For anyone who wants to dig further on this, http://ponce.sdsu.edu/global_warming_science.html explains the actual reasoning of the paper that came closest, which was an 1896 paper that laid out all of the actual facts behind global warming, minus the prediction that a rapid increase in usage of fossil fuels actually WOULD cause global warming. The author of that paper did come to the correct conclusion not long after, but I'm not aware of any record of his doing so before the year 1900.

The paper itself is available at http://ponce.sdsu.edu/arrhenius_paper_1896.pdf.

The first newspaper article that I'm aware of predicting global warming was in 1912. See https://theconversation.com/for-110-years-climate-change-has... for more on that story.
>>Do you actually use twitter so this comment isn't lining up with your expectations?

yes, and I see zero hate or other issues with content on my feed

> What is _actually_ motivating you to comment like this?

I hate when people attribute opening the Overton window to more than just Extreme left authoritarian political opinions, which is what Political Twitter was isolated to before elon, is some how a bad thing
From a tech standpoint, how would this be accomplished? Using AI to detect "protest videos" and purge them from devices? Or maybe tracing the source of widely shared videos then going into the devices and purge? Obviously scanning all phone would be an impractical albeit impressive task.
Damn I think you just changed my opinion.
We can only speculate what Twitter 2.0 will be but I suspect Twitter 3.0 will be a very small company trying to emulate Twitter 1.0.
i use twitter and have been using twitter for the past... fifteen years (my profile say "Joined October 2007").

my own twitter experience has not changed at all -- i'm seeing the same tweets i was seeing before and seeing none of the hate people are seeing. but, ofc, the plural of anecdote is not data.
Here's a talk I'm chewing on right now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNtntlVo4LY

as with every abstraction, its value is in the value it brings you. That sounds a bit tautological, but I think that's the crux of the matter. If you like abstraction, and abstractions help you think, you are going to find value in them. If you feel they bring you nothing, then there is no need for you to use them.
I understand the top-line bottom-line divide, but I am not fully convinced if the top-line projects are any safer. Wouldn't another reasonable business strategy be to get rid of all new projects, and only focus on operations-as-is during times of economic uncertainty?
Neither did I... I took a guess.

I generally see it abbreviated as SV.
Are we at all surprised when the incentive is for them to make you buy ink as frequently as possible? There are even subscription services now for ink - all for that sweet Recurring Revenue investors love. They've made their systems hard to service yourself or use third-party components/cartridges so no player is going to make a "value" option anytime soon.
i think there's enough people to solve multiple problems simultaneously
Have bookmarked it to sit down and properly read later :)
When you cause hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths, to say it's not a matter of policy is a complete cop out. Russia also ostensibly does not have a policy of murder and rape, not publicly and not officially at least. It is through their actions that we can infer such a thing, just like we can do the same for the actions (and not "official policy") of the americans. Hundreds of thousands of people still died directly because of American imperialism, so it does not matter what was publicly said.

(Also, my comment on denialism was related to "The US does not purposefully target innocent people", when there are multiple examples of American soldiers doing just that. To separate the US from the actions of its soldiers is asinine, because you dont extend the same separation to the russians. Which only makes sense because you are defending "your" side.)
Credit cards are a legacy system
I’ve wondered the same thing. My working theory is that the ai art models are more interesting to a wider group of people than the language models, meaning they get better returns on the massive sums needed to invest to train such models. Ai art is really exciting for anyone who has ever dabbled in art before, because it can do things which I am utterly incapable of doing. For that reason I’m happy to pay for it. Ai language is not as exciting because it can basically perform the same tasks I can. So it’s interesting as a curiosity, but not as something I’d pay for.
> I think this new idea of "public testing" is really just a post hoc recasting of Elon's failed Twitter Blue rollout. Calling it by those words is...creative?

Its just a diplomatic rephrasing of Elon’s “do lots of dumb things” tweet:

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1590384919829962752?t=cc...

But advertisers who have pulled out because of distrust and lack of stability aren’t likely to be reassured by rationalizations for the policy instability, they’ll just be confirmed in their decisions to wait to see how things shake out.

And regulators concerned about noncompliance with binding rules aren't going to care about a PR rationalization at all, except insofar as it provides evidence that the failures were intentional rather than inadvertent.
> And at runtime, libcurl could find itself using a different libc from the application, so a buffer malloc’d in libc can’t be passed to free() by the app.

That's a general issue with C plugins/libraries. You cannot even assume that objects are allocated with malloc() because the library might use its own memory allocator, object pool, etc.
There are apartments big enough to hold kids. I dont buy this argument.
Slightly outdated article, but still relevant imo to show the different types.

https://medium.com/@nils_reimers/openai-gpt-3-text-embedding...

