high_derivative

My guess would be because HN likes sourcehut's open source approach (I still read it as 'Sir Hat') since its announcement on here. There are some projects that HN as a community tends to like and upvote just for visibility without feeling the need to comment on it.

Sorry, but my point stands. In Facebook's case, there is absolutely zero reason to assume good intentions, give the benefit of the doubt, have general good-will, or believe its employees regarding privacy aims.

'The off-Facebook activity setting isn't currently available to you right now.'

Smart, announcing it without it being usable, so when it's silently rolled out later people will have forgotten about it. Never change, FB.

Cynically, because he believes them on his side?

Strikes me as pretty ironic that student groups which are most active in no-platforming efforts now make a free speech argument.

"Instead, Tumblr has a new chance to redefine itself in 2019 and beyond"

So, Matt commented in the other thread that NSFW content is not coming back due to the difficulties around hosting and processing adult content (payment processing, advertising, everything).

Where does Tumblr fit in 2020 between Twitter, Medium, and Instagram? What's its medium?

I mean great if it works for you, but the happierco website gives me impressions of dystopian micromanagement on the management end, and performative happiness on the receiving end.

Maybe disclose that you work for them, too.

My inside-FAAMNG experience has been that most employees seem to be not interested in the politics and are primarily focused on doing good work (people in their 20s), or on putting in their 8 hours and going home to their families (people >30 mostly, of course they also want to do good work, just have additional new priorities in a young family).

Then there is a vocal minority who leverage that no individual's performance really affects the money printing machine. They blatantly view the company and its resources as a means to further their political goals.

They come across as incredibly entitled and tone-deaf against the actual working class or people actually suffering from oppression (say, women being incarcerated in Iran for decades for taking off their veils, or protesters in HK). No matter how petty and entitled the request, anything denied is interpreted as some larger act of "violence" against them.

What I didn't/don't understand is why management allowed that to happen. Either they actually believe in the political goals themselves, are afraid of the conflict, or believe it just does not matter for the company.

I think what management fails to understand often is that giving in to a demand is not viewed with gratitude but merely as accepting what's naturally right and good. In other words, giving in to demands 1..n does not give you credit when demand n+1 is posed. The ultimate conflict is just delayed.

For the topic of optimization, I recommend:

https://people.csail.mit.edu/jsolomon/share/book/numerical_b...

It will give you a decent introduction to optimization methods underpinning deep learning. Deep learning theory is optimization theory.

There are youtube lectures as well and Justin is a great lecturer.

I personally would not recommend the Goodfellow book. It's not a good book for newcomers, at best it's a quick reminder of how some things work on a non-rigorous level.

There seems to be a lot of downvoting irrespective of post quality.

I wonder if this is i) thread-specific due to possible brigading, or ii) a more wider tribalistic phenomenon. I have perceived (lost my old account from years ago) that downvoting more and more is plain disagreement with the opinion, not whether a comment is substantive. Could be completely off and biased, but at least in this thread it seems to be the case.

This is intensely interesting because everything points towards China never backing down, and protesters having nothing to win. The default assumption is continuity of the party and the system.

Yet, looking at history, systems are not that stable. The Berlin wall and Sowjet union seemed like they would not end.

I assume 3-letter agencies have vast amounts of resources dedicated to analyzing how to create the instabilities that may ultimately make such systems collapse.

Bottom line, historically speaking, we should not be surprised if China collapses. We should also not be surprised if the party keeps its tight grip for another 100 years.

I think this is a very common perception issue. I am at a university with enormous wealth concentration, but wealth is opaque and everyone orientates upwards.

For students without means or parents buying them toys, someone buying an iPhone on a whim because their old broke is rich. Having any money to spend on non-essentials is rich.

Students who can buy an iPhone on a whim because it's just a random expense for their parents would never think of themselves as wealthy - that's the people who go on first class trips and wear designer clothes without thinking twice.

The people who wear overpriced clothes and go on expensive trips don't feel rich either, they don't even have a building at the university in their family name, and no multi-generational wealth.

I briefly went out with the daughter of an Asian billionaire tycoon, the kind with lots of buildings named after. She never mentioned it or brought it up and I wouldn't even have known until it suddenly clicked about her name and the name of some buildings. I never asked her who she orientated upwards to, though. Some richer tycoon's family?

He was on suicide watch according to most articles on this. Which makes it more sinister.

n=1 but I if were considering the two options, I would simply not want one that has me owning more electronic waste (console). I am not sensitive to the price either way, but I am sensitive to owning more electronics.

Note: this is in the new nature machine intelligence journal which many leading academics in the field have argued against for reasons like that:

The article cannot be downloaded: "Complimentary shares do not allow downloading. If you have another access method, please visit the regular publisher article page in order to download."

More background: https://retractionwatch.com/2018/05/01/thousands-boycott-new...

F that. No need to read it either, it's a straight-forward uninteresting "neural networks applied to toy problem X" paper. No interesting use of structure or geometric deep learning, just brute-forcing with 10 billion samples.

I should clarify, I think there are a lot of good reasons for high inheritance taxes if reasonably structured. I meant disowning people who are still alive in a communist sense (do not want to start a discussion on socialism/communism though), i.e. the government literally deciding someone is not fit to own such a big piece of the means of production and taking it from them.

I am sorry but I am not following. What can be said about anything? That it will fail for some reason? Fine, but what does that have to do with the particular point of the ownership structures of German car makers?

The corrosive effect of misallocated inherited wealth. For context, BMW's biggest shareholders are the Quandt/Klatten family.

Through the entire supply chain, hundreds of thousands of jobs and massive impact on the wider economy, electrification, competitive effects in the energy market, and climate change, all depending on a handful of people.

People who (in this particular context) have no particular motivation for..really anything, with virtually infinite inherited wealth. Especially not to rock the boat or drive any vision forward.

