yohui

Well, "make.girls.moe" is the URL and name of the tool.

According to the technical report [1], they used character portraits from Getchu [2] for training data. A cursory glance shows that the overwhelming majority of the characters are female. As a result, the characters the tool generates are likely to appear female to our eyes.

After the code is open sourced, perhaps someone should try to create make.boys.moe using character portraits from otome games [3].

[1]: 12.8 MB PDF, http://make.girls.moe/technical_report.pdf

[2]: example from report (possibly NSFW?), http://www.getchu.com/soft.phtml?id=933144

[3]: games with a female protagonist and many male characters, https://vndb.org/g542

> Chromium-based browsers do not support user styles

Does anyone know what gorhill means by this? Stylish for Chrome seems to work fine: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/stylish-custom-the...

Am I missing something? (Probably, but what?)

There's strong bipartisan opposition to civil asset forfeiture: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/07/session...

The only question is whether Congress or the Supreme Court will strike it down first.

Baidu has long had an uncluttered, Google-like homepage, e.g. in Jan 2010: https://web.archive.org/web/20100101155014/http://www.baidu....

It's true that before its departure Google China was losing market share to Baidu, reportedly at least in part due to government throttling which slowed Google's service to a crawl: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/6143553...

Still, Google China's share of the market was not negligible. The article above claimed it had only just dipped under 30%; StatCounter (accurately or not) claims Google China was still above 40% in early 2010: https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share/all/ch...

Either way, that's a significant fraction, more than Bing has ever had in the US. Not to mention the size of the Chinese market or future growth potential (consider what Google could have done with Android in China).

Google could have responded to the pressure by seeking to appease the Chinese government. Other companies have done so, many profitably. Google did not.

The GTX 1080's current MSRP is also $500, though, and it's been on the market for over a year already.

Also, those numbers only represent the "minimum FPS range" for select titles. While minimum FPS is important, the picture is incomplete without other figures such as average FPS.

Plus, AMD clearly cherry-picked one of the benchmarks (Deus Ex MD, presumably using DirectX 12) just to lower the GTX 1080's range in that comparison: https://www.pcper.com/files/review/2017-07-30/vega-35.jpg

It's marketing's job to shine the best light possible on their product, of course, but it says something when Vega still doesn't look terribly impressive despite that effort.

While the technology exists, so-called "terminator genes" have not been implemented due to opposition from anti-GMO activists and other groups: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_use_restriction_techno...

Update: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/07/google-denies-claims...

Perhaps the BBC spoke to someone at Google who said the news feed would be available via the web – à la https://news.google.com or https://newsstand.google.com/ – which the reporter misunderstood to mean Google.com itself would display the news feed?

It just seems anomalous that such a great change would be announced with so little fanfare (a single sentence in the article). I need to see confirmation before I believe it.

Google's blog post talks about introducing the newsfeed to the Google app, but I don't see any mention of Google.com: https://www.blog.google/products/search/feed-your-need-know/

Anyone know where the BBC found this confirmation?

China also restricts democracy and access to the internet, but that's not to say the US wouldn't be harmed by a move in that direction. China has different strengths and weaknesses; the US would be ill advised to give up its own strengths.

They're bringing it back: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/06/onedr...

> Can anyone explain why 999 is not the best emergency number ever chosen?

Numbers with widely separated digits such as 911 in the US or 119 in Japan are less likely to be accidentally dialed than numbers with similar or identical digits such as 999 or 112. As the article notes:

"However, around 35 per cent of calls do not involve actual requests for help, with the majority of these made by children playing with home phones or people accidentally dialling 999 or the European emergency number 112, often from a mobile handset in a pocket or handbag."

Though phones which map the emergency number to speed dial may negate the advantage.

Accidental calls waste time and potentially divert resources from real emergencies.

Stargate being a notable exception: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Program#Stargate_Comm...

Which reflects how in real life the Air Force does have more to do with space than the Navy.

Abe isn't an American conservative. Even European conservatism isn't a one-to-one match with the American version, much less Japanese conservatism.

> I don't make any particular claim about how the government identified the source. They also have access logs and apparently only 6 people accessed the document.

Thanks for pointing that out. I've edited it to simply say "via other methods", especially since other comments say the source did not directly send the info via her work email.

