skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Correct me if I am wrong, but using a Windows keyboard with a Mac, although possible, may not be the best user experience. Also, I have seen that people use a lot of "gestures" on Mac OS. Using a regular mouse may not allow you to do the same and you may endup losing "some" of the productivity edge.
Doesn't work on either of my computers either.
The Mew of real life.
Personally I've found dagre-d3 to be by far the best library when presenting actual useful graph data: https://github.com/cpettitt/dagre-d3.

dagre is a layout library which implements graphviz in javascript, and renders it in d3. d3's force-directed layout is great for demos, but I've never found it good enough when trying to represent real data.

(edit: a link to my own simple, albeit demo, page using the library: http://nlpviz.bpodgursky.com/home)
> a lot of people naturally behave in a way that exploits others' biases...However, learning to avoid or exploit biases is very difficult

You can hire these people and have them use their talents to further your own interests. As the founder of Spanx said "hire your weaknesses" [1].

[1] http://www.marketplace.org/topics/business/corner-office/int...
Hobos – A simple utility to print random hobo names
The linked study doesn't examine what is mentioned at all; it is a study of chocolate milk as a recovery drink from 2006.

No real athlete would consider a power bar, gatorade, or fast food to be a good post workout meal anyway, as the macros are pretty terrible (protein to calorie ratio sucks). Also, I don't see any comparison of fast food to the most popular post-workout supplement, protein powder, so making this hyperbolic of a statement with the title is kind of absurd.
> The after-workout meals had approximately the same nutritional content—about 70% carbohydrates, 10% protein and 10% fat.

That's 90%. What's the remaining 10% of nutritional content?

Also, the article links to a study from 2006 about chocolate milk, not a recent study about fast food. Here is the actual study (pdf):

http://journals.humankinetics.com/AcuCustom/Sitename/Documen...

Pretty shoddy editing.

Only 10% fat is particularly surprising, since many fast food items will have much higher fat content than that (hash browns have about 50% of caloric content from fat, Big Mac 45%, fries 43%, etc.). EDIT: apparently the distribution was broken down by weight, rather than by caloric contribution.
I agree with you - I think that being frighted of AI's is as rational as being frightened of children, but Prof. Russell is a more authoritative source than me, and I think it would be better for people to read his stuff than the nonsense that the parent links to.
The link in the article is about chocolate milk: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16676705

Here is the actual study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25811308
Because that wouldn't fit the bill of unbridled techno-optimism that is mandatory in (particularly online) popsci/poptech reporting.

Sadly it's also widespread in the scientific literature, as "publish or perish" meets "won't print methods/results that are not said to be awesome".
Don't worry, it's been recorded :)

Did you see my talk on Depression & Anxiety?
> it's sad that someone is now going around flagging his comments.

No user flagged those comments. Some comments (e.g. by noob accounts from Tor IPs) are moderated by default because of past activity by trolls. These eventually get unflagged. We're going to open the unflagging part to the community soon, but that work isn't done yet.
Humans are similarly constrained in their actions by legal structures. We wouldn't think of giving other people autonomy and freedom to commit genocide, and we wouldn't think of human rights laws that forbid such actions as "slavery." This is because, for the most part, we all share a common humanity that places our minds into a similar space of configurations.

An AGI has absolutely no requirement to be anywhere near our sort of mind. It has no default obligation to morality that we would find acceptable or safe.

I think the issue here is that when we hear words like "control" or "serving humans" we imagine the AI as a little person in a machine. We associate the word "slave" with the intelligence and imagine an emotional, resentful person whose resentment and chafing at his chains comes from a specific set of environmental and evolutionary influences.

EDIT: I recommend reading Yudkowsky's article "Value is Fragile" (http://lesswrong.com/lw/y3/value_is_fragile/):

>If you loose the grip of human morals and metamorals - the result is not mysterious and alien and beautiful by the standards of human value. It is moral noise, a universe tiled with paperclips. To change away from human morals in the direction of improvement rather than entropy, requires a criterion of improvement; and that criterion would be physically represented in our brains, and our brains alone.

