kevinnk

I think a total household income of ~150-200k is right around the cutoff for 4 people to live in Palo Alto together. You can split that up however you want though. In my case, that's 4 people earning ~50k rooming together. In the case of a family, one person earning 120k and the other doing a startup earning 50k (plus 2 non working kids) works too.

You're right that someone trying to support a family on a single income at 50k would have a tough time, but I think the range of people who can make it work is a lot broader than you're making it seem.

I rent in a house and split 4 ways. My share of the rent is a little over 1k.

I live in Palo Alto making about $55k and live fairly comfortably; my actual living expenses are probably closer to $25k. It would be hard to have a family, but I get by just fine having roommates.

Facebook and vid.me as well. And twitch for streaming.

It's one thing to lie, it's another thing to lie about something that could easily be found out and possibly get them sued. The risk/reward ratio seems way too high for Facebook to lie (unless they were forced to.) That's obviously not proof, but it seems like pretty strong evidence.

A Facebook exec's claim doesn't count as proof.

How about an official statement from Facebook itself over a year ago[1]? If it was true, people could find out by decompiling the app and make Facebook look absolutely horrible.

[1] https://newsroom.fb.com/news/h/facebook-does-not-use-your-ph...

It's still up in the air I think - you can see from his blog[1] that others in the the committee prefer a syntax more like

    meta::type interface(const meta::type source) {
        // … basically same code …
    };

If I understand you correctly, the way you'd address this is by using counterfactuals. See this course[1] for an overview and this paper[2] which talks about the bias problem in the context of movie recommendations.

[1] http://www.cs.cornell.edu/courses/cs7792/2016fa/ [2] http://www.cs.cornell.edu/people/tj/publications/schnabel_et...

Communism is not authoritarianism (except maybe in practice). Lots of communists are essentially anarchists.

You genuinely think the type of people who subscribe to subreddits like coontown and fatpeoplehate are going to have their mind changed by people on the internet?

Yes, because I've personally met such people.

I've had no success changing the minds of people who think that being trans is a mental illness despite citing numerous peer reviewed articles. Maybe I'm going about it wrong, but I'm not sure it gets more clear than pointing to a bunch of scientists that directly contradict their understanding.

Changing minds takes a lot of empathy and skill (and usually time) to pull off consistently in person, much less online; I'm not surprised that a strategy of throwing scientific articles in people's faces (which they will probably never read) would be unsuccessful. Regardless, even if you are successful, you will probably never know unless you have a long term relationship with the individual.

"Real income growth" is the growth in income post inflation.

Lots of clubs/community orgs are like this. The community soccer org for the city I grew up in had lots of turnover in the management due to voting.

A friend of mine got an offer from a startup in Palo Alto that he wanted to negotiate. He literally walked across the street to another interview and had a counter offer when he met with the founder of the first company the next day.

Actually, there was a bunch of blow back and the main researchers behind the result stepped down.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21656-leaders-of-cont...

if these folks were earning more, someone else wouldn't be doing that job, so the overall earning that the set number of jobs would support wouldn't change one way or the other from the tax revenue point of view.

That's exactly what "zero sum" means.

Very cool! Good binding libraries between C++ and Python have been super useful for my projects in the past, and I'm glad to see something similar developed for Rust.

For anyone reading the comments first, this is a fork of rust-cpython. The motivation for the fork is linked from the Readme: https://github.com/PyO3/pyo3/issues/55

You need a TLS connection to get the NIST beacon, which requires a seeded rng. That seems like a chicken and egg problem.

IMO, what these adversarial examples give us is a way to boost training data.

That's basically the idea behind GANs.

I think the more fundamental connection is that when goods are perfect subsitutes for each other, under perfect information you always choose the "cheaper" good (where "cheap" is defined by whatever metric you're using).

Somewhat ironically, this fact actually has connections to the concept of dual variables in constrained optimization problems, the theory of which was largely developed in the Soviet Union for use in central planning.

PORC is one of the largest police advocacy organizations in California state. SAM is funded largely by private individuals (yes, "individuals" not "individual", although its single donor is Julie Schauer). Notably absent is any "big pharma" or private prisons, in contrast to what the GP stated.

The biggest funders of the anti prop 64 campaign ("Adult Use of Marijuana Act") were private individuals and police unions.

http://www.nber.org/papers/w23532?utm_campaign=ntw&utm_mediu...

Total payroll fell, so your explanation is not consistent with the data.

"the average low-wage worker in the city lost $125 a month because of the hike in the minimum."

This is the bad news.

Okay, I think we're talking past each other at this point so let me be as clear as possible: the original comparison was between TSVs and logic in DRAM. Both of these are a way to get DRAM on chip and as physically close to the core logic as possible. Logic in memory is on die, while TSVs are on package; neither can be "extended" by an end-user without connecting off chip. Neither changes the physical package size very much (TSVs are not intrinsically bigger than logic in DRAM). Both have nothing to do with off chip connections; as soon as you start talking about things happening off package they behave identically (grids of processor/DRAM combos can be done with either in exactly the same way). Any chip you like can have TSVs (many core, single core, big, small, whatever); there's​ no architecture that logic in DRAM can have that TSVs can't. Both can be used to "split up processing to where the memory is". Neither has to be a "fat node".

So with that out of the way, what exactly is the advantage of logic in memory? Because so far nothing you have described is actually an intrinsic advantage.

Do you see interposer style designs as linking up terabytes of DRAM?

I don't think we're going to see a terabyte of dram on an interposer for a while (4GB is about the max you can get commercially right now). I'm not sure what you're trying to get at though; even with logic in DRAM you have to go off chip to get to terabyte levels, so I don't see the advantage.

All the chips you're talking about are pretty major dies, not really suitable for having many stacks of them in conventionally tightly spaced DIMM arrays to reach such RAM sizes.

The stacking happens in package (<1mm thick). Your DIMM array is going to have to be pretty damn tight for that to matter.

Of course, 3d chip advances might throw all current assumptions out the window and change the layout of everything.

TSVs are 3D (or "2.5" depending on the configuration). You should have thrown out the assumptions back in 2014.

The point of my post was there's not much upside that integrated DRAM/logic has that TSVs don't, but plenty of downsides. Regardless of Venray's claims, there's a reason modern high performance parallel architectures go with TSVs and interposers (Knights landing, new GPUs, some deep learning platforms, etc...) instead of logic in DRAM.

You can make logic on a DRAM process, but either your logic will be slow or you'll have to increase the cost of your cost/power consumption of your DRAM cells. With separate chips connected with TSVs you can have your cake and eat it too (each process can be specialized for it's components) plus you get the added benefit of increased yields (chips are smaller, no special processing steps).

Manufacturing logic on the same wafer as DRAM is difficult since the processes are so different. On the other hand, manufacturing on separate dies and connecting with an interposer or TSVs gets you tremendous bandwidth and relatively low latency; this is how some newer generation graphics memory is implemented (see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Bandwidth_Memory).

Foldcoin is very similar to what you're describing. The problem is that it's not actually clear we can do what you're describing in a cryptographically secure way - foldcoin for example essentially relies on the security of the Folding@Home network, something I find extremely sketch​y. Regardless, it's not actually clear that Folding@Home itself is a net positive for society anyway (see https://www.gwern.net/Charity%20is%20not%20about%20helping)

Can you name a major political group or politician in SF that takes that stance? I'm not super integrated into SF politics, but everyone I know who's against restrictive measures like the OP suggests aren't voting for stricter supply (and if they are I don't want to support them).