MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by gmuslera | 2025-04-16 15:42:32+00:00
Stopping climate change should be the only goal. And by the means of reducing our impact and probably reverse it in the most reverse way without potentially disastrous side effects.

Assuming that we will be able to "control" the climate is the wrong approach, because we can't even properly predict how it behaves in our current stage. Climatologist struggle to understand or get badly surprised by some of the events that are happening right now. And without understanding, without prediction, there is no control, just throwing the ball in the roulette and hoping that it will fall into the right number. The bets are just too high for that.
by glitchc | 2025-04-16 15:42:57+00:00
> Employees have always been responsible for managing their own career growth and always will be. How can it be otherwise?

On the contrary, from the 40s to the 70s (possibly well into the 80s) the corporation was heavily invested in your career. Employees were expected to dedicate their lives to the firm, and the firm, in turn, was expected to take care of them. This "free-for-all" employment model is fairly recent.

Edit - added source (1993): https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/employers-employees-no-...
by 542354234235 | 2025-04-16 15:43:31+00:00
This whole rant presents a false dichotomy, that you either communicate technical information with zero effort at interpersonal style, or you communicate with interpersonal style with no, or false, technical details. You frame turning criticism into constructive criticism as sugar coating or fluff. That interpersonal skill is the opposite of technical skill, rather than two different skills.

> Complaints that tech is too "male dominated" and "notoriously hostile to women" are often just this. Tech was always full of types who won't preface their proposals and criticisms with fluff, and instead lean into autism. When you're used to being pandered to, neutrality feels like vulgarity.

Communicating with other humans effectively is learned skill like any other. You just refuse to learn because it is more difficult for you than neurotypical people. But the funny thing is that women are harder to diagnose with autism because girls are pushed more to learn to socialize than boys, so they learn how to “mask” better. Boys are pandered to and not pushed to learn a difficult but much needed skill. They are given a pass in a way girls are not, so the neutrality of being told it is an important skill, just like every other field where humans communicate with other humans, feels like vulgarity.

The answer is not to pretend interpersonal communication is a pointless skill. The answer is to acknowledge and work with both sides, understanding that it is a skill that cannot just be ignored, and understanding that skill levels vary and we should account for, and work with, those various skill levels. You know, inclusivity rather than pandering to the entrenched culture.

> But they start from the conclusion and work their way backwards. This is what the rewritten statement does: it tries to fix the relationship before fixing the problem… The people who build and maintain the world's infrastructure prefer the masculine style for a reason: it keeps civilization running, and helps restore it when it breaks.

The irony of this is that you work from the conclusion, that masculine style is what “works”. That the relationship of masculine style and “civilization” are causal. Instead of fixing the problem, that industries that are male dominated have been restricted to women for most of human history. Women are 50% of the population but anything “feminine” is treated as some sort of weird small minority that should adapt to live in “real” society or stay out.
by toast0 | 2025-04-16 15:43:39+00:00
Plenty of late 2600 games look tons better than early games. If you look at Combat vs late life Activision games like Pitfall! or Keystone Kapers, it's a huge difference in visual quality.

It's still nothing compared to early NES games, of course. And late NES games certainly got a lot nicer looking.
by peterldowns | 2025-04-16 15:44:12+00:00
No? From the page you linked:

When you use Paid Services, including, for example, the paid quota of the Gemini API, Google doesn't use your prompts (including associated system instructions, cached content, and files such as images, videos, or documents) or responses to improve our products, and will process your prompts and responses in accordance with the Data Processing Addendum for Products Where Google is a Data Processor. For Paid Services, Google logs prompts and responses for a limited period of time, solely for the purpose of detecting violations of the Prohibited Use Policy and any required legal or regulatory disclosures. This data may be stored transiently or cached in any country in which Google or its agents maintain facilities.
by throwup238 | 2025-04-16 15:44:19+00:00
> But how do I proceed from there with actual planning or budget?

You make up the number you wanted to hear in the first place that ostensibly works with the rest of the schedule. That’s why engineering estimates are so useless - it’s not that they’re inaccurate or unrealistic - it’s that if we insisted on giving them realistic estimates we’d get fired and replaced by someone else who is willing to appease management and just kick the can down the road a few more weeks.
by nrdvana | 2025-04-16 15:44:34+00:00
In most of the video clips I saw, he was saying "I don't know anything about that", which could be entirely true. Often I see hints that he's attempting to play the Aes Sedai game of "speak no word that is untrue" but he's too dumb to do it well. Anyway, as an extension, both comments can be true, that Trump himself has no plan and is an idiot, but that his administration is enacting Project 2025.
by jjani | 2025-04-16 15:44:37+00:00
Your link seems to say the opposite.

