skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
No. But yes.

There are laws which set out exceptions to other laws. Law enforcement agencies "qualify" for these exceptions in the actioning of their duty if and only if they are respecting any limitations present in those exceptions and all law not explicitly updated by those exceptions.

Though I'm no lawyer, nor am I even an American, so what do I know?!

As a related-but-not-really-directly for instance: in the UK the emergency services (including the police) have exceptions allowing them to break certain driving related laws, but while doing this they must display their presence obviously, with at least the flashing lights and where necessary their sirens, so other road users are aware that a speeding vehicle may be about to enter their locality and can safely respond to that circumstance. The blues and twos are not just to get people to move out of the way, they are to inform other road users that you are there and may be speeding or performing other manoeuvres that are not normally permitted (or, at least, are generally frowned upon). Though while the exceptions allow breaking other rules in certain circumstances, there are both specific exceptions to the exceptions (there are limits to how fast the police can go in urban areas and so forth) and they are always couched in wording that means that general due diligence must be followed (the police are expected to use their judgement so even if operating within the set limits they could be reprimanded & charged if they cause damage/injury/death and it is successfully argued that no reasonable person would have taken the offending action under those circumstances.

Of course with agencies like the FBI there is a greater level of secrecy, so enforcement is more difficult. Who watches the watchers when the watchers can arrest/detain/prosecute you for watching?!
To me, this line sums up the whole discussion:
"If a worker is told where to work, what their rate is, and does not control who orders the work (can't make client hire/fire decisions) they are an employee."

I have a feeling that Uber and the other "sharing economy" companies have very bad news coming.
I'm possibly missing some subtleties but isn't this "we can automatically optimise image processing kernel assembly code" rather than the ridiculously clickbaity headline?

And couldn't Adobe just recompile those routines with a newer compiler/assembler/whatnot?
React is an exciting future
Something like an RTG would make sense. An actual, plutonium-based RTG wouldn't.
Which do you want to know? (as it affects the answer greatly). And how short is "SHORT TIME"? For certain small values of "SHORT TIME" the answer is come back when you have more time.

How to apply machine learning using Python? (then scikit learn related materials).

How to tinker with machine learning implementations? (then which one are you trying to tinker with and what problem that isn't solved in the standard libraries is your concern?)

The theory of machine learning? (then "The Elements of Statistical Learning" and "An Introduction to Statistical Learning", but that is in R not in Python)
"All incivility" ? I guess not in the sense that one person publishing something that absolutely nobody else wants to receive is not communicating. But this discussion is considering communication that at least two people want to partake in, but a third party does not want them to. I would classify all such communications as legitimate - my justification is along the lines of the End to End principle and the math that makes it possible to implement robustly.

> There's a big difference between a platform and a protocol

Yeah, which is why we're even discussing this topic. But by the same logic, users are rightly free to judge and complain based on their expectations - Reddit Inc isn't entitled to the community. All centralized forums eventually die (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9867142), but that doesn't mean we should condone their locally-optimal actions while they're doing so.

Furthermore, community moderation is actually irrelevant to this discussion, as moderation (apart from government censorship) was supposed to be left up to the individual subreddits.

As far as decentralized protocols, "identity verification" is much stronger than what's needed and would be the path to madness (open to legal extortion, etc). What's essentially needed is a proof of work so that bad actors (whether one defines that as spammers or your standard youtube commenter) have finite amount of "energy", while nyms that prove worthwhile are unencumbered.
Interesting take - How does one maintain Passion about something they are not good (or improving) at? I get that, day one a musician does not have the skills, but would they maintain that passion if they were not getting better?

Passion overtime + participation = improving knowledge.

A new person who is passionate, will quickly outpace the person who is not.
Even if you had a 100% guarantee that the casino would pay with no upper bound, it still isn't worth paying more than few dollars for a lottery ticket.
This Week’s Cloud Computing Jobs – AWS Solutions Architect Openings
Care you explain why exactly you think this stuff is worth considering? I have to admit, I'd never heard of either before now, but a quick reading of the Wikipedia page on Plasma Cosmology does not leave me with much enthusiasm for the topic.
Ahhhh, fusking a post really makes it much easier to take the high ground doesn't it?

You've admitted it yourself - not only has the UK has started jailing "Internet bullies" but Canada has recently begun taking this to an even further extreme by jailing a man for 6 months who simply disagreed with a feminist shaming campaign planned out on a [different] young man:
http://www.infowars.com/man-faces-6-months-in-jail-for-disag...

I don't see the US not following this pattern in the near future as well.

