skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I agree with almost everything in that article. I have been playing chess for 20+ years. During that time I have spent several months at a time seriously spending all the free time to improve my chess. I have read numerous chess books, many of them multiple times. I have an expert level rating (USCF) now. I wish someone has told me to concentrate on tactics before going after openings or strategies. Nowadays for any new beginner once they learn the rules I tell them to practice tactics.

Learning positional strategies and all the fancy openings from the books was great. But was useless to improve my results when I was beginning. When I analyzed my games with the help of computer, I found 90% of the games were decided because me or the opponent missed a simple tactic which is just 1 or 2 moves deep. If this is the case in your games you should study tactics until you can find all 1-2 move tactics. It sounds easy. But I have seen a number of class A players miss these simple tactics numerous times.

Finally you will understand opening and positional strategies only if you can spot tactics in them. Once you do not find any tactical mistakes in your game you start to play positional chess. You will appreciate making good positional moves when you do not make silly mistakes.
It's a list of falsehoods - I'm Scottish :-)
Thanks for this comment. I was wondering why it was taking too long to load - it turns out I just needed to switch browsers.
23andMe is very clear at every step of the way that it is not diagnosing anything.
Hear, hear. I've instead tried to get better at everything but chess. e.g. playing StarCraft helped me learn basics of strategy that I wholly didn't understand the first 20 years of my life.

I've "known" how to "play" chess since I was young, so I couldn't see the forest for the trees. Learning strategy via a different vehicle helped me get past those roadblocks.

I haven't played a game of chess in probably 10 years but I know that if I came back to it, I could approach it from a much better informed viewpoint, since now I understand the high-level strategic elements that 7-year-old me didn't realize existed.
The performance impact of "Russian doll" caching
If they get an FDA approval, it would mean that there has been review that their outputs are actually appropriate. That's why the FDA is required by law to review items marketed for diagnosing disease.
"Think of it like a lottery. In this case the obvious decision is to buy more tickets in order to get more chances to win."

I like what Seth Godin has to say on failing until you succeed:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDtkBsWgzWE

And this article by Scott Adams:

"What's the best way to climb to the top? Be a failure."

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142405270230462610...
I have to agree that this seems completely reasonable... glad to see so few commenters jumping to the expected conclusion that this is some kind of government oppression.
TV news grates on me.

Here's a good reason:

http://www.cgpgrey.com/blog/why-tv-news-is-a-waste-of-human-...
A founder and ex VC learns to code
most french persons have no clue how to type the “ÿ” character

Not true. ÿ is very simple to type on a french keyboard, it's like ë (eg Noël), with a different letter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%8B#French_and_Dutch
This isn't a drug.

I know you're responding to a more general point, but I don't think any of your post applies to this situation. This is about marketing materials, and more importantly the factual information therein.
I've never tried Glass, but how close has it gotten to their original promo video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSnB06um5r4
How the hell should the FDA be trying to help 23andMe?

Did you even read the letter? The FDA is making serious and legitimate claims. Amongst other things, the FDA is claiming that 23andMe has said that they were in the process of completing their validation studies. 23andMe has already submitted their 510(k) (which is the form/clearance required for -any- medical device), but failed to provide the required evidence to back up their claims in their submission.

Note that the FDA is that claiming that 23andMe has not provided sufficient evidence (as in they don't like the study you did) rather the FDA is claiming that 23andMe has not submitted the required evidence at all. As in there should be this big ass binder full of test results comparing 23andMe's test results against the ground truth, but that binder doesn't exist.

This is hardly stifling innovation. 23andMe has had 5 years since they started selling their product to produce an analytical or clinical study proving their product's effectiveness, and they failed to do so, despite clearly knowing that it was required, to the point of claiming that they were in fact working on it.
From the article, a quote trying to justify facial recognition apps:

"What I'm most fundamentally interested in is this idea of maximizing human potential," she said. "We could do expression recognition, and use it to teach autistic children how to recognize expressions." Another helpful scenario she described for facial recognition would be to help Alzheimer's patients remember people that they know they ought to recognize, but have forgotten."

Yeah, sure, I'm all for helping autistic children, but it's pretty damned obvious that non-invasive non-troubling uses of facial recognition on Glass are going to be the edge case rather than the rule.
how would you define 'error rate'? Do you mean "lab handling error rate"? Or "information presenting" error rate? The way 23andMe works, is they run your DNA and they show "percentages" based on already done studies. Then they throw in caveats (like, if you're not of the correct race relative to what the study was done in). So what would you suggest? That the service track all of their users over a long-term and then see whether the percentage of their users that get condition X matches the percentage they predicted? And then do some sort of statistical analysis on a possibly moving number (because 23andMe updates their information if academic science improves) with a population that might turn out to have differing biases...? And then prove this information over what, 100000 SNPs on the chip?

