skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You're still free to choose who you get healthcare from.

It's like saying the food/farming industry isn't a free market because "some people will use very little while some [fat people] will use a lot more through no fault of their own." It's a ridiculous argument, and sounds more along the lines of Peter Joseph's "structural violence" mantra. The whole "you're not truly free until you get all this free shit given to you so you can be free to do nothing/be lazy".

Granted, it isn't actually a truly free-market, anyways. Government subsidies, minimum prices, etc, all distort the market and affect peoples' actions.
They kill a lot of people when not built and operated correctly, which is what the article points out, right?

What would happen if the Chinese took the same attitude with nuclear power?
ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/guix/

It requires QEMU.
Obviously. I was saying the person I replied to was completely incorrect with his example of a computer.

It was a reply from absurdity.
> Your claim

It wasn't MY claim, it was the poster above me.

I was saying his comparison was absurd. Obviously it doesn't cost that much.
> But the reality of technical merits doesn't change based on your ideology.

So your thinking is not shaped on ideology?

> German industry may indeed be in better shape, but that is inspite of German energy policies, not because of them.

Well, it's the opposite.

The renewable energy industry is growing and is already earning lots of money.

> What you're really arguing for here is a poorer, less prosperous,

That's what the big utilities told us twenty years ago. The opposite happened.

> actually improve people's lives instead

That's not even good propaganda. After the Energiewende has started in 2000 we now have the lowest unemployment for decades.
I'm afraid you're mistaken -- frequentist statistics are not a special case of Bayesian statistics, and there is generally no "implicit, built-in prior" that allows you to get frequentist worst-case guarantees from Bayesian techniques.

Consider the case of a confidence interval on a binary proportion given a finite number of samples.

A frequentist method will produce an interval that includes the true value of the proportion with at least x% probability, even in the worst case, for any proportion between 0 and 1. (E.g. the Blyth-Still-Casella method or the Clopper-Pearson method.)

An x% credible interval will include the true value exactly x% of the time, averaged over all values of the proportion weighted according to the prior. This will not provide the same guarantee (much less the same interval extent!), no matter what prior is used.

Which is not to say the credible interval is bad or inappropriate. It's just not the same kind of tool. It is optimizing a different penalty function of non-inclusion.

(Another example where the "Bayesian" technique is not quite as conservative as necessary to achieve a frequentist-style guarantee, even with a uniform prior: http://www.quora.com/I-have-burned-200-disks-and-I-want-to-m...)
http://i.imgur.com/IfuyZAj.png
"Granted, there is plenty of canned rhetoric on all "sides" to go around, but that doesn't make this any better."

The problem is that certain sides get way less flak for "canned rhetoric". Particularly populist viewpoints.
Duh. I was saying that comparing to the computer in front of me is ridiculous for comparing to a solar cell.

I was ridiculing him for even suggesting it as a reply.
very intresting
> mmm...that's not what I read/heard. Germany had a surplus sometimes during the year but on the average it's a consumer more than a producer.

But that's wrong.

> Germany is a net exporter (since 2012) but suffer from the important irregularity of solar/wind production (overproduction and underproduction happen regularly and may damage the network).

That's the same with nuclear. France has lots of surplus power on weekends, in the night and on holidays. On demand peaks in summer and winter they have not enough.

> may damage the network

Peak demands like in France can also damage the network.

> And, 46% of the electricity is coming from coal...

That will shrink a lot in the coming decades.
Statistics researchers in academia definitely express a preference between frequentist and Bayesian inference. So no, it's not limited to philosophers - and I'm pretty sure all but the most forgiving frequentists would not agree with the concept "frequentist = Bayesian with flat priors". Remember that you cannot really formulate a flat infinite (and infinitely thin) distribution in mathematical terms: you need to resort to limit calculation.

While the concept "Bayesian + flat prior = frequentist" is useful to explain a high level connection between the two worlds, there is a lot more to the topic - and in my opinion, it's something that can hardly be scratched without a formal education in the field.
yep, that's all it does. It just inverted the sequence dependency. You call it "worse". But I argue that it is a much better mental model in the specific use case of updating state given an external disruption from the user.

You see, what you call a clear sequential path is what I call evil :). We had tons of those in our app, and it was so hard to keep track of them, and everytime I didn't look at it for a while, I had to invest 10 minutes to track down the event chain.

There is one simple reason for this: If you have a sequential path, you loose the context after the first link. A updates because "user-clicked-x", and B updates because A updates. But if you're working on B, you ask yourself why the heck did A update in the first place?

You might argue that you are always aware of this, but we found that when our app grew more complex, we actually didn't always know.

I'm sure you could find a solution where you keep the sequence and don't lose context, but then you have to state the dependency in the wrong place: In model A you have to say that model B should update. But that's all wrong because A shouldn't care about models that depend on it. The models that depend on A should care!