> Paid Services

>... When you activate a Cloud Billing account, all use of Gemini API and Google AI Studio is a "Paid Service" with respect to how Google Uses Your Data, even when using Services that are offered free of charge, such as Google AI Studio and unpaid quota of Gemini API.

>... How Google Uses Your Data When you use Paid Services, including, for example, the paid quota of the Gemini API, Google doesn't use your prompts (including associated system instructions, cached content, and files such as images, videos, or documents) or responses to improve our products, and will process your prompts and responses in accordance with the Data Processing Addendum for Products Where Google is a Data Processor. For Paid Services, Google logs prompts and responses for a limited period of time, solely for the purpose of detecting violations of the Prohibited Use Policy and any required legal or regulatory disclosures. This data may be stored transiently or cached in any country in which Google or its agents maintain facilities.

Activated a Cloud Billing account -> All use of Google AI Studio is a "Paid Service", even free use -> Google then doesn't use prompts or responses to improve the products
by haswell | 2025-04-16 15:44:58+00:00
I suspect we feel the same way about the actual harms of care denial, i.e. they’re unacceptable, immoral/unethical, cause unnecessary suffering and death, are tragic and horrific, and reforms are required.

But we disagree about the use of language. Many people reduce complexities to the most extreme word they can think of. It’s very popular these days to call many things “violent”.

The issue is that this kind of reductionism makes people stop taking the word seriously, and by proxy the people using it. In my opinion, this ultimately hurts the underlying message.

> To constrain violence to physicality is to ignore and minimize the myriad creative ways we've concocted as a society to inflict harm

This is fallacious and untrue. There is no reason to believe that using precise/accurate (and no less expressive) language is synonymous with ignoring harms. To reiterate the point above, overloading language is far more likely to cause this problem because at some point people have no idea what the word means to the person using it.

I consider myself “woke” by the original definition and spirit of the word. But you’d get 10 different answers about what that actually means these days.

The looser these definitions become, the less able we are to communicate effectively and this is one of the many ingredients driving increased polarization and the feeling that we exist in separate realities.
by tetris11 | 2025-04-16 15:45:02+00:00
People are working on Virtual Twin[0] mumbo jumbo along these lines. Why bother with microscopic effects of ion channels and cell proliferation when you can simulate tissue dynamics with continuous gradients?

(Because the trees are often more informative than the forest itself...)

0: https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/what-is-a-digital-twin
by nyrikki | 2025-04-16 15:45:30+00:00
From a CS background, several people I know have raved about the following book[1], of which will be friendly and useful for future needs anyway in the field. The first part of the book is what appears to be a pretty good refresher path.

IMHO working through that book will make you practice with enough basic calc to make moving on to stochastic calculus fairly easy.

[1] Performance Modeling and Design of Computer Systems: Queueing Theory in Action - Mor Harchol-Balter

https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~harchol/PerformanceModeling/book.htm...
by anentropic | 2025-04-16 15:45:45+00:00
I am very interested in this but have some questions after a quick look

It mentions "Serverless pipelines. Run fast, stateless Python functions in the cloud." on the home page... but it took me a while of clicking around looking for exactly what the deployment model is

e.g. is it the cloud provider's own "serverless functions"? or is this a platform that maybe runs on k8s and provides its own serverless compute resources?

Under examples I found https://docs.bauplanlabs.com/en/latest/examples/data_product... which shows running a cli command `serverless deploy` to deploy an AWS Lambda

for me deploying to regular Lambda func is a plus, but this example raises more questions...

https://docs.bauplanlabs.com/en/latest/commands_cheatsheet.h... doesn't show any 'serverless' or 'deploy' command... presumably the example is using an external tool i.e. the Serverless framework?

which is fine, great even - I can presumably use my existing code deployment methodology like CDK or Terraform instead

Just suggesting that the underlying details could be spelled out a bit more up front.

In the end I kind of understand it as similar to sqlmesh, but with a "BYO compute" approach? So where sqlmesh wants to run on a Data Warehouse platform that provides compute, and only really supports Iceberg via Trino, bauplan is focused solely on Iceberg and defining/providing your own compute resources?