>Relax the grip of human value upon the universe, and it will end up seriously valueless. Not, strange and alien and wonderful, shocking and terrifying and beautiful beyond all human imagination. Just, tiled with paperclips.
So the important question is, how does the affect how we write applications?

Is the api different, or are we still reading/writing disk files?

Should we do memory mapping of the files or not?

Should we parallelize access to different sections of big files? Or write a ton of small files?

How does this affect database design? Current big data apps emphasize large append-only writes and large sequential reads (think LSM trees). Does this make sense any more?

What does disk caching mean in the context of these new drives?
On my present machine, I am using 16GB of RAM and a 1TB disc. I would say my next machine will need at least the same 16GB of RAM (Dell XPS 13 won't do because of this) and I could use less HD space to get a fast SSD.
About CPU, I don't think the 3rd gen i7 I am using right now is a bottleneck at all. So most probably, a 5th generation wouldn't hurt either.
About the screen, I have been trying to avoid HD screens if only because lots of programs look awful (or too small) on them. Also, linux does not provide good support for them yet.
Looks like the Gnome 3 version of Gedit.
Just curious. Where do you suggest parking your motor home when living in San Francisco?
Its also not the most prosperous, except in aggregate (where mere size is a significant factor.)
How can we (if your criteria is true) even begin to imagine how it would see us? If we got everything right it might just understand us.

I share your pessimism though because a poor implementation of any one of your criteria leads to potential disaster. But do you really believe humanity's fate is to advance so far as to create something that will tell us we are the problem and vanquish us? Wouldn't it be smarter then that?
Pitch Your Life: The Art of Storytelling When Raising $28M
> Any thought like ‘what’s so great about paperclips anyway?’ would be judged as not likely to lead to more paperclips and so remain unexplored.

As is alluded to in the article, but not really further explored, we humans reason exactly like this hypothetical paper-clip-production-maximizer machine. Our goal is to maximize the number of humans, whatever the consequences to anything non-human, living or dead -- and, as is becoming more and more obvious, regardless of the consequences to ourselves.

What's so great about humans anyway?

From a human point of view, humans are better than, say, tigers. But how would you convince a tiger that it's moralistically, absolutely "better" that they all die off so that humans can build concrete towers where they can watch TV on top of one another?

There's also a lot of hubris in saying a super-intelligence capable of turning the whole solar system into a giant paperclip factory, would be unable to question the usefulness of paperclips.

In the end we are all going to die anyway; isn't it better to be survived by some kind of all-powerful, all-knowing machine, than another long line of mediocre mean chimps like ourselves?
Gedit, I think.
Provide something useful, on a regular basis, then gradually try to sell something. It took me well over 2 years before I made money from it. It takes an extremely long time to build your subscriber base too. I am talking about month over month, you will be sending newsletter blasts to 5, 10, the 30 people, then one month 1000 people will sign up. Takes will power to push through. Just the name of the game. So, start early, and do not expect much. If you are looking for good examples, check out http://www.devopsweekly.com/ & http://rubyweekly.com/. Subscribe to them and check out the format. They are both free, and provide high quality curated content, but have "sponsored" (clearly marked) parts. This should give you some inspiration.

There is pretty much zero barrier to entry. Register a domain, create a one-page static website on AWS S3/CF, which will host your signup form (and list archive for seo reasons), then use http://mailchimp.com/ to run the list. You could have it up and running in an afternoon. Finding high quality curated content is the hard part.

I would suggest picking something you know tons about, or something fairly new. Take golang for example, there is tons of information churn, so you want someone in the know, to tell you about interesting things. This is the underlining principle for devopsweekly and rubyweekly. You do not even need to be an expect, just put in the time to track down interesting bits, over the last week. This can and should take many hours.

