jongraehl

That's not true. You can call an instance method from anywhere given an object. There's just no implicit 'this' in a static method.

Let's leave aside the current crop of folks who're still reclining in the easy insight of "there is no objective truth".

If you don't want to seem like an idiot, then don't write like an idiot just because recent descriptivist dictionaries were pleased to take note of the increasingly widespread misuse. You will be judged and you won't always have time to explain your principled write-like-an-idiot stance.

Unless you couldn't care less how you come off, because you already care the minimum possible amount.

"there are cases of vegetarians endorsing mcdonalds" - more likely, that account did click 'like'. however, paid publicizing of past likes that way is slimy and users didn't give any meaningful consent to it.

Braces combined w/ something like clang-format or gofmt are clearly better. Perhaps a really advanced editor (that most people don't use) could offer a similar experience for braceless (sig. indent) languages.

Short braceless code typesets beautifully, but you can probably get a similar effect w/ an appropriate 'braces highlight at lower contrast when autoindented as expected'.

Poor Greece. Exports so low. Wages and local prices so high. But nobody will hire anybody. They voted for the impossible. Better inject some more capital; they're expecting it.

That's how it is in Mexico, too. They leave some unfinished faux-second-story attached to their building and never pay full property tax on the value of property-with-one-completed-story. Re: "who starts ..." why don't you search before you post?

Is this a joke? Jobs pay what they pay. You don't fix things for other people based on your personal version of fairness, although you're free to pay employees in your own company whatever you like and they'll accept.

You're also advancing a "behind every great tech dick is a great female fluffer" narrative, which isn't helpful.

Although I don't read LessWrong much any more, people always seemed willing to talk about their actual beliefs in depth. It's about as male-heavy as HN, I guess. There was, a long time ago, some controversy over 'here's what you need to do to get more women', which, as you'd expect, enraged a few folks.

Surely you can admit that Americans are less caste-loving. We treat talented individuals of all races+genders+GLBTQBBQ pretty damn well compared to the majority of the world (the mentally ill, on the other hand ...). I give us an A-, globally speaking.

The reason I'm so confident is that I, and everyone I know, personally welcome and would hire and help competent women and bright-but-just-starting-to-ascend-the-learning-curve ones too. I've coached a female colleague in preparation for a successful job talk at Google, for example (same as I'd help any colleague I thought had a shot and asked me).

I've admitted that I don't know the culture in every company and part of the U.S. and do think if we're serious about protecting women from unfair discrimination we need to screen out whoever, due to cultural differences, cannot be professional in hiring and working with women). Professionalism is a pretty low bar and I'd expect even H1Bs from more gender-traditional cultures to be able to pass it, no matter their private preferences+beliefs.

Extremely certain, except of course for workplaces outside my experience, which is most of them. One thing I hadn't considered when I first posted was the impact of H1B workers, which I guess would vary depending on the culture of origin.

Importing foreign workers obviously isn't to make the workplace representative of the local citizens or even residents.

I know that women in tech experience a different brand of socially awkward interactions than men suffer, but to suggest that there's bias against them making it more difficult to succeed (as opposed to the opposite - people rooting for them and ready to to help) is just a bridge too far for me.

I wonder why they don't just use GHC with some customization to make the default eval strategy less lazy. I understand why someone might prefer more predictable (strict) evals by default.

John Carmack's "we are having a hard time hiring all the people that we want. It doesn’t matter what they look like." is pretty much all you need to say, over and over, until they give up.

There are two problems w/ 'white male' dominated engineering fields (really, male, unless you insist on the slander that asian+indian are 'honorary white'). One is optical. It just looks bad to shallow thinkers who don't care to pause to find out what the pool of able+willing workers looks like.

The other is that techies are too insecure about their value and virtue; they're inclined to actually respond in good faith to slanders like this one. Big mistake. You do see also occasional diversity attacks against the really high earners (managers, sales, finance, corp. law, certain posh local FD/PD, maybe some doctors?) but since they don't seem to flinch much, they're pretty much left alone.

Yes, everywhere I look around me are a bunch of guys. (maybe 10-20% women). Yet I'm certain women are welcome. Sorry, they just are.

In CA this costs $800/yr minimum no matter the income.

As long as you're doing your training offline and shipping the resulting learned models, I don't see this is a big risk. If you're planning on shipping software that can learn online, then sure, use something else for that, or ask for a better deal from FB.

I wonder what would happen if every company offered patented algorithms under these terms. Still wouldn't stop patent trolls, I'd guess.

"We made a great prediction that didn't pan out because others also acted on the same prediction" or "the future just didn't turn out like the past in that particular data-mined aspect and we don't know why"? I know which story I'd want to tell were it my unprofitable system.

Clearly we should replace it with a more pornographic test image, since that's the most common use case.

1. min-wage raises are so modest and so slowly phased-in (in the US) so to not produce smoking-gun employment drops, and employers prepare in advance for them, so sloppy underpowered studies don't show any large effect. marginal effects are small and so you need a powerful study.

