janosett

I hope we’ll eventually be able to find a hybrid approach, where some teams at a company can be fully remote and others can require presence in the office. As long as this is all communicated up front, I think it would cater to folks with different preferences.

It may not be purely altruistic, but seems like a net good. Participants aren’t under any obligation to work for Google, and for some participants working for Google might be a desirable opportunity! If not, this is a chance to get experience working on impactful open source projects and get paid for it.

Personally I think it’s great when incentives align this way.

Unity is pursuing cloud because there is such a large opportunity. Even in the world you imagine where WebGL games take off multiplayer net code, matchmaking, server hosting, live ops, etc. could remain large markets.

Today, most large game companies do many of these things in-house — by offering services to solve some of these challenges Unity is hoping to lower the barrier to entry for smaller developers to compete and convince the larger ones that they would be better off using managed services instead.

I was involved in a mid-sized software company migrating from AWS to GCP. My experience was that the GCP team was very hands on, and that enterprise support was very responsive.

The support isn't perfect, nor is the product -- but I would say the level of customer service for GCP can't be compared to other Google products.

I agree, OO can be useful and this article doesn't add much to the conversation of when stateful objects and inheritance are the best choice vs. functions and composition vs. some hybrid.

That said, please consider the community guidelines:

"When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names."

Yes, I would openly encourage different types of work contracts in California / the US. I'd commit, for example, to 1-2 year auto-renewing contracts. Probably would need a few conditions:

* If I am terminated without breach of contract I still will receive full compensation (at least for some months).

* Contract may not be broken related to any unexpected health issues.

* No arbitration requirement if one side accuses breach of contract.

Of course this would benefit me more than the employer :-)

This is the risk with at-will employment in CA. The employer could very well decide after two days of you working there that they wanted to let you go -- there's no part of the contract keeping either side from ending things early.

I don't think it's unethical to leave after a short amount of time given the employer has no equivalent expectation.

The bottom line here is that there are essentially no repercussions when cars injure or kill cyclists. This needs to change, and hopefully we can also add proven separated bike lanes which make it safer and more efficient for cyclists as well as drivers.

A friend used one of these (the shorter models) as a coffee table -- I distinctly remember how hard it was to move the big, dense metal cube in and out of his room!

Fair points, and I agree on the need for a better initial estimate heuristic :-)

I don't know about this particular algorithm, but I believe some similar approaches only converge if you're estimating on values from some stable or slowly changing distribution. A monotonically increasing series would not be a good fit (nor a small dataset).

> they've committed to probably never getting laid for 7 lifetimes

> you would rightly deserve every glare and smirk received for presenting this thing

I think there's some valid criticism in your comment, and I don't think this design is very practical. That said, can we avoid this type of comment on HN? All kinds of geeks out there find things outside the norm interesting and I'm sure some community is interested in this type of hardware.

Shaming and insulting people who are interested in things you find impractical doesn't really fit with the spirit of HN, IMO.

EDIT to refer to guidelines:

"Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community."

While I would love quality discussion about politically charged issues like this, it seems like we can't manage to stay respectful. I think it might just be natural to follow suit with the divisive conversations happening in other forums.

What draws me to HN are the thoughtful, genuine discussions about topics around technology, science, and business. While not perfect, it often seems to dodge the political divisiveness and focus on common interest. I hope we can find a way to keep that spirit of camaraderie and shared interest.

> "We show that this architecture"

They are demonstrating a new technique, Gated Linear Networks.

> gives rise to universal learning capabilities in the limit

they claim to show that with an unbounded amount of time and memory (network size / # params) this architecture can be used to learn/approximate any function

> with effective model capacity increasing as a function of network size

Model capacity here refers to the ability to memorize a mapping between inputs and outputs. They show that a network with more layers/weights will "memorize" more.

> in a manner comparable with deep ReLU networks

"Deep ReLU networks" are referring to commonly used modern deep neural network architectures. ReLU is a popular activation function: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rectifier_(neural_networks)