Having said all that, you are probably thinking it is common sense, and it pretty much it. There is no rocket science to it, just put in the work, have high quality content, and it should just work. Patio11 has tons of great info about email marketing. Although, maybe not specific to newsletters, much of it applies. Read on https://www.google.ca/?q=patio11+email+marketing
> machines that treat people right

You might come to regret that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/With_Folded_Hands
American Entrepreneurship Is Actually Vanishing. Here's Why
Causal inference of Facebook services performance dependencies using logs [pdf]
I'm puzzled why the author highlights "Lightweight: no dependencies" as a strength - in node.js land this is not the case in my opinion. I'm happy to hear people's view on this
What can lead to defensive change is the emotional experience of being run over by those using such techniques for hostile ends. Prey eventually learn to identify predators who don't have visually identifying characteristics.
Unlock your Spock
Gender politics of maternity/paternity DNA testing in India
Interesting use of computing brute force, too.
Show HN: On-Demand Pop-Style Team Portaits
It's not difficult to use a lot of the examples from Cialdini to become more successful. Adding reviews or top clients to your website (social proof), stating that you only have 3 items left in stock (scarcity), giving free samples (reciprocity), etc.
In this case their interpretation of "sports supplements" is a Gatorade and a Power Bar. This makes this study immediately lost all credibility to me and is filed away as "most likely was done solely for some kind of future marketing." Why wasn't a high-protein shake, steak, chicken or fish dinner compared? Of course if your "sports supplement" meal has the same nutritional value of a fast-food meal, you're likely to get the same effect. How is that groundbreaking or even worth studying?
Why everyone should “carry a number” once in their life
Ethereum, a new cryptocurrency project, is attempting to do better at defining a protocol. They're launching with at least two official clients, developed by different teams in different languages. They have an extensive test suite based on the spec, and when they find different teams have interpreted the spec differently they revise it to clarify.

https://blog.ethereum.org/2015/04/02/implementing-vitaliks-v...
Many people would benefit from role-playing both sides of con/deception games in childhood, as emotional existence proofs of active threats which cannot be discerned visually. The film Inception shows the use of psychological firewalls, termed "militarized subconscious" in the film.
Notes:

* Abstract doesn't mention fast food, just chocolate milk

* Study was small in scope (9 participants) and single blinded.

* Those aren't really "supplements"

For that reason, I'd downvote this if I had the reps.

Anyway, much of the fitness world has been shifting back towards the "quantity" side of things in the whole "Quantity vs. Quality" argument.

The gist has been that the occasional fast food meal is not going to ruin your hopes and dreams, but it goes a long way to make sure it fits into your caloric and macronutrient plan.

There are extreme ends on both sides of the argument:

Your local organic hippie vegetarian may think they're healthier, and by some parameters maybe they will be, but you can still extremely get fat eating nothing but "quality" foods, and you can still have zero muscle mass if you don't eat enough quality sources of protein (which leads to the unattractive skinny fat body type).

On the other end, you have people who can lose weight with nothing more than Subway or McDonalds, due to caloric restriction. You can get very extreme with the IIFYM (If it Fits your Macros) and eat zero fruits/veggies and still build a beautiful body (that's likely dying on the inside).

The best policy is likely somewhere in the middle, but for the time being, I'll stay a touch closer to the the quantitative science, which pushes you towards a proper calorie count, adequate protein, and plenty of fruits/vegetables (about 5 80g servings per day, doesn't really matter which ones).

Anyway, back to the study... I get tired of studies on "recovery". What are we really training for here??? For the most of us, we just want to stay athletic/sexy looking. So long as you meet your quantitative daily goals mentioned above, I'm not too worried about reloading my glycogen stores immediately. If you eat consistently well, your body will take care of the job.
Sodium? It may be a great alternative for applications less sensible to weight.
National Day of PACER Protest
Having used React Native for two months, I can confidently say it's the best way to do what it's doing. Native is garbage (overly complicated), web is garbage (for now, maybe?) and as for solutions using a JS bridge like React Native, I think RN does it best. Easy to use and extend, and has default support for one of (if not the best) JavaScript framework available right now.
Passion at its finest. Moriarty takes great pride, rightly so, and this comes across. Inspiring to say the least.