That, in a nutshell, is why Germany's car industry is dying long-term. VW ownership same thing via Porsche SE.

I find this incredibly interesting, how entire economies ultimately lag and long-term may fail on the bottleneck of a few randomly selected people. Interestingly, there seems to be no good way out because disowning individuals for the collective good is a path that historically does not tend to work well for innovation either.

Its research is heavily focussed on showcasing new applications for Nvidia hardware.

So without having followed the story, some thoughts on designing large frameworks, where a programming language is possibly the among the most ambitious because design choices are so consequential.

In my iterations of learning to do this (in the open source machine learning space), there have been always five phases:

i) Ingest - use existing tools for years, try to build things and understand the subtleties of their limitations.

ii) Build something - if you were right about the limitations and identify ways to overcome them, people will recognize that and want to use what you build.

iii) Maintain and learn how your assumptions live up to user realities.

iv) Realize very likely that your first attempt at greatness wasn't all that yet, even if it becomes popular. Popularity is not a sign of what you building being well designed, just that the need for it may be great.

v) Build something based on the combination of your initial hunches and taste which got you into it to begin with, and your experience on building something large.

Iterate, and given enough talent and sweat, you might create something that is just right.

Being a computer scientist but not a programming language geek and looking at this, the project looks like a first attempt at ii), but is selling itself as a late iteration of v). Tech communities have very high standards and taste on design, so overselling is deadly.

Would you have some links to the backlash? Where are these discussions on his language taking place?

Note: written by a member of the Bakery's family

"Grandpa Gibson has resumed his favorite spot at a patio table outside our bakery. Before the protests, his time there was filled by conversations with passersby. But now, he often sits alone."

Very sad. I once read something that paraphrased to: campus activism for young people can be socially sanctioned sadism. A way to let hate and emotions flow at someone and let any decency go out of the window because the target deserves no empathy or dignity. They must be annihilated.

Just to clarify, I have spent the better part of the last decade at one of the institutions in my response. I have seen generations of students come and go. Your experience may differ but at least where I am, the qualitative change is this: earlier this decade, it's been really only small groups.

Now, with students born after 2000 and having grown up fully immersed in social media being on campus, what would have been relatively niche wokeness in 2010 is 'common sense' for many. Including extremely low tolerance for view point diversity.

Evidence needed, strongly. There is an incredible push happening at all levels of e.g. STEM, tech companies, everywhere, to get women. They receive special support, scholarships, extra application tracks, extra programs, preferred hiring, and boys are falling more and more behind.

Are you really trying to say that the Harvard-Stanford-Oxbridge woman is held back compared to, say, the plumber's son (no offence, a highly useful profession, but you will find few of their children at these unis)?

This is a fair point - the local cause is the one more accessible. Here is a counterpoint:

If you exalt a local event like the one in the original post (an arrest for a theft), or a speaker from the opposite political spectrum to terms like 'violence, hate speech, traumatizing' (words you will find in student newspapers and activism here), what is left for real events of actual drastic impact to society and the lives of others?

This kind of activism is a concept inflation that is tearing societies apart from both ends. An interesting article on this:

https://quillette.com/2019/02/14/the-boy-who-inflated-the-co...

I am a grad student leaving university soon enough, and this does not surprise me at all.

Especially at elite universities, there is this interesting phenomenon of mostly upper middle class white women from on average the most privileged upbringings in the western hemisphere arriving at a university they (anyone) could only attend by incredible privilege and luck. Yet they arrive fully convinced they have been held back by the patriarchy their entire lives. Same for other groups and their pet causes.

They find no apparent contradiction at being the most privileged of their generation (speaking of Harvard, Oxbridge, Stanford here), yet the smaller and local the cause, the more vicious the activism. Someone they disagree with dare speak on campus? Violence, trauma, discrimination, hate.

Getting arrested for taking off a veil in Iran? Genocide? Consumerism destroying the planet? Yawn.

I often see people on hn saying this is all blown out of proportion and a small vocal minority but when you talk to undergrads these days, you will realize these beliefs are not just a handful of people but carry weight across the student population.

Not least because opposition is shamed into silence. University admins are usually easily cowed submission on these causes, mostly because it does not cost them anything to uninvite/fire someone.

This article has incredible annoying spacing (one sentence per paragraph). Is this meant to read like an unrolled Twitter thread?

Content wise: I recently cancelled my Netflix again because despite a flood of new shows, all feel incredibly generic and formulaic. I like shows across genres, from teenage romance to sitcom to thriller, and I am looking forward to watching e.g. Narcos new season when it hits, there are also great one-offs like Maniac.

I just don't believe in the strategy of flooding their platform with their own content at this volume. Or rather, the type of content. If I remember correctly, plots and artistic decisions are made by committee, and it just shows very hard how plots are made to be subtly educational, not offend, just a lowest common denominator of what the data says.

Not sure it works. After finding myself browsing through too many evenings in a row, I always cancel until something I know I want returns for a new season, then resubscribe for a month.

Me too! One thing I am noticing is that because I often just use it to destress, I am not improving really, because it's all instinctive on 3 minutes.

The problem with improving seems to be that while I can play a few blitz games, taking time to work on game is more a separate occupation. I occasionally do the lichess practice thingies but without seeing much impact. Anything that can be done that helps but that is on the timescale of a few blitz games?

The number one quality inspector in a company should be the CEO, is he included in this?

It means they have fully subscribed to an intersectional victim culture that is obsessed with race, identity and oppression. It means giving platform to e.g. journalists inciting personal campaigns against e.g. Tim Hunt or whoever is the wrong-thinker of the hour.

Outrage sells so this is a rational strategy for them, it is just surprising they have a better reputation than, say, Fox News.