MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by etbebl | 2025-04-16 03:44:56+00:00
OK, but do we necessarily just care about the central 95% range of the output? This calculation has the weird property that values in the tails of the input correspond to values in the middle of the output, and vice versa. If you follow the intuition that the range you specify in the input corresponds to the values you expect to see, the corresponding outputs would really include -inf and inf.

Now I'm realizing that this doesn't actually work, and even in more typical calculations the input values that produce the central 95% of the output are not necessarily drawn from the 95% CIs of the inputs. Which is fine and makes sense, but this example makes it very obvious how arbitrary it is to just drop the lowermost and uppermost 2.5%s rather than choosing any other 95/5 partition of the probability mass.
by timewizard | 2025-04-16 03:45:17+00:00
> "and it has accelerated my output massively."

The folly of single ended metrics.

> but to avoid LLMs out of principal? That's just luddite.

Do you double check that the LLM hasn't magically recreated someone else's copyrighted code? That's just irresponsible in certain contexts.

> in case you feel it relevant.

Of course it's relevant. If a 19 year old with 1 year of driving experience tries to sell me a car using their personal anecdote as a metric I'd be suspicious. If their only salient point is that "it gets me to where I'm going faster!" I'd be doubly suspicious.
by toomuchtodo | 2025-04-16 03:46:54+00:00
They are breaking down the federal government intentionally. DOGE was never going to hit their goals, they were impossible to hit. The goals were just cover to take full control over anything they can get their hands on.

> Even my die-hard Republican distant relatives are suddenly shocked because programs they benefited from are being cut. They thought they voted for something different.

They voted for others to be hurt and to lose benefits, not their “in group.” Surprise surprise, they are considered the waste by those they voted for.
by WalterBright | 2025-04-16 03:47:34+00:00
My friend Eric Engstrom (yes, that guy) got a programming job at Microsoft despite having zero education beyond high school. He became a team leader for DirectX.

I have a degree in Mechanical Engineering, not software. Yet I got jobs as a software developer with zero certifications.

At the D Language Foundation, we have never asked any of our participants for there certifications. Some have PhDs, some have high school diplomas. We only care about what they can do.

You don't need to have any certifications whatsoever in order to start your own software business and do contract work.

You cannot buy an education. It's necessary to put in the work to learn it one way or another. I learned that the hard way in college. No work, no pass.
by int_19h | 2025-04-16 03:47:47+00:00
The US was historically rather hostile towards new waves of immigrants in practice, treating them very much like second class citizens (Irish, Italians, Latinos etc), effectively pressuring them to assimilate by becoming "more American than Americans" to avoid such attitudes. One can argue that the system kinda sorta worked in the long run, but I don't think it makes it worthy of emulation.
by epistasis | 2025-04-16 03:48:56+00:00
Your words don't make any sense in this environment. The idea that any person at an agency could stand up to or convince the DOGE team of anything is preposterous.

Anything that weakens the US or puts our cybersecurity in a place that Russia can exfiltrate data will happen. This is not about the US needing anything and it's silly to think otherwise. See also the NLRB whistleblower and the security backdoors that DOGE demanded to allow data exfiltration and the subsequent death threats to the whistle blower.

You mindset is behind the times and needs to adjust to a, frankly, insane current reality.
by dhorthy | 2025-04-16 03:49:57+00:00
i have seen a ton of good ones, and they all have ups and downs. I think rather than focusing on frameworks though, I'm trying to dig into what goes into them, and what's the tradeoff if you try to build most of it yourself instead

but since you asked, to name a few

- ts: mastra, gensx, vercel ai, many others! - python: crew, langgraph, many others!
by jjmarr | 2025-04-16 03:50:09+00:00
I like how this was the origin of the "virgin/Chad memes". Some guy kept spamming a meme about the "virgin walk" to make people feel self-conscious, and then someone made a joke response called the "Chad stride". Years later, those two are inseparable in popular culture.

A literal thesis, antithesis, and synthesis.
by transpute | 2025-04-16 03:50:28+00:00
NIST owns the budget for both NVD and CVE, contracting MITRE to operate the CVE program.

NIST budget was cut 12% in FY 2024 (Oct 2023 - Sep 2024).