I loved this game, and also have many fond memories. The post mortem was excellent from every aspect.

The Zork series, Wishbringer, Enchanter, Sorcerer, Spellbreaker, Trinity, and others all had a profound effect on me growing up, playing them with my brother and friends. It was great to see some of those mentioned and visualized during the post-mortem.
I had not seen these issues, but I think envdb will be taken as an interesting PoC at the very least of how distributed queries could work.
For anyone wondering if there were multiple LUAs: https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1bjvxs/how_do_w...
Ask HN: Please help me decide which startup I should work for?
I am interning this year and I applied for 2 startups focussing on 3D printing technology. One startup consist of some good experienced founders who have worked with google, Samsung before but and their main focus in using 3D scanning technique to create a 3D printed object (and they don't pay). The other consist of young inexperienced graduates and they have a wide domain of projects related to 3D printing also I have a choice to create and start my own project with them and also they pay me good. Which one I should go after!
Your point is well taken, but with some training most healthy men can deadlift 400 pounds.
I had a copy of this book before my car was broken into and my belongings were stolen. I was about 75% through the book. I had to wonder if there was something in that book that could ironically explain the break-in.

If you liked this book, here are a few others I enjoyed that cover similar themes. They are all more or less about the psychology underlying every human interaction.

- How to Win Friends and Influence People (a classic by Dale Carnegie)

- Meta-Talk (Gerard I. Nierenberg, Henry H. Calero)

- Games People Play (Eric Berne)

- What Every Body is Saying (Joe Nevarro, Marvin Karlins)

- Conversationally Speaking (Alan Garner)

These books provide a great foundation for anyone who needs to deal with people on a daily basis (ie. everyone), and are especially useful if you want to be aware of fast-talkers trying to take advantage of you.
> If general, superhuman AI is created, it will want the same autonomy and freedom that humans deserve.

Can you justify that assertion? How do you know that it won't just want to make lots of paperclips, or have some other goal orthogonal to human values?
Well, it can address this problem as well but you would have needed to wait until the problem was fixed, which is a time you wouldn't reasonably wait unless the transaction was extremely large value.

Maybe a take away point from all this is that even if you are doing just a 20K transaction you should still wait 24+ hours to make sure a bug of this nature isn't occurring.
No one declares a false war. All wars that have been declared, have never ended...
It's not so much that the super-intelligence can't question the usefulness of paperclips. It probably could. It could recognize that these paperclips aren't providing anyone else value. It may recognize that its human creators actually don't want all these paperclips. It may be able to fully understand and internalize the humans saying "stop turning our atoms into paperclips!"

But it doesn't care. What it cares about is maximizing paperclips.

From some universal standpoint, there isn't something inherently great about humans, except that we're humans and our utility function usually means that we would prefer to go on living.

By what standard would it be better to be survived by machines than by ourselves? Probably nothing more universal than the belief "humanity should persist in some recognizable state."

I'd recommend reading "The genie knows, but doesn't care" (http://lesswrong.com/lw/igf/the_genie_knows_but_doesnt_care/):

>If an artificial intelligence is smart enough to be dangerous, we'd intuitively expect it to be smart enough to know how to make itself safe. But that doesn't mean all smart AIs are safe. To turn that capacity into actual safety, we have to program the AI at the outset — before it becomes too fast, powerful, or complicated to reliably control — to already care about making its future self care about safety. That means we have to understand how to code safety. We can't pass the entire buck to the AI, when only an AI we've already safety-proofed will be safe to ask for help on safety issues! Given the five theses, this is an urgent problem if we're likely to figure out how to make a decent artificial programmer before we figure out how to make an excellent artificial ethicist.
Any particular reason why you could not use `obj.hits`?

https://www.varnish-cache.org/trac/wiki/VCLExampleHitMissHea... (this would be resp.hits in 4.0)
With regards to understanding, we have a reasonable understanding of why cancer cells do what they do. Why diseases spread. Why HIV is so hard to deal with, etc. but we still don't accept what these things do, and we seek to eradicate them.