Try telling someone who has been the victim of a Twitter doxxing, or had their personal information shared online, that they can "just ignore it" when harassment from justice bots spills over into their real life. Simply deactivating your accounts on these platforms doesn't render immunity.

If you don't see direction in which the discussions you share on the Internet is going, one should simply follow the Google Ad / Zuckerberg anti-pseudonym zeitgeist going on in a global scale today.

Now, I'll agree with you that the difference in "scale" of repercussion is in magnitudes, but here's the kicker: If one were a dissadent in China, please tell me WHY you would choose LinkedIn as your platform to share your dissenting opinion on. Why would you seek out the service in the first place? These dissenting citizens are not waiting on bated breath for foreign companies to provide them a platform to voice their opinion. You assume way too much in that Chinese citizens NEED LinkedIn to share their dissenting opinions. Chinese-borne services such as Weibo follow the same censorship guidelines as well.
IMEI can easily be tracked from manufacturing to point of sale to the specific cell tower it is connected too.

Tampering with gsm equipment or importing unregulated equipment can land you in jail in many western countries.

Pre-paid Sim cards might not be available anonymously in many places. Some will require id, some will require a billing card for data and there are quite a few mixes in between that make purchasing such item an issue if your freedom is on the line.

Not to mention that it gives the investigator a point of sale which is very important.

Stingray or not as its just a nonsensical brand like a billion out there I made it very clear in my post that due to the attention cellular technology has received from law enforcement agencies over the past 20 years or so GSM and other cellular systems are easily trackable.
He doesn't explain how more information effects market scarcity, he's really just thrown that one out there with no explanation!
> So who said finding objective truth is more valuable than subjective truth? Yes, it helps more people, OK. But who says that is more valuable? Once you start assigning values, you'll find no objective justification.

I think there is consensus (at least among people, philosophers included, in their ordinary lives) on the value of helping more people. I can't persuade someone who has different values from me to change them, and I wouldn't try. But I think disagreements like the one I seem to have with the original post are more likely to be cases where we have similar values, but either disagree about the empirical facts, or one or other of us has made an error of reasoning.

> Finally, even the question of what constitutes knowledge is very tricky. The famous Gettier problem clearly shows that if we agree on a complete, robust definition of knowledge, we find that nothing we believe we know actually meets the definition.

Which is a flaw in philosophies that try to work with definitions. If we restrict ourselves to empirical predictions, Gettier's examples cease to be paradoxical.

> As to your statement about STEM vs. humanities people, I could debate your assertions from my own personal experience all day long, but the mere fact that you chose to make it tells a lot about you and your priorities. What's your point? That STEM people are smarter? Let's suppose that they are. So what? Does that make them more valuable?

Actually my assumption was that they're equally smart and my point was the opposite: that STEM education seems to impart some valuable abilities that those without STEM education do not have, whereas people without a humanities education seem to still have the supposed benefits of one. So my claim would be that an STEM education is more valuable than a humanities one.

> I think that is one question that is far more valuable than any answer you can find :)

Maybe we really do have different values. All I can say is that in ordinary, everyday life, I suspect you find questions (ordinary everyday questions like "where are my car keys?") to be only as valuable as their answers. And that in ordinary, everyday life, you find things valuable only insofar as they connect to ordinary, everyday life. You can construct a whole anti-inductive edifice of beliefs that stand alone, but if they're completely disconnected from anything in real life... well, I find I'm better off without them, and I expect you would too.
When I was learning, I wasn't a safe driver. I learned to drive because of its obvious utility, but the only reason to learn to fly would be for enjoyment. The process of learning to fly with the prospect of killing myself, or someone else, would not likely be fun. I'd always have that image of screaming fiery death at the back of my mind.

It depends what the margins are though. If it is the case that if you mess up the instructor can recover the aircraft, then there's not too much to worry about – you're not going to kill someone while you're learning, or at least not with any high degree of probability. But not knowing the margins, not knowing how safe learning is.... That's the thing, rather than what would happen if I did get good at it.
I'd say that this depends very much on the problem. There are problems that are more elegantly and intuitively solved recursively without necessarily ascending very far on the, e.g. parsers for nested-but-not-terribly-so data, say some applications of S-expressions or a protocol like DHCPv6, or traversal of tree structures known not to be tall.
I created a github repo (https://github.com/apeeyush/machine-learning) to store and organize the codes I used in Kaggle contests (mainly knowledge contests). Recently, I have participated in some vision and CTR prediction contests as well but could not update them here since the code is still very hacky. Will really appreciate any contribution from the community.
We've been hearing about the impending “end of capitalism” since the beginning of merchant capitalism in the 16th century. Mercantilism still thrives even when commodities are produced by non-capitalist production methods.
Why Is Programming So Hard? Learn to Code with Pseudocode [pdf]
Mashable opines to end anonymity on the internet
I've heard it said a few times by neuroscientists and doctors that the best thing you can do for your brain health is regular exercise (standard 30 minutes elevated heart rate stuff: like running or swimming).