An earlier bill to supplement NIST funding has been reintroduced in 2025, https://fedscoop.com/public-private-partnerships-bill-nist-h...
by protocolture | 2025-04-16 03:50:32+00:00
>Serious question: why would a dairy care about the cow's quality of life?

Honestly a dairy I visited only had stalls for milking time. Their issue was that the cows wouldnt eat the shit they fed them. But they had a lot of room to run around in while being malnourished.

They went bankrupt a few years later, mainly because malnourished cows dont tend to provide milk.
by ethbr1 | 2025-04-16 03:50:44+00:00
If anyone is near eastern Tennessee, I'd recommend the Sweetwater Valley Farm tour (in Sweetwater, TN).

They have the same Lely automatic milking machines from the article, and you can watch them do their thing.

Honestly, the teat-cleaning is the neatest part -- you realize how much more hygienic a mindless automaton can be.
by xyst | 2025-04-16 03:51:01+00:00
Some companies are already clueless when it comes to CVE management. Probably won’t see the effects immediately but give it a few more years for new generation of vulns to be created/found and we will be back to early 2000s level security.

Open season on American corporations for domestic and foreign hackers.

If program isn’t brought back then CVE database likely to be fragmented amongst the “private” CVE databases.

Sec Corp A has 700 well documented CVEs but Sec Corp B has 702 CVEs in their database since NIST funding pulled. What do corps do? Maybe some of them with massive budgets setup contracts with both to get “full spectrum coverage”. Maybe other non-technical companies that think of IT as strictly a cost will go with the cheapest or forego it all together.

Who knows maybe we get ~~~free labor~~~ open source community to pick up the slack?

This country with the orange man administration is quickly going to shit. Not in a “I dislike {opposing party} way” either. In a “I dislike authoritarian regimes” way.
by danpalmer | 2025-04-16 03:51:04+00:00
pgdog looks interesting, but I read the docs wondering how it handles foreign keys between tables, and the docs don't seem to cover it. It was the first question I had, and I'd assume would be an important question for most users. The project states "Data relationships are not sacrificed to go faster" and that it operates "transparently to the application", but it's not clear how it does that in regard to foreign keys.

Additionally, maybe this is just a pet peeve with Postgres documentation in general, but the docs use "database" to mean both a single database and a Postgres server interchangeably. On some pages this makes the content harder to understand. I think it's good practice to distinguish between databases and "clusters" (no, not those clusters, actually servers), and perhaps between clusters and groups of servers. While some of the naming is unfortunate for historical reasons, re-using the same names for different concepts just causes more confusion.
by cma | 2025-04-16 03:51:50+00:00
I tried to look over the history and I only see a funding increase, CISA cut $3.7 million at the end of 2023 for the next year and in response NIST reallocated extra funding to NVD: $8.5 million in 2024

A funding shortfall and strain isn't a funding cut. And from what I see there was a funding increase.
by anenefan | 2025-04-16 03:51:53+00:00
I find vegemite far too salty, and the taste too strong, even spread as thin on toast to be merely the slightest colour change. No I don't like it much. I've only found the NZ version of marmite [1] being palatable and after time found I looked forward every so often to a nice marmite sandwich.

I would guess it has to do more with how it was imported into Canada. [2]

The labelling might be also what's got the product into trouble, yeast extract should have those vitamins in moderately high levels as it is without fortifying.

Finally for the rofl is a 2010 crow [3a,b] in regard to how Canada is leading the way ... to allow fortified foods

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeast_extract#Marmite_(New_Zea...

[2] https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Regulations/C.R.C.,_c._8...

[3a] https://www.cmaj.ca/content/182/5/426 ... [3b] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2842846/
by Capricorn2481 | 2025-04-16 03:52:18+00:00
> Then they are completely misrepresenting what error handling is about

That's fine, but the commenter didn't pull this out of nowhere. It's in the article. Your reply makes it sound like you didn't read it, as if OP is giving a rare hypothetical that most Rust programmers don't support. This is common error handling advice in the Rust community.

And this is representative of what you may run into when reading other people's code or trying to contribute to their library.
by tonyarkles | 2025-04-16 03:52:20+00:00
I think you’re confusing “smart contracts” with “legal contracts”. They’re not entirely different but exploiting a loophole in a smart contract doesn’t necessarily meet the standard of a legal one.