2. do you want people who receive food stamps etc. and aren't hireable at $8/hr to have any legal on-the-books employment options or not? either way they're getting the food stamps.

3. I personally would rather see more Costcos+Trader Joes than Wal-marts+McDonalds, so i want to believe your 'bad employers winning' unless we force higher pay, but presumably people won't work for bad employers, so i don't see where your forecast is coming from. anyway it seems a little cargo-cult. you can't just start paying $20/hr instead of $8 and suddenly beat Costco.

Author is an expert, and correct. In the linked video he mentions that the difficulty of creating a sharp analog high-pass filter is in practice completely mitigated by oversampling, which is described in the Wikipedia article on DACs.

Suppose you have a 96khz DAC coming from your computer. Surely you see that a computer can solve for the nyquist reconstruction of some lower sample-rate recording (e.g. CD audio) to that sample rate, and then (still in digital 96khz) remove ALL the noise between say 21khz and 96khz, at which point a final analog filter will have an easy time leaving 0-21khz unmolested while killing all higher frequencies, right? It's practically implied by what you wrote. Per what OP says, that's more or less the effect of any DAC you'll use today.

I guess it doesn't matter to human ears with a well-mastered 16 bits, but the video linked in the OP explains that typically dithering noise is shaped (toward frequencies we're less attuned to). The models used to lossy-compress also typically put more noise in some of the higher freqs.

Anyone have a hint for using G-Maps (or making a homescreen shortcut) to navigate home address that won't send me to the wrong place, or make me wait, in case of slow internet?

This seems fairly basic functionality so I may be missing something. I've even been sent toward a place 30 miles east of home, repeatedly, trying to select the autocompletion of 'home'.

As wrong-footed as Uber appears lately, don't take buzzfeed's word for anything. Dishonest trash-talking + a financial conflict of interest. Headline-baiting 'journalists' trying to steal attention+emotion for profit w/ gossipy attacks do need to consider their own glass house, especially when their sole productive output is stirring up drama.

Being agnostic on the Uber CEO's character (don't know him) I'd caution him to stop giving material to a nascent angry mob and those stoking it.

Conclusion is not supported by what came before:

> If someone had designed a work regime perfectly suited to maintaining the power of finance capital, it’s hard to see how they could have done a better job. Real, productive workers are relentlessly squeezed and exploited. The remainder are divided between a terrorised stratum of the, universally reviled, unemployed and a larger stratum who are basically paid to do nothing, in positions designed to make them identify with the perspectives and sensibilities of the ruling class (managers, administrators, etc) – and particularly its financial avatars – but, at the same time, foster a simmering resentment against anyone whose work has clear and undeniable social value.

I had the same mistaken first impression.

Poor people do prison time and hard drugs more often (both of which might shorten a telomere). I also expect that physically measurable psychological stress is worse for poor (than for type-A work-stress junkies - probably that's more eustress due to control).

Since she finds a strong shorter-telomere association in neither equally sweet juices NOR in diet soda, this result probably just unhealthy-lifestyle-correlation (e.g. drug addicts and undiagnosed diabetics drink more soda). Also, “The extremely high dose of sugar that we can put into our body within seconds by drinking sugared beverages is uniquely toxic to metabolism” (from her Time interview) seems an overreach. A properly functioning metabolism can handle some sugar, even in a spike.

Paul, why do you say it's wrong that Float(Long.max - Int.max) is equal to Float(Long.max)? Float has less than 32 significant binary digits, and Long.max - Int.max has the same MSBs as Long.max. You would need to use Double to see the difference. I'm not sure what implicit conversions/promotions have to do with that - you want a warning or error when going from Long to Float? That would be reasonable. You can even lose significant digits between Int->Float and Long->Double even though they have the same total number of bits, so you could require those to be explicit. (from a slide in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TS1lpKBMkgg )

Read https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/22815528-anki-essentials (Anki Essentials) to get started.

Spending a lot of time commenting and, especially reading comments, is usually sad-making, as you're likely avoiding a better alternative as you would with a video game.

As well, there unhappiness-producing currents in many "we are all so smart" commenting fora, but I expect most people can expect a positive or at least enlightening experience if they're wise enough to avoid ego-tussles.

If you find you're getting less out of a group than you used to, likely you've grown more than the group. You wouldn't necessarily have done better to avoid it in the first place.

If you don't score yourself by how much better you're doing than peers (or yourself yesterday), it shouldn't be too hard to be content+optimistic, provided you're lucky enough to be healthy + intelligent + free of bad relationships.

What seems natural for most of us, though, is to become desensitized to what's good and feel only about the surprises, which eventually end up negative (mean-reversion and things over-enthusiastically taken for granted - I'll always win, they'll always love me, etc.)

I think knowing that helps a little. Just like it helps knowing that your blue mood when you're sick will pass on its own as you recover.

Some people are naturally more or less happy, I'm sure, in their baseline no-surprise state. I wouldn't worry about it until someone figures out how to change it. As long as you have energy to want+do things, you're ok.