Totally anecdotal but at least you can measure blood-flow to the brain and draw conclusions based on waste-product-metabolism, etc.
I don't know a recruiter or hiring manager that doesn't use it. That's the sole reason I use it for when applying to new companies they can vet my experience and work history.
unfortunately it is over now. will keep that link and definitely use it at the give away just before the final release
Estonia 100 square kilometers larger than thought
I have two distinct experiences giving a presentation to "executives". One was a CEO who is very widely known, and has a lot of respect. The other just got promoted after the person above him got axed.

When I presented to the first guy, everyone else in the room was half listening, on their laptops "multi-tasking". He was giving me 100% of his focus. When the demo was over he shot me several really insightful questions. No one else had any substantive comments.

The second he spent the whole meeting writing an email on his phone. When the demo was over, he said "great work, keep it up", got up, and excused himself.

One of these guy is a multi-millionaire, the other is unemployed.
Agree - code (the thing they built) + passion (they built it because they wanted too) + inquisitive (found a problem and developed an answer)

A person doesn't have to posses all these things to write good code. But they would be a great fit on the teams I like to work with.
The Met’s helicopter snap of Michael McIntyre is a wake-up call to all of us
Dependency does not mean government. A homeless man can be dependent on a church for food and shelter, but that does not mean governance.
You seem to have already concluded that a project that isn't seeing rapid, active development, is not suited for use.

There's a difference between "solid" and "moribund".
I think that will be the case for most families second car, but not their primary. People will own one family car, that's feels comfortable and contains personal items. The second car (today used largely for commuting) will be self-driving.
I find it interesting that writing this post he is using his own advice

Because this will help him In his task of helping his spouse to do the same
Yes they do. Do you really believe you're going to use your personal arsenal against the Federal Government if it decides to take some other right they agree with?
It sounds like everything is just black and white for you too though.

I assure you that it's possible for someone to only have one great passion without being an egotistical narcissist.
How to create and publish your first Node.js module
Considering turning my text-logo into one of these!
Are not the meetings properly documented and the actions minuted?
Crossposting to reddit.com/r/iamverysmart
lol - perhaps consider a job in growth hacking ;-)
Even better is the annotated version of the original jQuery release, which contains John's rationale about how things are the way they are.

http://ejohn.org/blog/annotated-version-of-the-original-jque...
Mapping Lexical Spread in American English [pdf]
Fine let's drop the analogies

> He stayed at his own computer. Typed in URLs.

I don't understand why everyone in this message thread is being so obtuse about how he accessed the site. It DOESN'T matter what method you use to access the system under the CFAA. The thing that matters is intent.

If you disagree with that then fine. And whether anyone can actually prove beyond a reasonable doubt what someone's intentions are is infinitely debatable. But the fact of the matter is that the prosecution proved in a court that weev knowingly accessed a portion of a computer system that he knew wasn't meant to be open to the public and that he knew he did not have authorization to access. It doesn't matter that all he had to do was type in a URL. He knew those URLs weren't meant to be accessed by him, or at least that's what was proven in court.

I'm not really trying to get into a debate about whether the CFAA is a good law, I don't really think it is. But there's certainly evidence that weev broke the law as it's currently written. Yea he got a 200 status code back and we can endlessly debate whether that should mean someone is given permission to access the site. But I think, and the jury/judge agreed, that weev wasn't just poking around their website thinking that those URLs were open to the public. I mean come on, this wasn't just some random user who happened to type in a URL not knowing what it was going to access. Weev knew what the fuck he was doing. Whether there's actually enough evidence to prove that is of course up for debate, but as the law is currently written I think he was guilty.
I looked and Wikipedia has "As of 2015, the vast majority of researchers openly reject plasma cosmology because it does not match modern observations".
I used to use this site: http://www.blenderguru.com/
Microsoft releases license terms for Windows 10: Biggest surprise? No gotchas
New Superfast Network Will Sync Machines Across America
Ironically in my neighborhood they put up meters on the neighborhood's main street, claiming that it would increase shopping. Due to the fact that the street was always packed with residents parking long-term.