> To form a contract, there must be: a) an offer and acceptance of said offer; b) consideration for the offer, or some value exchange; c) an intention to form legal relations; and, d) a certainty of the terms of the contract

https://www.canlii.org/en/commentary/doc/2019CanLIIDocs4082

The people who made the smart contract almost certainly wouldn’t tick all four of those boxes definitively. It’d be an interesting civil case probably!
by Aurornis | 2025-04-16 03:52:49+00:00
It depends on the carrier. As multiple other commenters have explained, you can absolutely be hit with a tariff fee after receiving the package.

They do not care if you didn't want to pay the tariff. They don't want to deal with warehousing it, offloading it, or returning it to sender. They want to get it into your hands and deal with the logistics later.
by Rury | 2025-04-16 03:52:55+00:00
> ... you make a request ...

Sounds like the work of mustering up instructions... like programming...

So how do these LLM's completely remove us from having to do this work of mustering up instructions? Seems to me someone still has to instruct LLMs on what to do, and that the only way this reality will cease to exist entirely, is if humanity stopped desiring computers to do what it is they want. I don't think that's happening anytime soon.

However, maybe fewer programmers will be needed, but then again, the same was said of Fortran and COBOL and look at where we are today, more programmers than ever...
by bastawhiz | 2025-04-16 03:53:27+00:00
This article doesn't mention "event handlers" a single time. Even if you get past the client and server getting out of sync and addressing each component by a unique id that's stable between deploys (unless it's been updated), this article doesn't show how you might make any of these components interactive. You can't add an onClick on the server. The best I can figure, you pass these in with a context?

Ultimately this really just smooshed around the interface without solving the problem it sets out to solve: it moves the formatting of the mail markup to the server, but you can't move all of it unless your content is entirely static (and if you're getting it from the server, SOMETHING has to be interactive).
by epistasis | 2025-04-16 03:53:33+00:00
Why would they spend money to replace it? The idea is to weaken and destroy the US and its institutions. Giving Palantir money might mean that security improves, and that goes against their goals. They have already demanded that Russia stop being treated as a cybersecurity threat in other areas of the government, this is a way to ensure that systems are vulnerable to attack.
by shakna | 2025-04-16 03:54:38+00:00
I'd say that the rhyme and reason are quite clear [0]. They published a playbook, and they are implementing it at a record pace.

> The NSC [National Security Council] staff will need to consolidate the functions of both the NSC and the Homeland Security Council (HSC), incorporate the recently established Office of the National Cyber Director, and evaluate the required regional and functional directorates.

> Given the aforementioned prerequisites, the NSC should be properly resourced with sufficient policy professionals, and the NSA should prioritize staffing the vast majority of NSC directorates with aligned political appointees and trusted career officials. - Project 2025, pg 52.

> ... History shows that an unsupervised NSC staff can stray from its statutory role and adversely affect a President and his policies. Moreover, while the NSC should be fully incorporated into the White House, it should also be allowed to do its job without the impediment of dually hatted staff that report to other offices. - Project 2025, pg 53.

The goal is to build up a political organisation to use as a weapon, and to scrap the rest - as a legal excuse to say that the political appointments will be necessary.

[0] https://www.project2025.observer/
by transpute | 2025-04-16 03:55:31+00:00
Would appreciate a pointer to the source, thank you.

2025 article claims 30% increase in 2024 workload, https://www.securityweek.com/mitre-signals-potential-cve-pro...

> According to NIST, while the National Vulnerability Database (NVD) is processing incoming CVEs at the same rate as before the slowdown in spring and early summer 2024, a 32 percent jump in submissions last year means that the backlog continues to grow.
by mmooss | 2025-04-16 03:55:37+00:00
> In a stunning development

Who is still stunned by these things? They want you to be stunned; they want you to tell everyone else that you're stunned to spread feelings of terror and powerlessness. If you actually are stunned, you are stunningly ignorant. If you are not and still saying it, perhaps to emphasize your unhappiness, you are a 'useful idiot'. Either way, if you are saying it, you are a useful idiot.

