Y
HN Search
Hacker News Search
new
|
comments
|
top
|
jobs
1787
searching Neon…
1.
▲
2.
▲
3.
▲
4.
▲
5.
▲
6.
▲
6 ms
·
1.
▲
by
1787
5y ago
I was one of the people who built the "plugin based ranking model" at Semantic Scholar as an intern several years ago; it's a rare treat to get a blog post about what happens after you leave and they need to replace your syst
2.
▲
by
1787
5y ago
Yeah, I think the post author may be confused. I've migrated several high traffic gRPC services (basically TensorFlow Serving) from AWS NLBs to ALBs for the improved load balancing. It worked pretty much as desired (although a little e
3.
▲
by
1787
7y ago
Basque is not an ethnic identity? Wikipedia would seem to contradict that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basques https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basque_nationalism
4.
▲
by
1787
8y ago
I am annoyed by the article's use of Bill Gates to exemplify the "fortuitous circumstances that figure into every success story". Bill Gates and Microsoft is not "every success story". I would be surprised to find e
5.
▲
by
1787
8y ago
The "tech bro" angle is just clickbait. I am pretty sure that Foxconn, Tesla's Gigafactory, and a datacenter are not what is usually meant by "tech bro". Second, if cities believe that these tax breaks are good inve
6.
▲
by
1787
8y ago
It is true that an algorithm can be converted to a formula, and a formula to an algorithm, but it is unlikely a given useful algorithm could be generated mechanically from a (human-written, useful) formula. For example, you could write a fo
7.
▲
by
1787
8y ago
There exist counterexamples in the broader world. Historically in the Sinosphere it was commonish that two people might share a command of written Classical Chinese but not really be able to speak to each other. For a modern example, consid
8.
▲
by
1787
8y ago
"human convention of written language" is a bit much. Stroke order is almost as important as what the actual strokes are in the definition of a Chinese character, for example. Of course unless you literally watch someone write you
9.
▲
by
1787
8y ago
Discussion groups in small private spaces are a somewhat related but clearly and justifiably different issue from huge kinda-sorta-maybe-public fora like YouTube. Trying to conflate the two will probably just lead to confusion and muddle th
10.
▲
by
1787
8y ago
Yudkowsky flirts with tautology in the title - "well-kept garden" has keep right there explicitly and "garden" implies a caretaker. So almost by definition a well-kept garden won't persist without intervention. But
11.
▲
by
1787
8y ago
Speaking of established case law, we have from the very first page of Heller [1]: > The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia... [2] The Constitution encodes a value jud
12.
▲
by
1787
8y ago
I wouldn't be surprised if priests or monks had quite long work hours; imagine the RSI one might get from copying out whole books by hand. You could reframe as underemployment a lot of the extent to which jobs in the past were less str
13.
▲
by
1787
9y ago
This is sort of true, but the graph of citations is basically a DAG - very unlike the graph of hyperlinks on the web. From what I've seen it's not obvious that PageRank on a DAG tells you anything super interesting.
14.
▲
by
1787
9y ago
You've shown that many midwesterners are anti-progressive, but that is not the same thing as anti-intellectual. Furthermore, the optics of where they stand relative to young professionals in the sciences are just that - optics that don
15.
▲
by
1787
9y ago
Semantic Scholar is completely non-monetized (and will stay that way as far as I can tell) because Paul Allen pays the bills and has a public interest goal. Full disclosure: I worked on Semantic Scholar.
16.
▲
by
1787
9y ago
You can't just try and smudge the line between speech integral to criminal conduct and defamation and other speech. The way we avoid sliding down the slope is by requiring an immediate demonstrable harm - any fuzzy argument of the &q
17.
▲
by
1787
9y ago
I am a little confused by your formulation of relevance, or at least the "to what" implicit in it. If we are speaking of relevance to predicting the future or steering societal opinion I would say the more reductive an argument th