So by inverting the whole sequence dependency, you gain the following:

1. in every model you are aware of the context, i.e. the original event that triggered the state change in the first place

2. you are also aware on what other models this model depends on (it is explicitly stated and not hidden like you said).

This means that you can work on model B and extend it without ever looking at other models, while knowing exactly the origin of your state change. In my opinion, this is decoupling at its best. It also helps unittesting greatly.

While I agree that inverting the dependency is a drawback, I've gained things that, at least in my opinion, heavily dominate that drawback.
Humans have difficulties, but they manage it decently, driving slower, and more carefully. And the car apparently is unsafe to use in such conditions.
Minor trivial technicality ... the 6 note Birthday song snippet is the 6 notes AND the 5 spaces between the notes, so your combinations are underestimated by a bit (3^5 ish). Still reachable by enumeration though.
"fundamental as function composition" is obviously subjective, but I think the point is that it seems you can make a fairly strong argument that in lisps, there is a question of what does the form (map f) eval to, and transducers put forth an answer that seems to be logically correct and superior to any alternatives. Hence, it seems fundamental.
Even if it can't it still can be incredibly valuable in a lot of climates where it operates well most of the time(ie most of California at this point). Most people don't travel very far and where they do is probably well mapped. Google could solve a small percentage of the problem and still win.
Fraps Crack 3.5.99 Screen Recorder Full Version Free Download
mmm... as I get older and (hopefully) more experienced, I have become doubtful of this point. Apparent simplicity comes often from ignoring the subtle difficulties in a problem. Adding a layer is often the disagreable but reasonable thing to do.
> But Germany is also building new brown coal power plants

Germany is also closing fossil fuel plants.

> So... why not nuclear instead?

There is no 'instead'. Coal will be phased out a lot during the next decades.
Yikes, total mistake.
How SUPL Reveals My Identity and Location to Google When I Use GPS
When Whites Just Don’t Get It
I agree, from the videos, podcasts and co-writing I had thought Brian would have been Editor-in-chief. I'm surprised Ryan was chosen instead.
False, activist judges can be good or bad, but are usually good. Unless you are anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, anti-desegregation, then yeah, you might think it's terrible.
As someone who was in a similar position and whose world view seems to be similar, I would say that looking for a career as a programmer is probably a bad choice, but you're actually far better off than you think.

On the bad side, the career of programmer is a bad career to get into in the same way that scribe, typist, and elevator operator are terrible career options. However, if you go to a job interview and can't read, type, or use an elevator, you'll be shown the door. Programming is heading down that same road.

So, there's some good news. You didn't waste your time. You're going to be writing code until the day you die. You'll just never be called a programmer in the same way that you'll never be called a chauffeur when you drive yourself to work.

The next bit of bad news is that you probably do suck at programming. The CS AP test was a cake walk back when I took it and it DID include pointers at the time (during the brief period where they focused on C++). I was a deplorably incompetent programmer when I took the exam and I aced it without any problems.

The corresponding good news is that it largely doesn't matter that you suck as a programmer. The vast majority of people are so terrible at programming that even basic, wipe-after-you-poop competence will make you look like a superstar. To put it more succinctly, have you head of Git? I'm not asking if you've used it - have you heard of it? Congratulations! If you have, then you're in the top ten percent of crappy programmers.

I guess what I'm saying is that you shouldn't "follow your dreams" - don't become a programmer because that career is dying. On the other hand, you're pretty well off, because your dreams are going to chase you down. You'll probably never be a "programmer", but you'll spend your career programming, whether you want to or not.

You should specialize, but not in a "sysadmin" or "network guy" sort of way. These also seem to be assimilating into the basic employment competency list. Instead, ask yourself what you want your programs to DO. After all, if a couple of Silicon Valley VCs came to you and said "We need a programmer to make a database of left handed people and code areal drones to blow them up", I'm guessing that you wouldn't be that thrilled at the opportunity. So ask yourself what you'd like them write instead. If it's the next great ray-tracer for pixar, study physics and optics. If it's the next facebook, read up on sociology. If it's the new mining operation. If it's a better news site, study journalism. If it's an encrypted webmail client, study math. If it's blowing up left handed people, study aeronautical engineering.

And keep studying programming. It's a wonderful little hobby that will payout huge dividends in your career. Just don't try to be a programmer. Or an elevator operator.
> That $2000 bottle of Margaux takes over 600 times as much energy to produce as Three Buck Chuck.

Profit is not exempt from my argument. Because at the end of the day profit gets spent, and by paying for the more expensive item you are contributing to energy use once that profit is spent.

Some expensive (in money and energy) item that otherwise would not get purchased has now been purchased because the profit enabled someone to afford it.

> and will also increase retail prices by 4%

That's fine, but I'm not following your math. If you made $60 the first year, and prices went up 4% each year (inflation presumably), your total generation after 25 years is $2,499 worth of power.