You should have known decades ago: The GOP impeached a President for lying about sex; they fabricated intelligence to invade another country (killing thousands of Americans and 100,000+ Iraqis) - and that was all before 2004. They've voted almost unanimously, multiple times, to bankrupt the country (by refusing to authorize debt for existing obligations). Nobody (i.e., the Dems failed to) stopped them or made them pay a price, so why wouldn't they keep doing those things. (Edit: And if you object because the analysis criticizes one side and therefore you reject it as partisan, that's a big part of the reason nothing was done.)

This time they published Project 2025, telling you what they were going to do.
by gitremote | 2025-04-16 03:56:14+00:00
The consequences of incorrect code can be severe outside of front-end web development. For front-end web development, if the code is wrong, you see from your browser that your local web app is broken and try to fix it, or ship it anyway if it's a minor UI bug. For critical backend systems, subtle bugs are often discovered in downstream systems by other teams, and can result in financial loss, legal risk, reputational damage, or even loss of life.
by mmooss | 2025-04-16 03:57:56+00:00
> Your words don't make any sense in this environment. The idea that any person at an agency could stand up to or convince the DOGE team of anything is preposterous.

Your comment embraces and spreads the powerlessness they want you to feel and spread.

Of course you can stop them - like any other negotiation in life, especially non-friendly ones, you need to make it in Trump's interest either by carrot or stick. Trump has interests; identify them and identify your power in those regards ('power and interest' is the term), and use it.

Also, stop helping them make DOGE the scapegoat. It's Trump.
by AyyEye | 2025-04-16 03:58:58+00:00
Why would anyone trust you?

The best case scenario is that you lied about having people answer support. LLMs pretending to be people (you named it Sam!) and not labeled as such is clearly intended to be deceptive. Then you tried to control the narrative on reddit. So forgive me if I hit that big red DOUBT button.

Even in your post you call it "AI-assisted responses" which is as weaselly as it gets. Was it a chatbot response or was a human involved?

But 'a chatbot messed up' doesn't explain how users got locked out in the first place. EDIT: I see your comment about the race condition now. Plausible but questionable.

So the other possible scenario is that you tried to hose your paying customers then when you saw the blowback blamed it on a bot.

'We missed the mark' is such a trope non-apology. Write a better one.

I had originally ended this post with "get real" but your company's entire goal is to replace the real with the simulated so I guess "you get what you had coming". Maybe let your chatbots write more crap code that your fake software engineers push to paying customers that then get ignored and/or lied to when they ask your chatbots for help. Or just lie to everyone when you see blowback. Whatever. Not my problem yet because I can write code well enough that I'm embarrassed for my entire industry whenever I see the output from tools like yours.

This whole "AI" psyop is morally bankrupt and the world would be better off without it.
by ajross | 2025-04-16 03:59:51+00:00
> Weren't there major problems with the current CVE implementation

Absolutely. And if the headline was "DHS proposes improvements and streamlining to the CVE program" we'd all probably be cheering.

Leaping from "This is Flawed" to "Let's kill This" is a logical fallacy. A flawed security registry is clearly better than no security registry.
by 01HNNWZ0MV43FF | 2025-04-16 03:59:54+00:00
I see at least three obvious reasons for the cuts:

1. Politically-motivated "purge the weak" Nazi stuff - Cutting Medicare, cutting Medicaid, cutting Social Security, cutting education, cutting anything that benefits people who are old, poor, queer, female, etc.

2. Privatization - NWS and NOAA are wonderful public services, and they'd rather profit from the data they produce. This is why taxes in the US are such a bitch to file, tax companies oppose any policy change that would make the paperwork easier for filers.

3. They might actually be Russian assets. Tearing down institutions that took generations to build makes space in the world for Russia to exert more influence. You can tell this is working because Europe is now wanting to re-arm.

It makes me sad. If I had a billion dollars I would still want to live in a better country. These guys only want a better world for themselves, and making everyone else into a permanent servant underclass only plays into that.
by latency-guy2 | 2025-04-16 04:01:19+00:00
I actually would love this. I hate having to go to another website to share some thoughts I had using tools in a platform.