It definitely did make a difference as far as finding a space, since us locals now have to park on the side streets. Not sure it shopping increased, or just the city coffers, though.
Village Starter Kit
Other than the fact that flat comments are easier to scroll through (for most i guess), I think flat comments allow you to comment overall in the forum which could mean your response can be applied to One or more posts at the same time. Usually a forum is meant for that. If you focus too much on one-on-one conversation, then may be staggered comments make sense.
I'm a Scrum Master who took over for a SM who was fired. The first thing I did was ban computers from the planning meetings.
If you're interested in writing a renderer yourself (which is obviously way cooler than using some tools), I'd recommend first picking up either "Fundamentals of Computer Graphics" by Shirley and Marschner or "Computer Graphics: Principles & Practices" by Foley and Van Dam. Once you understand the basics of computer graphics and especially of shading and ray tracing, I'd recommend picking up "Physically Based Rendering: From theory to implementation" by Pharr and Humphreys which is an excellent book that explains the State of the Art of photorealistic rendering. Once you understand how physically based rendering, path tracing, BSDFs and all that good stuff works you're ready to write your own rendering (or to implement a new SIGGRAPH paper in the framework provided by the book). It's a lot of fun writing your own renderer and you'll produce some beautiful pictures.
If you have time, Lee Smolin's book The Trouble with Physics is a captivating read.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trouble_with_Physics

Smolin makes a sosiological-historical argument, that from the 20s to 70s, the development in theoretical particle physics was done by trusting the "mathematical intuition", if the math was beautiful and predicted the existence of some particles, a bit later usually the experimental physicists found those particles. And the rewards and Nobel prizes went to those who did the math the fastest.

So the whole theoretical physics adopted this style of work, when someone proposes something new that looks interesting, everyone tries to do the math as quickly as possible, to be the first to get the results.

But then from the 70s to 00s, this flocking attitude was applied to string theory, and people just developed string math furiously, and it was left unnoticed that the theory was totally unrelated to any experiments.

So, Smolin suggests, for 30 years the best of theoretical physics went into a direction that may be totally separated from experiments. If this turns out to be true, theoretical physics pretty much lost 30 years.
This seems robust, but feels like more moving parts than are necessary.

I feel like HAProxy with PostgreSQL + Bucardo (multi-master + at least one slave) would achieve this, and net you fewer moving parts. Under what circumstances does this fail where the etcd-dependent solution succeeds?
In fact the above mentioned London Agreement on German External Debts, in most cases is not known by the germans making those remarks. Especially regarding greece, there are still roundabout 300 billions of reparation payments in discussion, compared to 80 billions of loss, in case germany would agree to a debt cut. We should be happy that greece people was polite to us till now. :)
Oh I forgot to give you this to help you sleep better at night:

http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~jms/papers/fpgavirus.pdf
They have a few of the top games in the social casino category on both iOS and Android. I work there and make some of the slots games. If you're a fan of gambling they're actually really good games even though you're not playing for real money.

https://zynga.com/games/zynga-poker
https://zynga.com/games/free-slots
https://zynga.com/games/wizard-oz-slots
I don't get this game. The explanation is so short and I have no idea what happens next when I click on another number.
Post updated with detailed list and links for each list item.

At studios I've been at, we did tests with various renderers. Sure, we could have rendered a film in Cycles, but it would have taken much longer.
Something you make in two minutes enables more interaction than this solution? I must work at a very slow pace...legends take me longer than I'd like to admit.
I've got to say I'm rather amused by the notion that type inference and GC are innovations of the last 20 years.

Regarding now vs. the 80s, we have much better tools for making assurance cases for critical software. So much progress has been made in both specification correctness and implementation correctness that I think the only way you could compare the two and say there hasn't been improvement is if you haven't tried to see what we can actually do now vs. then...
I didn't say anything could or could not be done with Cycles. I said there were 'tons of RSL examples'. Do you understand the significance of a history, and body of work available to start with, and not having to start from scratch? I was using BMRT in the 90s, and reading books about procedurally-generated textures. People wrote so many shaders in RSL, most available for you to copy, modify and re-use. I am assuming there are not nearly as many OSL examples as RSL examples or samples of code. I may be wrong. For the record, I'll use both, and I am happy to see Renderman as an option. I am particularly interested in OSL as a corollary to RSL. Sony used it successfully to counter Pixar's mention here. I am also eager to test my RSL chops again too!
The burden of proof here is on Cycles. There's 30 years of history showing off Renderman, and everybody in the CG industry knows that it's awesome. Not many people have even heard of Cycles. What movies have used it? Why is it better than the existing rendering software? Is it compatible with the Renderman spec? How easy is it to set up a render farm with it?
That is why I don't ask for "open source" contributions. Ideally, the candidate built their project to make money!

Christopher Hitchens- "Long describing himself as a socialist and a Marxist..." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Hitchens

I am a hardcore capitalist so he need not apply for my gigs :-)