What you are basically arguing is that 23andMe should not be allowed to offer its service.
Moreover, it appears from the letter that the concerns are about marketing; ie, presumably the FDA was simply asking for 23AM to clarify their copy to remove any implication that you could use the product as a substitute for a doctor's assessment of your e.g. cancer risk.
Why would early adopter cash out instead of keeping their savings in a deflationary currency that is gaining value? They didn't in the April crash.
Bizarre - the last link I was on was a random ESPN quiz with UVa star Joe Harris in which that quote was one of the questions. (I realize this is a pretty meaningless and useless comment, but seeing this quote 2 times in less than 10 seconds was too much not to mention).
Bitcoin Foundation[0] don't have any particular ownership of the term 'Bitcoin'.

In terms of financial services it is trademarked to Mt Gox in various jurisdictions, as a result of a trademark spat some years ago.

[0] a fair number of people object to the prefix 'The' so I omitted it.

Edit: as to 'prior art' challenges, those aren't significant in first-to-file jurisdictions such as Europe.
Logic is not required of argument in court. In fact certain types of logic, like bayesian reasoning, are sometimes explicitly excluded. http://understandinguncertainty.org/court-appeal-bans-bayesi...
No, they don't really go far enough to be useful. Look at the netflix movies on their site, then look at the amazon prime movies... there's overlap. I've already seen Flight, but now I have to see it's box image every time I look at a list of movies for each streaming service.

What would be better is a list of movies across all services, I see Flight, then I click, "I've already seen it", then I never have to see it again.

Or, I see Flight (and want to watch it), click it, then I'm presented with links to watch on Netflix, free for Amazon Prime, $3.99 on Amazon Instant, 4.99 on Vudu, etc...

A recommendation engine would be gravy. What I want is a global view of media available that lets me say, "Queue this to watch", "I've seen this and stop showing it to me", "I have no interest in see this". Then the movies it's showing me are new to me.

Basically, the problem is finding a needle in a haystack. You could rummage through the haystack, or you could remove the hay, straw by straw and say "Is this a needle"?
You have to be in the right place at the right time.

You also have to recognize the opportunity and take it. That's what "making your own luck" is all about - exploiting opportunities to their full.
I'm building a similar tool system-wide for OSX. There are a couple differences in my implementation:

- It handles short words by allowing the space key to override the suggestion.

- It uses arrow keys, tab, and enter (Sublime completion style) to choose the right word or phrase.

- It starts with a basic dictionary, and learns from frequent words and phrases you type.

- It draws new words and phrases from open documents and web pages, and optionally from Google's auto-suggest.
I use a CSS framework for http://www.LiberWriter.com

My customers do not care about it at all, except for the fact that the site looks better than if I had done it from scratch. My users probably do not even have any idea what a CSS framework is.
I too am confused by the claim that Dojo and YUI are not frameworks, but Backbone is.
Newegg's lawyer is supurb. Even factoring Marshall, TX into account, I'd give them decent odds.
When evaluating startup risks/events there needs to be a standard term or acronym for "doesn't matter; spouse is multi-billionaire."
>Cheaper I understand, however, it doesn't seem very healthy work.

My family works its own garden. We have a modest plot, which we push into production very comfortably, for about 8 months a year. This plot, which was once a 'pleasure-garden' around our house, replaces a family of 4's vegetable-nutrient needs at the grocery for about 6 months a year. Its a lot of work, mostly for my wife, but if I "didn't have to work elsewhere", the two of us could definitely have a much bigger yield.

The point I'm trying to make is that in fact, gardening for ones own vegetables simply has to get fashionable again. Even if you are a city-dweller, yes: garden culture has to push towards sustainable, edibles, as quickly as possible.

Which means, I predict the work is going to get easier, not harder. The false-economy of buying an Apple for 10c, which was trucked from a few thousand km's away, is really the end of it; our Pear tree gets us supplied good and plenty, and it costs nothing but a bit of rope to keep it propped up in the winds .. oh, sure, I did have to build a flame-thrower to keep the wasps away, but: that was fun!
Minidom: How can I check if I have the expected root and children?
It keeps me up at night that you could work your entire life in startups, do everything right and even work on good ideas, and you could still never really succeed. Then I realize that success (in terms of an exit or something similar) can't be the goal: I work on startups because I like building things (edit: things that have the potential to have a tremendous impact) and I want to change the world.
If you are really interested in chess then there are certainly ways to improve. All of them take work, but you don't have to give over your whole life. A little every day is enough.

I can't recommend http://www.chesstactics.org enough. Tactics are crucial, both for offense and defense. Read this for understanding, not to skim, and do the exercises. Again, do the exercises.