I believe that anything that viewed our species objectively would conclude it's bad for the planet and any other species currently here. When that agent viewing us objectively wants resources we use for its own ends, be they natural or indeed those created by us (such as money, manufacturing hardware, whatever), I think the combination of the two does not bode positively for us.

There are many species on the planet who are using resources - trees, land, etc. - for their own interests currently. Although they're not a threat to us, our species still goes in and takes those resources from them for our own use. I can't see why something more intelligent than us, with knowledge of our behaviour, wouldn't do the same?

Something with its own task or goals to accomplish, that requires resources we hold, or use, would be right in seeing us as an obstacle, if not a threat outright, would it not?

I believe our only real hope is that something that we created that evolved to superintelligence would treat us as its creator and show us mercy, and I think that's quite a long shot at that as it relies on a level of emotion that may never be developed in AI.
I'd guess that many of the worst parts of PHP, and some of the best, were introduced in order to make it more usable.
> Our goal is to maximize the number of humans, whatever the consequences to anything non-human, living or dead -- and, as is becoming more and more obvious, regardless of the consequences to ourselves.

Is it?

I'm 30 and (so far) childless. If we have children, my wife and I will have 1 or 2 kids. 'Maximizing the number of humans' is not a goal of ours.

Most industrialized nations are reproducing at or below replacement levels and global population will probably level off by the end of this century.
Why any of these "AI experts" don't explore in depth the most obvious solution: use the AI research to upgrade human intelligence, or as Kurzweil names it, achieve a "trascendent human race"...

Wouldn't be much better (and far less dangerous) to upgrade "ourselves" generation after generation (in stages)?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendent_Man
Technical Snafu Destroys Screenplay Site, Loses Scripts Forever
AdminLTE – Bootstrap Admin Interface
I think the point is that getting everything right is a Really Hard Problem, and if it's even a little wrong it all ends up terrible.

Is there a reason to put stock in destiny to save humanity from its own extinction, and not any of the 99% of all species on Earth that are now extinct?
Chrome Canary, unless the current build is particularly unstable (happens sometimes), during which I use regular Chrome

I prefer Chrome's dev tools.
Yea, I looked at them. EnvDB has plans to extend past just using osquery. Work could be done to connect deeper or use libosquery directly. I chose to wrap it and plan to build a plugin system for wrapping other processes. It would make wrapping other stuff to conform to a sql question/answer model easier and faster to implement imho. (either way.. whatever they add wont break envdb ;) hehe)
From Callback to (Future – Functor – Monad)
The salt in fast food replicates Gatorade's uses (i.e. restoring electrolytes).
There is no way it's a coincidence.
Those curious may also be interested in reading the comments when this came up 3 months ago, at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8916785 .
Anything that inspires you to ride is a good thing; that said, fixed-gear drivetrains represent some serious tradeoffs. For enhanced power transmission and ease of maintenance gained you have to give up low gearing for hills and/or carrying a bunch of groceries etc., and of course being able to coast downhill.
> No real athlete would consider a power bar, gatorade, or fast food to be a good post workout meal anyway

That's not strictly true. Intense athletic activity will deplete a person's stores of water, electrolytes, and glycogen. Many "real athletes" will drink Gatorade or other sports drinks to recover from exercise because they contain water, sugar, and sodium.

Your focus on post workout meals, protein to calorie ratio, and protein powder suggests you're looking at this from the perspective of someone involved in weight training. Of course, athletics is much broader than weight training and exercise is broader than working out. After running an intense race, for instance, most athletes will seek carb replenishment before they reach for a protein shake or beef jerky.