I miss the days when experiences would actually choose to integrate other platforms into their experiences, yes I was sort of a fan of the FB/Google share button and Twitter side feed (not the tracking bits though).

I wasn't a fan of LLM and the whole chat experience a few years ago, I'm a very mild convert now with the latest models and I'm getting some nominal benefit, so I would love to have some kind of shared chat session to brain storm, e.g. on a platform better than Figma.

The one integration of AI that I think is actually neat is Teams + AI Note taking. It's still a hit or miss a lot of the time, but it at least saves and notes something important 30% of the time.

Collaboration enhancements would be a wonderful outcome in place of AGI.
by drmikeando | 2025-04-16 04:01:29+00:00
You can view this result as the convolution of the signal with an exponentially decaying sine and cosine.

That is, `y(t') = integral e^kt x(t' - t) dt`, with k complex and negative real part.

If you discretize that using simple integration and t' = i dt, t = j dt you get

y_i = dt sum_j e^(k j dt) x_{i - j} y_{i+1} = dt sum_j e^(k j dt) x_{i+1 - j} = (dt e^(k dt) sum_j' e^(k j' dt) x_{i - j'}) + x_i = dt e^(k dt) y_i + x_i

If we then scale this by some value, such that A y_i = z_i we can write this as

z_{i+1} = dt e^(k dt) z_i + A x_i

Here the `dt e^(k dt)` plays a similar role to (1-alpha) and A is similar to P alpha - the difference being that P changes over time, while A is constant.

We can write `z_i = e^{w dt i} r_i` where w is the imaginary part of k

e^{w dt (i+1)} r_{i+1} = dt e^(k dt) e^{w dt i} r_i + A x_i r_{i+1} = dt e^((k - w) dt) r_i + e^{-w dt (i+1) } A x_i = (1-alpha) r_i + p_i x_i

Where p_i = e^{-w dt (i+1) } A = e^{-w dt ) p_{i-1} Which is exactly the result from the resonate web-page.

The neat thing about recognising this as a convolution integral, is that we can use shaping other than exponential decay - we can implement a box filter using only two states, or a triangular filter (this is a bit trickier and takes more states). While they're tricky to derive, they tend to run really quickly.
by randycupertino | 2025-04-16 04:03:05+00:00
> During his hours of testimony in a Washington, DC, federal courtroom on Monday, Zuckerberg said that Facebook had greatly evolved since he launched the platform more than 20 years ago and that its main purpose wasn't really to connect with friends anymore.

> The FTC argues that Meta monopolizes apps that share content with friends and family.

> "The friend part has gone down quite a bit," Zuckerberg testified. The Facebook feed, Zuckerberg said, "has turned into more of a broad discovery and entertainment space."

Interesting how they're de-emphasizing the friends element. Guess that's why I go directly to a friend's page to see what they're up to lately, because I will never see it on newsfeed.
by zelphirkalt | 2025-04-16 04:03:07+00:00
While what you say is true, I think it is a failure of generalization. A few special cases show it is possible, but what you don't mention is how extraordinary these cases are and at what time they happened and what background, including ideas, information, location, and motivation the people had.

You can very much buy an education in many places. Money from parents pays for the best universities, no, actually schools already, the best teachers, the best atmosphere/setting for learning. While some children work on a farm, rich people's children will already be learning, simply because the parents can afford it.

There are many places, where it doesn't work like in your extraordinary examples. Just because something is possible for a few, it doesn't mean, that it is generalizable and that it can be done for everyone.
by buzer | 2025-04-16 04:03:28+00:00
Salmonella and it causes are very regional in EU. Places like Finland have basically 0 cases of salmonella caused by domestic poultry products per year. If there salmonella is found from any chicken in the flock, the whole flock will be quarantined and generally fully slaughtered (meat & eggs must be pasteurized after the slaughter if they are sold). In 2023 0.1% of the tested flocks had salmonella.

According to https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11945640/ most of the outbreaks in humans (where exact cause was found) were caused by foreign vegetables.

On other hand countries like Italy find positive samples from 27% of their flocks ( https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.2903/j.efsa... ). USA doesn't do testing at that level as far I understand, I only found that 8% of the tested chicken parts have salmonella (https://www.propublica.org/article/salmonella-chicken-usda-f...).