mtrimpe

It sounds like you're describing Flow (as defined by the book [1]; not popular culture.)

For me that does indeed seem to be the most common denominator of 'proper' happiness.

[1] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/66354.Flow

But for that technology to work you have to re-encode the source stream for every desired bandwidth range which is not exactly cheap [1]

[1] https://zencoder.com/en/file-transcoding/pricing

If you ever find their suitcase which can be unzipped flat let me know and I'll pay whatever you want to have a couple of them shipped to Europe!

I really enjoyed the article but I hope that the conclusion is that it's now possible to live in a bubble (not meant pejoratively) where you don't experience sexism.

Being able to live in that bubble is probably dependent on class, status, confidence and certain personality traits; but it is possible and that's great!

It is really important though to realize that it is a bubble and to be mindful of where it ends and what happens when you hit the edges of the bubble.

Source: Being LGBT in Amsterdam and having lived in a similar bubble for a long time but eventually having it burst.

I think Claim 1 is actually more about determinism; that if by knowing all the inputs you can reliably get the same outputs what you have isn't consciousness.

Neural nets are somewhat starting to escape that dynamic but there still isn't a neural net that reliable pulls in a continuous stream of randomness to generate meaningful behaviour like our consciousness does.

Now to be honest; I'm not entirely sure if John Searle would agree that that is consciousness when we do get there but I do agree with him that deterministic consciousness is essentially a contradictio in terminis.

I honestly don't see how that's any different from the age-old "tabloid" papers (like Telegraaf for example.)

How will it not be effective? When I read an article on Blendle (Dutchie here) I don't like or think is worth its money I ask for a refund. They even ask you when you're asking for a refund so they know if the price is too high, article is too long or the content is too bad. It seems like, if anything, it would discourage clickbait...

> If we want a 'European Google' or European startups in general, we need to become less risk averse, more willing to reward the types of people needed to work in those companies and less obsessed about regulations.

I think we don't. Europe just isn't setup for breakaway successes in the way that the US is. And we wouldn't be able to stomach the societal cost even if we were to try.

Europe is built to enable a Mittelstand [1] though which also allows for lots of diversity and innovation and is why Germany is still an industrial powerhouse.

If Europe wants to compete it should do so on its own terms; except doing so is virtually impossible when companies can claim ownership of their users data because that inevitably leads to the massive centralized monopolies we're seeing now.

One thing Europe is good at though is pushing through laws which prevent companies from establishing harmful monopolies though and that is what Europe needs to do.

If in addition to "the right to be forgotten" Europe would push through "the right to own your data" and forced companies operating in the EU to return all user data (down to request logs used for analytics) to the user the dynamics of tech industry would change dramatically; and in a positive way for the user too.

That will take a while but I think, or hope, it will happen eventually and either way; it will have a much greater chance of success than trying to copy a model that is inherently at odds with a value system developed over dozens of centuries.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mittelstand

I found Build Your Own Angular [1] gave me the most understanding in the least amount of time. It's geared more towards understanding (and Angular 1 not 2) and not so much towards building stuff though so YMMV.

[1] http://teropa.info/build-your-own-angular

Ah okay. I meant 'bluff' in the sense that there's no objective value here so any discussion over created value is basically just a matter of opinion/gut feeling/confidence.

For me it was basically just a metaphor for negotiating over intangibles; without the apparent connotation of cheating your partner out of something.

Either you're projecting a lot into my choice of words or it's because English isn't my native language.

From my experience almost all cases where one party wants out and the other wants to continue (not just in tech) involve some amount of cash changing hands.

That amount being zero is just a special case for when very little value was accumulated. In that light giving "just walk away" as the general advice, even though it might be right in this case, is quite overly simplistic in my opinion.

And if your partner is also your friend you should also take that into account of course but from what I could tell the OP didn't mention anything about that.

Or more generally:

You currently have a share in the company which you want to sell. Without real revenue the company's value is almost entirely subjective. The right price then is basically what you can convince your partner to pay you for it.

If your partner calls your bluff and is prepared to scuttle the company that could well be $0. If (s)he believes in a bright future for the company it could just as well be $10+k though.

Regular neural networks were popular until they stopped delivering best-in-class results for a lot of problems.

Recent hardware made it possible to train more layers and they're now getting cutting-edge results in many areas again so they're now getting more attention again.

@jamii: For some odd reason you seem to be hell-banned. I couldn't find anything in your comment history to suggest why though :s

@mej10: Turn on showdead if you want to see jamii's response to your question.

