HN user
Developers that contribute to an open source code, or to the single maintainer of a open source project?
How is the payment distributed proportionally to each contributor?
Or is it the case that the lead maintainer can decide to receive funds from tide lift without paying the contributors.
Did the organist obtain permission (appropriate license) to do so?
Or is it the case he did but its not possible to communicate that to YouTube?
Very different problems, one is failure to understand copyright the other is YouTube having a poor user experience.
Its not cheaper per impact, however you need to buy bigger numbers, millions typically.
Which no 'modern' web developer would go anywhere near!
fair swap
Is this open to Europeans and have you heard of GDPR?
Too much language/syntax to learn in my opinion, prefer something succinct that I can build up from.
Don't kids get taught a functional language at Uni anymore?
It would appear it stopped at probably the same time they started teaching Java. Which is why some developers like my self are a bit amused by the younger generation be amazed by this 'new' thing.
Interested in others experience on this, was taught Pop-11, Miranda around 1996 at Uni.
Most people are ignorant then :)
Yep PR release, help keep shareholders happy.
However I would argue hiring a 'suit' who was CTO for a reputable knowledge based AI company 8 years ago, and since been in a strategic position during Googles recent progress is more valuable to Apple at this time than a well published researcher.
There is an assumption with some of these responses that you want to learn ML for career progression.
If so, are you really interested in ML or do you just think its the hot bandwagon of the moment which you want to jump on to get ahead? If that is the case, I'd suggest that perhaps that is a bit obvious and to identify something else that is less hyped and mainstream. Perhaps something which you can get ahead of the crowd on and ideally, have genuine interest in.
I did a 1st year Uni project using GA to evolve neural network topology in 1996 ... maybe I should dig that out and get me some VC $.
meh hate all these handouts based solutions, devalues the effort of the developers.
If I do something I'd rather get paid or not at all and I've chosen that, rather than cap out looking for tips.
Okay thats the bit that I was missing, seems a reasonable compromise!
Well having written a lot of C and a lot of data structures, particular in low resource devices, I'm well aware of the details needed to do so. I suspect many others are in the same camp. Pointers are hard, however after 10 years of practice there not so bad ;)
I feel that saying ohh you should never need to write your own pointer chain (linked list, trees etc) is a bit too sweeping and doesn't match my experience.
"not particularly relevant to most Rust programmers" begs the question is their less of an overlap from C programmers and Rust programmers than is being generally touted?
Thats simply wrong, educate yourself young man!
Sign of the times I guess, what would of once of been a neat C macro, is now marketing news in the tech industry.
Because mostly its all about the coin, there are no users, only speculators... ahhh but build it and they will come mentality rules here!
There is also a significant cases of:
1. The false disintermediation; when really they want to put themselves as the intermediary
2. This is so much better than what exists, we just need everyone to adopt it at once, in order to get the network effect that makes adopting it in the first place worthwhile.
3. We just need to solve this one problem to unlock the potential (insert HARD economic problem, that world has been failing to solve for last 30 years).
4. Just being bunch of nonsense, but who cares, with so much blind speculation we might come our rich as long as we scarper before the bubble bursts.
5. We just need these 3 miracles for success
6. Our solution is basically just the same as what exists, however we are really excited because we will implement it with blockchain!
Sounds like I hate the tech, I don't, just hate the bullshiters.
Looks like a genetic algorithm to me, just framed it differently to normal (which is clever). The hyperparams being the DNA and a network being an environment in which they are executed against.
You do know there is a BlazegraphDB also?
What inferencing does it offer to RDF?
How would I bolt on an inference engine to this if none is offered, i.e. to provide OWL:RL?
Its not W3C who produced the US law, is that so difficult to understand?
If the US law changes, then the w3c standard still stands, I don't think anyone involved in W3C thinks preventing security researchers doing their job is a sensible thing.
EFF are picking a fight with the wrong people, and producing propaganda to support that fight, making themselves less credible to those who actually understand the details.
I know 'Fake News' is a popular thing in the US, but I don't think its a sensible tactic in the tech community.
EFF argument was highly politicised and conflating US law, with global technology standardisation.
Quite simply EFF had a weaker argument, even though there is a lot of sympathy for their cause from representatives in W3C, who also think US law is an arse, its simply not the correct forum for the battle.
Well please provide some examples of what you explicitly mean, and then we can see if your wrong or not.
By new model, do you mean Licensing? You do know this is not new right?
You never fully owned that CD, you owned the physical object, but not the content, you only had permission to play it under certain conditions.
"I find myself less trusting of the EFF than I was before reading it. Is there a short descriptive term for "alienating your allies by obfuscating the details in an attempt to make a stronger case than the evidence actually supports"?"
This is very much my view also.
meh where to start with this ...
So it was this kind of hyperbole that largely did EFF a disservice in my opinion. The W3C is composed of very experienced people who can see through straw man arguments and unsubstantiated facts.
The main argument from w3c was that they deal with technical specifications, not US laws.
It now seems that the EFF are starting to get this, and looking to tackle the actual issues.
The EFF acted poorly through out this thing scenario.
Grab it while you can, it won't last, and then there will be a load of people on market with inflated salary expectations.