Can confirm, this is mostly campaign to remind about risks so people make more informed decisions.

There was some other campaign couple moths ago that warned about "kryptowaluty i ich podróbki" that tried to target project advertising as cryptocurrencies that are just normal scams like OneCoin and clones (Dascoin etc). I've seen many people here in Poland falling for that.

Sure people make their own decisions, but for it to work there needs to be certain level of information available.

Isn't there a loophole in this argument - if we could only include "building specialized sub-AIs" in the set of problems our AI can solve? Is there any fundamental reason why this can't be done? I agree that there needs to be more subsystem in AI for 'learning' and 'improving' to even work.

Not really sure where I stand on the AI debate, surpassing humans at everything seems misguided to me, like why would you include all this human-like cruft in the AI when you can put in stuff humans could never have?

Apparently there are already companies that take it a step further. They test sample of their employees with some fancy IQ test that measures them across several dimensions. From those results profile of desirable new hire is build and all candidates get measured by the same test.

On reddit in threads about interviews I've already seen couple people discussing those strange tests where in many questions there are no obvious correct/wrong answers, like for example all presented shapes can in their own way fit in presented pattern.

If there is no obvious right/wrong answer, I wonder if they are limiting their pool taking people who all think alike (kinda like in-breeding) or are they using it diversify the ideas and knowledge etc. (like diversifying gene pool).

Different answers probably give points to different traits the test measures, the ambiguity is just irritating for test takers coming from more classical tests where you know (or at least suspect) what is expected from you.

This whole test setup is not cheap so one can at least hope they considered the issue of diversity? The other thing is did they actually tested which teams perform better in specific problem domain that interests them?

'Pieróg' is also name of the shape, and some local dishes will be named after the shape, like 'Pieróg jeżycki' (small pizza folded in half).

In the other parts of partitioned PLC similar fight for culture was happening. Sometimes I even think, that some barricades were purposefully installed in Polish culture so that it will win again. In school you learn about the importance of Polish, how it was suppressed and people who learned it in secret were heroes... In day-to-day life many people will oppose using English words when Polish can be used, I even witnessed situation where foreign quest was invited for a speech and during q&a someone not only asked the question in Polish (there was a translator so no problem) but even stressed that the question will be in Polish, because we are in Poland...

When I visited Poland I found stuff like that very interesting. In particular, the large, old city of Szczecin, which was completely German for many, many years (and at times only had a few thousand Poles in it.) When I visited it seemed 100% Polish, and it was almost as if there was no trace of German anything in the whole city. This all despite the city being completely Germanized for many years and being only 2.9 miles from the German border.

First your comment reads quite... emotional? Both aggressive and defensive, almost to the point that one wants to avoid the discussion, but you asked in the edit so I reply. I assume you deeply care about the subject, but you need to understand, that if you want others to understand and maybe adopt your view it's better to tone down, avoid many short accusing questions etc... Also defending/explaining war by "but they started first before" always put you in a bad light...

Now, about how are you wrong. Wrong is too strong word here, I'm unfamiliar with many historical events you mentioned but I assume they really did happened. The general idea that Great Schism was a big source of tension, and directly and indirectly by events that resulted from it is and will be a source of tension, this is also true. The problem as I see it is the strength of this effect, you are right that it exists, but your comment reads as it was the dominating force that shaped this part of history, which many people not agree with. You also leave out many historical events that do not fit in, like Russia and Prussia working together to conquer PLC and later attacking Poland in 1939... Similarly when for example Napoleon attacked Russia, the west-east conflict was not the reason, it was just a tool to reinforce the conflict, and Napoleon actually wanted to conquer all and Russia was just one of many...

Wars can start for more "practical" reasons too (like oil) and historical/religious/ethnic reasons will soon follow, they can be present but they are not always the main reason.

Finally that bit about NATO troops could for some people change your comment from "comment about history" to "comment about politics pretending to be about history"...

If I can split your argument into three, then

> I think the point is that what we today might think of as Cold War style rhetoric and rivalry has antecedents in the Russian empire and points earlier.