Amen; I'm still flabbergasted by programmers not acknowledging that it's entirely possible to create a programming language which embeds our concept of privacy in cryptographic reality.

All you would need for this is to model each user's interaction with the system as a statement, where a statement could be either code or data, and then sign and encrypt these statements by default and encrypt the statement's decryption key with recipients' public keys as needed.

This might sound esoteric but we could already do this today just by taking something like Unison [1] and adding this encryption layer.

As geeks we should really own up to the fact that it's perfectly feasible to do this... and get working on it.

P.S. For a fun fact; at it's core such a language would pretty much be what John McCarthy described as 'the language for the year 2015.' [2]

[1] http://unisonweb.org [2] http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/3180

In Sweden all tax returns are public information and they seem to be managing quite well.

Then again; in all of Sweden everybody's tax returns are public information and their economy still seems to do just fine...

I'm not that up to date on the whole solar thing but I guess he then probably recommended not exceeding 600V (not W) for private uses.

The lawsuits were over high end equipment with higher ratings (I'm guessing voltage-wise) that had a small possible weakness which, when combined with installation which was too rough, ended up causing fires in hay-barns all over France.

The 36 stings was a record because he survived ;)

No particular tips on how to do it; but at least make sure you don't put too many in serial if you're at all concerned about fire safety.

My father was once involved in a big lawsuit over fires caused by faulty junction boxes and he swore he'd never let the total wattage exceed say 500, max 800, or so watts for panels installed on a house.

After all; it only takes a single slightly faulty contact and you essentially have an improvised arc welder on the top of your roof.

The Eurozone isn't necessarily that bad.

The main thing is that you can't tax by printing currency anymore which is a really easy way to levy taxes. That means you have to have an efficient taxation apparatus, tax the rich and poor equitably and be very careful with borrowing.

Greek's problem is that it isn't particularly strong in any of those and thus isn't really suited for being part of the Eurozone yet.

There's also the opposite route; where you manipulate the face and not the slider.

I remember reading some article about it where I think there were two axis; love vs hate and weak vs strong emotions I believe and by moving over the face you would see the facial expression change and select it by clicking.

That could also be an interesting approach for this...

It sounds like Brene Brown's (from the Ted Talk on vulnerability [1] ) book [2] address what might be your main concern.

[1] https://www.ted.com/talks/brene_brown_on_vulnerability?langu... [2] http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1604078588

That actually leads to a very interesting point; would self driving cars be vulnerable to adversarial imagery?

Neural nets are well known for being easily fooled [1] ... I wonder if you could create similar situations for self-driving cars.

[1] http://www.evolvingai.org/fooling

Or that they are inevitable results of mild neurological deficiencies; similar to e.g. dyslexia but more strongly stigmatized.

If you believe that attribution of consciousness to only yourself is a culturally developed feature (which seems plausible given the existence of many mystics who don't seem to do so) then it is very possible that in some people the machinery that is required to do so doesn't work properly resulting in varying degrees of schizophrenia.

At it's core money is merely a concept used to determine deservingness though. It lets us answer the question "does this person deserve X," where X can be providing them services/goods (or not.)

At the moment money is a rather contorted and easily manipulable proxy for deservingness though which is the cause of a lot, if not the majority, of the world's troubles.

There's no technical reason though why we couldn't for example determine deservingness through interpersonal distribution of value; like PageRank but for people.

Can confirm. There's nothing special about the ASML case.

There are a few exceptions in Dutch IT but, unsurprisingly, they are mostly staffed with internationals.

I couldn't agree more. Another thing to keep in mind is that it can be really hard to continue pulling off the confidence game you need when you're being groped and propositioned.

What I'm wondering about most though is how YC is handling these issues. If I'm not correct they once issued a warning to investors that bad behavior like this would mean they're out.

Did the groping during Demo Day get reported? And is that investor now indeed no longer welcome to YC? And what about YC-related investors proposing dates with founders... are they still in?

If I understand it correctly it's like Typed Racket with a purely functional AST which is also a content-addressable Merkle-tree and a UI with paredit-style type correctness.

I came here to complain about calling things 'next-generation languages' when it's obvious that a next-gen language would have to have a purely functional AST.

Turns out Unison has that; so you've got my interest!

I agree with the other comments though that these (amazing) salient details could be communicated a bit more succinctly ;)

P.S. I have a presentation up at https://speakerdeck.com/mtrimpe/graphel-the-meaning-of-an-im... which lists some of the real-world benefits of such a language... feel free to use it for inspiration.