Now lets take our $500 and invest it at 6% (which is pretty low), after 25 years you have $2,240.

Or in other words your ROI is virtually nil.
The fast way is to say that [b] is the initial algebra of the functor (Maybe . (b,)) and then note that initial algebras are representable as

newtype Mu f = Mu (forall r . (f r -> r) -> r)
Prefab is labor and gas intensive. The advantage to this technology is that you can do all the assembly in place and don't need trucking and all the other headaches to get stuff there. As a tool for building dwellings in remote places, I think this tech has a bright future .. I can see it being used to rapidly build refugee homes in deserts and so on..
Or maybe the author heard Google hype like 'no steering wheel' and 'no accidents in 700k miles', did the reporter thing of doing research and found out that it's as close to a streetcar as a fully driverless car, and wrote a story on it.
In Germany, Call-a-bike (Deutsche Bahn) [1] operates exactly like this. Bikes can be rented everywhere inside the city, and can be left on every junction within a city. There are no drop-off/rental stations.

So far, I did not have any problems to find a bike when I needed it.

[1] http://www.bahn.de/p/view/service/fahrrad/call_a_bike.shtml
> implicit property dependency graph

How similar is Ember's dependency tracking to Knockout's?

With Knockout I've had exactly the problem described in the article, where properties end up depending on eachother in a chain, and it is hard to keep track of what actually happens when data changes across multiple view models, particularly when inevitable special cases appear, where really I want to do something slightly different half way down the chain depending on what initiated the change, but all I have is a generic "property changed" event. How does Ember handle that?
I'm always using transfer.sh. It will return a filename that can be shared. For example "curl --upload-file /tmp/test.txt http://transfer.sh/hello.txt" will return http://transfer.sh/6t9me/hello.txt.
I also do. And - funnily enough, once I got mine on my desk, one of the others in the office brought his in from home, and a third engineer asked his wife for one for Christmas so now he has one on his desk as well...
> If A changes to no longer deal with that event, will B block forever?

No, A would just no-op, and control will return to B. This is all written in the context of JavaScript, with a synchronous dispatcher and no threads which can block.
> Who said decisions should be easy? I sweat over each and every one.

True medicine is a really hard job.

So maybe the way decide in medicine should be changed ? maybe they be done remotely but through a recommendation system so that each doctor would get plenty of nearly similar cases - so he could practice and hone it's intuition ?

Or since the complexity is really too great (and as a patient hearing that "this is art not science" isn't that encouraging , even if true) maybe the overarching goal of medicine should be to remove the art, and we finally have the tools to do it(watson, machine learning ,remote diagnosis , etc...) ?

And if we agree that that's a good goal, maybe the current way we try to do it (evidence based medicine) , is a bit clumsy due to both the science and the resistance by doctors , but at least it's going in the right directorion.
Ursula Le Guin, the Art of Fiction
Sensors and cameras can't really see something, but the eye and the brain of a human can guess, all senses are at 100% (humans are tired after driving in such conditions). Making an IA which can have the same performance/evaluation must be really tricky
Ok. I think I get your point now. I just don't agree.

> it is still the case that you need to know other things about human biology; further, you need to know many more things to determine whether losing weight that way is advisable

I believe that there are times when you need to be pragmatic and act before you know more. You might not be sure that losing weight (or that most obvious way to loose weight) is best for any given person but it's still an adivce they should take if they are overweight.

Just like it's a still good advice to excercise even if you are not perfectly sure that excersising won't kill you. You can take position of "I'm not sure. I better stay on my couch till the data comes in, indicating that it's healthy for me to run a bit." but that's not wise. You can't put yourself into stasis before you are sure if it's a good thing to eat less than you burn. Your life goes on and you need to act on incomplete knowledge you have so far.

TL;DR

I just don't agree that acting on "Do what physics tell you, ought to lower your weight." is worse than acting on "We need to learn more about our biology before we can do anything successful about our weight."
You'd still need to move around the input materials to the printer. I fail to see how it would be less gas intensive.

I agree about labor though.
FTP Server at LSUHealth New Orleans
I would imagine that part of the reason is that he now has all the money he and his family (if any) will probably ever need.
> You don't understand the difference between EROEI or ROI if you believe this.

Actually I claim there is virtually no difference.

Every single time I read an EREOI calculation I kept wondering "But he ignored that energy, and that, and that". After thinking about it I realized that money makes an excellent proxy for EROEI.

Every step in the process that costs energy also increase the cost. So the money essentially acts as "book keeping" for energy.

Everyone always gets mad when they encounter this for the first time, but think about for a while. Think about the basic cost for every single thing we make, and you'll realize at its core its always energy.

There is one exception that I thought of and that is pollution. Reducing pollution is a valuable thing even if it costs extra energy to do so.