Is probably true, people just reference Cold War because it's well known symbol and the rest of the history is not needed for them...

> I would even go so far as to say the whole thing is from the Great Schism. (...)

No, not really... The story in the article is placed when PLC was conquered, and similar things happened not only in Lithuania but also in Poland, where it was done by both Cyrillic Russia and Latin Germany. I'm not an expert on Russian history, but I could bet that at certain times they also tried to uproot other Cyrillic cultures who were deemed unwelcome by the rulers (both communist and before). I agree with the other person that this is just authoritarian thing.

> A couple months ago in the context of all the US-Russia political drama I was thinking of this...(...)

Well this one depends on the general world view I guess? If you tell history as a story of clashing ideas, then there will be a clear narration and you will easily see patterns as you describe, ever repeating conflicts of similar forces. But just one way of looking is often not enough to see the whole thing. I also see the direction of looking at the past tensions as promising, but then when do you stop? In this particular case the way of writing could be just an artifact of an older conflict used to reinforce the current one. We dnn't need to repeat the past, we can just reuse it.

Wasn't it the other way around? A type of supernovas ("standard candles") were discovered before the expansion and used to discover the expansion? The formula for distance only uses absolute and apparent magnitudes to calculate distance?

Yes, my comment above is wrong. It was the other way around.

Yeah they calibrated red shift from standard candles.

They use luminosity for SNe Ia.

> If he wanted a relationship, there are infinitely better and more appropriate ways to go about it, especially if he thought she might actually be interested.

McClure aside, in general situation when during recruitment precess you meet someone you would like to date is there really a way to go about it that doesn't end badly? Message during recruitment is plain creepy. Asking them out after they are hired is bad for obvious reasons like you being the superior and him/her having the impression that this is the real reason they've been hired. There was at least one story on HN that I remember when someone wasn't hired and soon after was asked for a date and it also ended badly, even if that person waited some time to be "safe" that still could be counted as stalking and using information summited during the interview for personal reasons is bad.

But you can't even ask about their phone number anyway! It doesn't matter if your intentions are honest and you two could be a good couple if you met at different occasion. Once the recruitment process starts he/she is pretty much removed form your dating pool. Even if you ask nicely without any inappropriate signals - any move you make can be seen by him/her as you taking advantage of the situation. Even innocent question about phone number can have really scary implications from his/her point of view.

Sure it can end in nice date or maybe an awkward silence and you explaining yourself and apologizing or it can give them a true nightmare... Are you going to risk it?

> in general situation when during recruitment precess you meet someone you would like to date is there really a way to go about it that doesn't end badly?

(a) No, not one where you have any control whether it goes bad or not

(b) Your day job is not a dating service

(c) If you can't figure out a and b on your own, you're not mature enough for a position of power

Was it not clear that this is what I was saying? That asking out that would be OK in other situations is not OK in the context of job interview?

I feel you said (a), and (b) and (c) were my additions. If you implied them and I missed it, then please consider my comment as TLDR-as-a-Service =)

Sorry, on it's own the sentence you cited can be read both ways and I was afraid you stopped reading there. My bad.

HE WAS MARRIED

Yes, you are right about there being a choice. This is the core of the problem here. Many I feel look at it and wonder why pass a good opportunity to meet someone, we could both have a chance at something great (unending source of unwanted advances)... The advice about not trying it in professional settings is seen as taking away their freedom to date people, as being rejected without even ability to ask and by it being fundamentally unjust. What they fail to consider is how it look from the other side and how the very same innocent question from their point of view can be seen as some sort of "deal" and part of nightmarish recruitment process.

Oh give me a break. You are so uptight.

On reddit someone commented that this whale must have know what he was doing... So, in theory could dumping large amount of ETH could affect pricing of even larger amount enabling the whale to profit from this procedure?

it's called stop-loss hunting; this just happened on a grand scale.

Theoretically because literally everyone doing it got liquidated it probably won't happen again - people wont set up stop losses and gdax will probably introduce a circuit breaker.