> I do think that The Intercept bungled this in not stripping the watermarks; I don't shield them from criticism even though I value their reporting. But I do not necessarily accept the government's version of events. Parallel construction is not unheard-of.

If the Intercept did make the mistakes they apparently made (if not they're free to deny it), does it matter whether or not the parallel construction theory is true?

I think tanderson92 is claiming that the source was actually identified via other methods, so the material provided by the Intercept played no role in identifying the source. Hence the Intercept did not accidentally reveal their source but is being portrayed as such in order to discourage people from leaking to them.

Personally, while that scenario doesn't sound impossible I think the likelihood is being overstated due to motivated cognition: if you like the Intercept you would like to believe they did nothing wrong, but in reality people do make mistakes.

Mute tab seems to be enabled by default now, so they must have changed their minds a while ago.

EDIT: Found an article: https://venturebeat.com/2015/10/20/you-can-now-mute-tabs-in-...

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14463732

Something like Google Contributor, which was just relaunched today?

https://contributor.google.com

Discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14467702

Eh? I don't see much content in revelation's comment?

As for the images you posted, I checked out EasyPhotoEdit and thetop10antivirus.com and neither site appears actively harmful (the former looks like an online photo editor and the latter an antivirus comparison page), so while the ads may be distasteful I'm not sure they should be called malicious ads since that's usually reserved for actual malware.

Doesn't the "Do not allow any site to show notifications" setting cover that?

chrome://settings/content#notifications-section

> I'm on chrome right now, and copy and paste is hidden away in a menu. And the keyboard shortcut for it isn't mentioned. How do you think people learned the keyboard shortcut in the first place?

Copy and paste are also in the right-click menu, and the keyboard shortcuts are shown there.

That's not what I got from the article. It says the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit based its decision in this case on the precedent set by one of its own previous decisions in 1990, which apparently ran contrary to the last Supreme Court decision on the matter back in 1957. The Supreme Court has now confirmed that the 1957 ruling still stands and the Court of Appeals was wrong.

> The Federal Circuit denied the transfer by relying on one of its precedents from 1990, which loosened the geographic limits on patent cases. Heartland urged the Supreme Court to overturn that decision, arguing that the high court's own precedent from 1957 held that patent suits are governed by a specific law allowing suits only where defendants are incorporated.

> On Monday, the Supreme Court agreed with Heartland. Writing the opinion for the court, Justice Clarence Thomas said that, contrary to the Federal Circuit's rationale, the U.S. Congress did not change the rules over where patent suits may be filed since the 1957 decision.

paulmd already put up a list, so I won't repeat it. Ars Technica sums it up:

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/03/amd-ryzen-review/

> Indeed, Ryzen's 95W TDP looks impressive compared to the 140W TDP of Intel's 6900K, a similar 8C/16T processor based on the Broadwell-E architecture. But in practice, Ryzen pulls just as much wattage from the wall as the 6900K, in some cases slightly more. Considering just how power-hungry Bulldozer was, that remains a significant achievement, even if it means that overclocking headroom isn't as high as some might have hoped.

Google Voice still does offer free domestic US calls. They kept renewing the one year free offer until they just declared it free indefinitely.

Mostly agree, but AMD's TDP estimates are slightly optimistic and in reality Ryzen's power usage is much closer to its Intel counterparts.

In terms of public perception, perhaps. In reality? The parent comment is correct: we let ourselves pick out the parts we didn't like, with a dash of knee-jerk opposition to "secrecy" on top, and completely ignored the broader context (trade, security, and international politics).

The good news is, against all odds, it looks like the other TPP members might forge ahead anyway even without the US (for now): https://www.google.com/amp/asia.nikkei.com/amp/Politics-Econ...

It wasn't concern for little countries or even anti-IP sentiment that killed the TPP in the US, though that provided useful cover, but nativism as embodied by Trump.

New Zealand, one of those little countries, just ratified the TPP a few days ago to "send a message" in support of free trade despite the US withdrawal:http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/330574/nz-govt-ratif...

Another discussion thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14292651

Article: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/05/googles-fuchsia-smar...

Original source: http://www.hotfixit.net/single-post/2017/05/03/How-to-build-...

See discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14292651

Mozilla was working on a Metro version of Firefox, too, but canned it due to lack of interest: https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2014/03/14/metro/