I've also used
https://huggingface.co/flax-sentence-embeddings/all_datasets...
Problem in the long run is that it doesn't matter whether or not Twitter believes they are hateful. Heck, it doesn't even matter if the person you're responding to thinks they are hateful.

For Musk to not lose gobs and gobs of money, it only matters whether advertisers, in their sole estimation, consider those people hateful. The guys with the nine figure ad budgets will almost certainly fall on the "cautious" side of that line.

The only thing that will help here is finding small, less PR minded brands or businesses to replace the players in the nine figure club. This won't be easy, but I think it is the only reasonable way forward to create the kind of Twitter that Musk seems to want to create. Having worked at "DDB Need'em" long ago, I'd set his chances of pulling that off relatively low, but I don't think it's impossible.
No, because the thing that has changed explicitly is Twitter is no longer going to ban users based on hateful conduct, but deboost their tweets.
he had very capable partners/lieutenants at spacex and tesla (shotwell and straubel, respectively). elon's undeniably great at cheerleading and fundraising but it's unclear how much credit he deserves for the technical accomplishments of spacex and tesla. at paypal he was run out almost immediately upon becoming ceo and at twitter he's surrounded himself with non entities like jason calcanis and alex spiro
it makes it kind of boring to talk to I find
You're confusing vacations with immigration. If that "guest" has come to your house on the premise that they're going to live with you, and you kick them out, yes, that is bad.

We even have laws about this, that's why there's a whole eviction process and it applies to people living with you as much as to normal tenants.
This is the reality of the astoundingly terrible business of food delivery. Take something with already razor thin margins, add multiple layers of middle men each with their own overhead and create the amazing situation where the product is incredibly expensive but most of the middle man take either low or no margins and the delivery person collects a rent but then loses that right away on vehicle maintenance and gas in many cases.

It's the biggest lose lose lose lose of all time. The only real winner is the government who collects tax on this net loss of a transaction.

This is also why direct delivery like a pizza shop or chinese place with its own delivery drivers works but the app delivery model doesn't.
I agree with what you said, and said the same. I never cared to practice it (and have some moral qualms with it). The book was insightful for me nonetheless.
If you're not using an off the shelf one, chances are it's tightly integrated to your application framework.

Trying to tease out the pieces that aren't coupled to Twitter's User class is probably more effort than it's worth
Tim Ferriss's Most Neglected (But Powerful) Advice
Fact is this could be very well be real in today China, a country known for her extrem level of censorship.
Damn, those AIs are more accurate than me.
> being against both censorship and cancellation should be a contradiction

Not at all.

By analogy, someone who is for the free market, must stand against both nationalization and monopolization.

Nationalization happens through regulation; monopolization happens through a lack of regulation.

So you can't say that someone who is "for the free market" is for or against "regulation" as a concept. Some regulation (anti-trust) is needed in order to make the market free. Other regulations (the kinds lobbyists push for) must be avoided in order to make the market free.

As nationalization is to censorship, monopolization is to cancellation. You get one from allowing some participants in the market to capture the market's regulators (moderators) and through them, direct top-down use-of-force to suppress those they don't like. You get the other by not regulating at all, and thereby not inhibiting private actors from either direct suppression of their peers — or, more insidiously, manipulating public opinion to cause aggregate bottom-up use-of-force ("mob justice") to be used to suppress their peers.

Governments have a monopoly on the use of force — i.e. a self-named vigilante is just someone committing criminal assault in the eyes of the law — because we as a society want the use of force to flow through checks and balances.

Insofar as speech can be used as violence to silence or terrorize groups (see: hate-speech laws in much of the world explicitly recognizing this), the act of silencing others through speech — cancellation — should also be considered a criminal vigilante act if not performed through societally-approved channels with checks and balances.

The lack of checks and balances for the "process" of cancellation, is how you get cyber-bullying witch-hunts and mis-aimed identity defacement (see: the Reddit Boston Marathon debacle.) We don't accept witch-hunts in the physical world; why should we accept them online?
Cool stuff, this demonstrates there's still a long way to go regarding building user interfaces

Also, I can imagine something like this would be very valuable when applied to language learning, especially for languages with ideograms
> Category theory is really the mathematics of abstraction

Mathematics is the mathematics of abstraction. That's all you're doing in math, from the beginning to the end. What's the same between "I have two sheep in this pen and five in that one" and "I have two apples in this basket and five in that one"? Hmm, you can abstract out 2+5=7, since it works the same in both contexts.

Everything in math is creating and exploring abstractions. The good ones tend to stick around, the bad ones tend to be forgotten.