While going through the above, or after you've finished, do tactics on chesstempo.com or another site. You will miss a lot of them in the beginning, but practice makes perfect. It's crucial to your game to be able to just see certain positions jump out at you, and timed exercises will help immensely.

For playing practice, find an online site and be willing to suffer through some losses as your ranking settles in. Maybe you have never won a game, but believe it or not you are not the worst player ever. As your rating is found, you can match up against others on your level. There are several big sites, and a ton of others. I use chess.com.

Another thing to try is "correspondence" chess, where you can play out a game over days, weeks or even months. Why? Because you can play many such games at once, you can play a bit when you have time, you can play people all over the world (no time zone issues), etc. But perhaps the biggest thing is that when you have 6 or 12 games going, you have to be able to look at a board and find the best move essentially from scratch. This ability to look at a board for what it actually is right now (instead of in the context of your plans from 5 moves ago), is a very good skill to have.
Grade Point Average - we have it in Australia too
What if successful startup founders have high IQs? Or particular personalities making them persevere? It's entirely possible that all those methods and practices count for nothing or are completely eclipsed by IQs, luck, networks...

This argument is being made against education. How much education really matters and how much outcomes are just a matter of raw cognitive ability of students and (self-)selection?

Truth is that we don't know. So most people choose to follow in the footsteps of those who have demonstrable achievements and hope for the best.

BTW This might be the first time I'm seeing a ghost blog in the wild. Just browsing the Internet, not looking at ghost blogs specifically.
Deploying Django/postGIS with Ansible & Wercker
Thanks, you're welcome.
Interesting. I found that going later in the day ( sometime between 10am and 3pm, whenever I take a break) is better for me because I'm most productive/focused in the mornings.
Mark Zuckerberg has a lot of thoughts about Washington DC
This one could probably be split into the autocomplete UI and the suggestion engine.
> while scientifically interesting

I'm not sure "interesting" is the word I'd have used. "Unlikely" is probably much, much closer to the truth. It's more or less astrology.
The point was that no points can be made.
Interesting topic, but the blogpost lacks data.
5 years for a clinical study? That's a laughably short amount of time. You don't just write a test suite and get your answer out. Moreover, this is kind of uncharted territory: If you've got a device that, say, estimates an 'elevated' risk of alzheimer's in 20 year olds, how long of a clinical trial period do you suspect would be reasonable to run the test?
At that point, if I wrote my own proxy server, I'd drop the JS altogether and just request a proxy link. I know what's cross-origin in my code, so if I wanted to mitigate it with a proxy, I don't need the additional library. Still say your best bet is losing the JS and opening up the server. I mean, what's going to be better here, telling everyone "it's a trust issue", or passing on a relatively simple self-hosted proxy server made specifically for CORS-faking? Else, my big trust question is "why exactly do you WANT me to forward my traffic through your black box server?"
...which "underscore"s the fact that you can make a great site prototype with frameworks (JS, CSS, etc). My claim was not that they have no use. But that you start with them, get a great site, then pull out the re-usable framework stuff and leave the customized stuff that makes your site/app so great.
You plug your code into a framework.
You plug a library into your code.

I think this definition is a good starting point for thinking about the difference between a framework and a library.
Someone ought to inform 23AM of that:

Find out if your children are at risk for inherited conditions, so you can plan for the health of your family.

Understand your genetic health risks. Change what you can, manage what you can't.

Arm your doctor with information on how you might respond to certain medications.

Document your family health history, track inherited conditions, and share the knowledge.

Explore your genetic traits for everything from lactose intolerance to male pattern baldness.

This is right there on their website.
Silicon Valley Isn’t a Meritocracy
Care to share a link to a competitor?
Well, as you say, you do check if they're "good people and nice to work with" - the post said pretty much that, because "being the kind of person I'd like to have a beer after work" is pretty much the same emotional reaction as "being the kind of person that is good and nice to work with", and isn't related to the fact if you're actually having beer after work with anyone.
While adding more Uber drivers does directly increase the number of cars on the road, that growth could be offsetted (not sure about the actual numbers) by people deciding they can rely on mass transit + Uber instead of driving a car.

Or it just means that there are more Uber drivers and less taxi drivers.
Recognizing a Mandelbrot set doesn't really mean you're mathematically inclined, so much as you've browsed the web long enough to know what it is.

But, great tutorial, nonetheless!
Grade Point Average.

Unsurprisingly, it is a way of averaging your grades (so that the whole of your academic career is compressed to one real number).

In the American system, the grades A,B,C,D,F are mapped to the numbers 4.0, 3.0, 2.0, 1.0, 0.0, respectively. Your GPA is a weighted average of your grades from 0.0-4.0

Usually a 3.0+ is considered to be decent.
"They do diagnostic tests."