Because at the end of the day we don't care how much energy we use, we care that we don't dirty our environment, and that we don't run out.

Your edit #2 is well taken. I will need to think about that.

My initial impression is that nuclear costs more energy (all those externalities you mention) than hydrocarbon fuel, but makes less pollution. So maybe it's worth it anyway.
Where in the article is it being ridiculed? I read it as a dose of reality, which useful to provide some perspective on the challenges that remain (that many people are probably not even aware of).

The original article might be of interest.

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/530276/hidden-obstacles...
Arse-sum!

</whiny teenager>
Do Students Really Have Different Learning Styles?
You've incorrectly identified Courtès.
DigitalOcean

ref link https://www.digitalocean.com/?refcode=34a8a2d54244

non-ref https://www.digitalocean.com/
As a bayesianist I would like to defend Frequentism here. p-value hacking IS NOT "Frequentist", it is malpractice has its roots in lack of education (copy-paste-analyses), publication pressure and using the p-value as a strong metric for judgement of results (which it was never intended to be).

Frequentism is a toolset of best practices and experiences about statistics, a KISS approach to statistics so to speak.

Bayesianism is a beautiful approach to probabilities and statistics, yet often turns out to be really complex when performing calculations and it is also not fool-proof and it also requires experience to be applied correctly.
It makes the cars worth less, if people were going to purchase rather than rent them, if they cannot be used for all journeys. If they are going to be rental only it matters less.
Or just make a 3D ivory printer and flood the market undercutting the poachers.
From the source: "Data from multiple passes by a special sensor vehicle must later be pored over, meter by meter, by both computers and humans. It’s vastly more effort than what’s needed for Google Maps."

In other words, the mapping required is very specific and doesn't exist. Current maps don't help.
> Not every directive attribute needs to be another directive -- it's probably overkill,

I think that this particular example shows that rather than extending framework of directives to nicely incorporate lightweight directives such as ng-required angular team chose to hack it into input/select/textarea directive because it was easier that way for them. There are many places like that in angular where the hacky path was chosen and due to this, architecture is lacking some of very obvious features like one-way binding of expression given in attribute to isolate scope (which is what ng-requried does to get it's value). You need to use & as workaround to achieve one way binding.

As for Angular UI as I said there were people that wanted to figure out how to implement tabbed views but they got no love from core developers. Basically recent advice about using UI Router to implement tabbed app is "Don't".

So I just went to implement my own stuff with $route, $routeParams, $location and ng-include.
Interactive Visualization of Global Terrorism Death
a lot of the opening of chess is playing memorized counters to different plays that have been extensively studied - you could fill a library with books dedicated to chess openings, explaining why a particular move is good against another.
The key question is what competitors have as technology. I don't know about the Japanese manufacturers, but in Germany Audi and VW have been heavily working on self-driving and assistive technology for the last decade and only incorporated communication technology at a later point (I was working at Vodafone R&D then and our team participated in joint tests starting six years ago). It is safe to assume that Google's approach was comms and data-first, car-physics secondary, while the manufacturers approach is the other way round with a focus on mechanics and physics.
Any End-to-End encrypted software. Ensuring a self-destruction on the receiving side is impossible.
Sorry I missed the joke 😆
Visual illusions: An Empirical Explanation
Data Science Skill-set Explained (Infographic)
There was an academic paper in the 70s on Fibonacci-based allocation strategy... though I can't seem to find it now. So the idea is definitely not new :)
Thanks for the kind words! It'd be great if you could tell me what improvements you think would be best, I'm trying to make howm's code as nice as I can. I know that having everything in one file is frowned upon, but I quite like the simplicity of it.
When humans do it, are they just taking a risk that the autonomous car could take, but won't?
That was an argument made in the "Humans need not apply" video.

The question I care about is whether Google's self-driving car is better than me in heavy rain.

Not all humans drive equally. I think Google's self driving car might be better for some people more than it is for others.
Most watched repos could be interesting too.
While I'm doing command line file sharing, why not just directly transfer a file to my peer with netcat?

Server:

$ cat hugefile.ext | nc -l -p 9999

Client:

$ nc server.ip 9999 > hugefile.ext

We tend to forget how the network is built, and how easy it is to use it with the right tools.
I think the point is that, unless you have insider information, it's impossible to trust any third-party product that works with these assumptions.

Really, if you're trying to share a file with someone over the Internet, your best bet is public-key encryption. You can safely share an ASCII armored GPG file over something like Pastebin (or email) without worrying about the confidentiality of the message. The problem, of course, would be that there is still (somewhat public) evidence of the communication.

Web-based end-to-end encrypted (and, better yet, ethereal) messaging isn't really solved yet. I think the "grandparent" poster is just trying to illustrate that publishing the same idea -- all hinging on "but really, trust us!" -- doesn't make much difference.