Category theory is the mathematics of composition. How much knowledge can you throw away and create reusable patterns of composition? How many interesting things can you find by adding back the smallest bits of additional structure on top of that minimum? How well do those things compose together, anyway?
Haha, I can't imagine that this happens often. But that being said, there are documented instances of Alexa picking up sensitive conversations on accident, for example in this WaPo article where it was observed picking up sensitive information:

"There were even sensitive conversations that somehow triggered Alexa’s “wake word” to start recording, including my family discussing medication and a friend conducting a business deal."

https://archive.ph/c7G1c
This post seems kind of incoherent. I think the premise is that, if you use the OTP properly, then you are generally protected from bugs by the properties of the OTP, and therefore you rarely (if ever) need to rely on testing or static type checking to catch those bugs. But I don't think the author is aware of the different value propositions of these tools - they each solve different problems, and work best in conjunction rather than separately.

With tests, for example, the big benefit is not checking whether code runs or not, it's checking whether the code does what you expect. I've been writing a surprising amount of code recently involving indices and slices of arrays, and it's often very easy to get that sort of code subtly wrong: including an element that shouldn't be there, missing one out, or surprising things happening when the list is empty. Types can't solve this problem, and it's unlikely that anything will crash per se, but you don't want to release to production and suddenly find duplicate data floating around the system because of some bad pagination code. Enter tests: I can write down a list of all the cases that are likely to be interesting, put together a test case for each one, and then make sure I've not forgotten anything in my implementation. Moreover, anyone who makes future changes can't accidentally break that logic, because the tests will keep on running. That's something tests can do that types and the magic powers of the OTP can't touch.

On the other hand, just today I was throwing together a quick reproduction script for a bug in a Python project. Because the aim was to find a minimal reproduction, there was a lot of refactoring going on - switching out libraries, adding and removing asyncio support, deleting functions, etc. Quite often, I'd make a change, and then need to make changes in other parts of the script to accommodate the changes (swap out a library -> change a couple of function names; add asyncio -> make sure everything is awaited properly, etc). Now I could have written tests for this script, but that would have taken ages and not been very useful. Or I could have run it and let it crash, as is the OTP motto, but even the takes time. But because MyPy is turned on by default in my editor, I got type feedback immediately on my code, which meant I could fix all the problems just by looking for the red squiggles. And sure, I still needed to run the code to make sure I could still reproduce this specific bug, but I didn't need to run the code just to see if it worked. The type checker solved problems for me that would have been slower if I'd been using just tests or a "let it crash" philosophy.

It seems to me that it is very useful to use each tool in the places that it is most valuable: tests to check that your code behaves logically and correctly; types to provide a sanity check and quick feedback on obvious mistakes; and the OTP to ensure strong reliability in the face of errors and bugs that slip through the other two defences. Using all three should surely give you better results than using one alone, especially if you use those tools according to their strengths.
If "actual science" is a real thing, then absolutely nothing humanity has ever done in the name of scientific endeavour is "actual science," given every experiment exists on a continuum of trade-offs.

A case could be made that A/B testing is insufficiently rigorous given specific goals, resources, limitations, context, etc. But that case isn't being made here.
I recently got an ADHD diagnosis as an adult, and similar to you it was a "no doubt, you 110% check every box in every aspect of your life" from both my therapist and psychiatrist.

My therapist obviously can't prescribe, but I have a fantastic relationship with them, and they did convey that they think I'd probably be a better fit for non-stimulant ADHD meds based on some of my other behaviors. My doc, however, started me on Adderall ER because I guess that's the standard medication to start ADHD patients on.

But I got some crappy side effects, kind of how you're describing: elevated heart rate, some nausea (especially if I didn't eat enough). My therapist was worried about some of the emotional intensity stuff, especially with stress and caffeine, but I felt like I was managing that okay.

In any case, my doc wanted to start putting me on _additional_ meds to counteract the side effects. Therapist was still prodding for non-stimulant (but I'm a bit skeptical of SNRIs in general, maybe a bad bias...)

But I really pushed to just....reduce the Adderall dosage. Doc knocked it down twice, I ended up at _half_ the initial dose, and now it's just _awesome_. Most of those side effects have gone away, I'm still getting the benefits I want out of it, and unlike a lot of other meds, I can choose on a daily basis whether or not I feel like I'm going to need it.

Obviously, I'm not your doctor, and I'm sure you did your due diligence far beyond what I'm offering here. But I did want to share my experience in successfully shaping medical decisions with multiple expert and personal inputs. Ultimately, I landed on a medication path that's been EXTREMELY beneficial for my happiness and productivity, and it was one that wasn't initially suggested by either professional.