More specifically they are busted for interpreting diagnostic tests not doing the tests. If they were two cooperating companies, and one did tests and squirted out results and the other sold diagnostic and interpretive services, the diagnostic services company would be busted but the test company would not be in trouble, as I interpret it at this time.

Skip all the exotic genetic issues and think about personal experiences with something boring, like blood pressure. No legal problem with testing someones blood pressure and giving them numerical results and maybe a medically sane set of typical ranges. My local pharmacy has a machine that does it for free. However, it would be a big issue for a non-MD using that data to diagnose high blood pressure, or a high likelihood of it anyway, then providing some treatment plans.

The issue seems to be selling services. If they just did testing, and provided a free downloadable immense data set and some statistical analysis tools and let the user come up with their own interpretations, they'd probably be in the clear (at least with respect to this individual problem). Now having a cloud service to hold the data and do the math is getting gray area ish but probably still OK as long as its the end user drawing the conclusions and not "the company" drawing the conclusions.
Its a simple procedure but from an epidemiological prospective, different screening methods are ideal for different slices of the population. If something has a very high false positive rate, it's a terrible screening tool... I think a lot of the concern is that someone might receive bad news and change their anti-coagulant dose because of a false positive. Even if that only happens to 0.1% of people, it could kill people. The point is that doctors don't market these tests to the public like that.
Yeah, all three have Collections and Views.
I started looking at openings, thinking that if I just started out with a well tested, accepted pre-canned opening, I'd be in a better position to start seeing some strategy.

It looked promising at first, but I still get creamed. At least it looks like I might know what I'm doing for the first few moves.
> The funny thing here, is that barring lab errors, which I think are highly unlikely unless they are being incredibly shoddy, which would take effort, the information that 23andMe provides is very reliable.

Certainly, there is science to support certain claims of the class made in the reports 23andMe provides being made with some degree of reliability based on the kind of inputs 23andMe takes in. Whether what 23andMe actually does from end-to-end makes the actual reports they provide reliable in real world condition is...well, exactly the question they have seem to have decided not to expend the effort to answer even after initiating the process of getting clearance from the FDA to market their diagnostic product.
I don't understand the problem you're trying to solve: The site doesn't tell me what it is about, why I should bother and who is behind it. Moreover, the selection of postcards is very limited and not what I would expect to be the "perfect postcard".
Charge the call, if the call is justified give a discount of 100%.
Then I'm more impressed by the local utilities than the OS :)
I ended up picking up the 2006 book used because of the cancelled second half. It's ok, but of course nothing like the full book treatment I'd hoped for.

I was a Commodore user from the Vic-20 days, through a C-64 and then several Amiga's, so the first part was also highly interesting to me, though. Just hope Bagnall gets back to it eventually.
The issue with charging money for 911 calls would be people who are not actually the victim of a crime (say, a bystander) will have a disincentive to call. In a world where some people already ignore crimes as "not my business" this cost will end up hindering reports from 3rd parties that are not involved. The most immediate example that comes to mind is something like domestic violence.
Most companies worth their salt care about these things from an engineer: can they think? can they communicate how they think? will they be diligent?

The real work is being the "person with whom the CTO can have a meaningful discussion about their current work with and then produce results on." Whether or not you as an employed want to grab a beer with your hire is a false signal.
That's the definition when "computable" is used in a formal setting. What we believe is that it is also equivalent to our informal, intuitive understanding of the term.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1889323233/

Amazing beginner course. Read this book and Vol2 and you will be ahead of most tournament players on the fundamentals. USCF 2100+ at my strongest.
Lessons from 2 months of remote working
Why would you want to remove the framework? This would just be a huge waste of effort for no gain, as the grandparent shared.
A decent un-bloated framework would account most of the time to a half-assed image. Not worth the trouble.
Because abstractions are slow. Abstractions are harder for new people to learn from scratch. Abstractions hide necessary details when bug-triaging. Abstractions hand-cuff you into a certain way of thinking about things, a certain way of doing things.

Agreed. For example, you should never use anything above assembly, and especially not high-level languages like C++, Haskell or JavaScript, which are filled with abstractions. Those are fine for prototyping, but for production you should switch to good ol' NASM, only making calls to libraries when appropriate.
It's more about the labeling. I can't market french fries as lowering chances of breast cancer because my tests only included males. How does the agency know whether your procedures are being done proberly unless you work with them on it.
aRrgh: A newcomer's angry guide to data types in R
Older guide but makes a firm point that should have much more recognition, and is still one of the best for "new to R" around
Hadn't heard about Google backing them, do you have details?