I like it

Last question is re here https://docs.bauplanlabs.com/en/latest/tutorial/index.html

> "Need credentials? Fill out this form to get started"

Should I understand therefore that this is only usable with an account from bauplanlabs.com ?

What does that provide? There's no pricing mentioned so far - what is the model?
by steveklabnik | 2025-04-16 15:45:47+00:00
Full agree with 1, I do use 2 depending (if I'm making a tree of modules for organization, and a module only contains imports of other modules, I'll use the curly brace form to save the need of making a file), and I'm not sure why 4 makes it harder? Wouldn't it be more confusing if order mattered? maybe I need to see a full example :)

Thank you!
by antirez | 2025-04-16 15:45:52+00:00
Redis supports random projection to a lower dimensionality, but the reality is that projecting a 350d vector into 2d is nice but does not remotely captures the "reality" of what is going on. But still, it is a nice idea to use some time. However I would do that with more than 350 top words, since when I used 10k it strongly captured the interest more than the style, so 2D projection of this is going to be much more interesting I believe.
by tikhonj | 2025-04-16 15:46:00+00:00
It's something that makes more sense hands-on. I took a basic letterpress printing workshop[1] at the SF Center for the Book (SFCB[2], a non-profit in SF), so I had an immediate idea of not just what brass rules were and even how they felt in my hands. Making a portrait with them would be a pretty involved, very tactile experience.

There's so much tacit knowledge involved with physical skills and practices that the only way to preserve the knowledge is to keep using and teaching the techniques. For letterpress printing this is going to be the domain of specialized artists and non-profit organizations like SFCB. I really hope that we do manage to keep practices like through the generations; they're unique and beautiful as both a matter of history and a matter of craft.

This is a good reminder to myself that I meant to take the extended "core" letterpress workshop series at the SFCB, but did not have the time or energy for it over the last couple of years. Hopefully I'll do it this fall or something...

[1]: Like this but, IIRC, with a different instructor: https://www.sfcb.org/workshops/calendar/introductiontoletter...

[2]: https://www.sfcb.org/
by mschuster91 | 2025-04-16 15:47:06+00:00
> If cars (the non-software parts) were made like this, there would be millions of them breaking down by the side of the road daily.

Well, cars did break down by the side of the road daily! That's why it used to be good advice even in the 90s to always have a basic set of tools in your trunk, why AAA offered roadside assistance already in 1915, and why part of the European CDL is enough basic mechanic knowledge to self-help when the truck breaks down.

It's only in the last 20-ish years that "smarts" became cheap and ubiquitous enough in cars that the car can warn preemptively. And additionally, regulatory requirements on quality, parts availability and public expectations went up, exerting competitive pressure.
by teslabox | 2025-04-16 15:47:08+00:00
Apparently the low light performance of the full-frame Sonys is a combination of IBIS (mechanical in-body image stabilization) and Back-Side Illuminated (BSI) sensors. The Sony A6600 (APC) has IBIS, the A6700 adds BSI. Other camera manufacturers also offer BSI sensors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Back-illuminated_sensor
by IG_Semmelweiss | 2025-04-16 15:47:18+00:00
The problem with that assertion is that workers are not interchangeable commodities. Background maters.

Your example assumes that most unpaid people are your avg bureaucrat salarymen, looking to pay mortages, with expensive side mistresses etc. But these are not the workers we are talking about. Here are often tech millionaires that made their money actually selling things people found enticing.

For them, the extra dollar is just a small marginal gain on their life. Whereas for the average salaryman you are referring, money is a matter of actually having food of the table.

Not all dollars earned are the same.
by RiverCrochet | 2025-04-16 15:47:29+00:00
The C64 always booted to BASIC, specifically CBM BASIC 2.0. There wasn't a provision for automatic booting from disk until at least the C128.

LOAD "*",8,1 was the command to load the first file off of your attached 1541 (if you were lucky enough to have multiple 1541s, your first one would be device 8 and you'd have had to set the device number on others to 9 or higher). Anyone who had and played a lot of games on the C64 back in the day has this command etched in their permanent memory.

There was the convenient-looking RUN/STOP key (yes it is confusing, it's STOP without SHIFT, and RUN with SHIFT held down) but the RUN key would only auto-load from device 1 which was the cassette. Made sense in 1982 when the machine was released because disk drives were about $500 in 1982 dollars, the same price as the system itself.

BASIC 2.0 had no "BLOAD" or "BRUN" to directly load and/or run a binary executable. The underlying Kernal could do this, but BASIC left a LOT of functionality on the C64 unexposed (such as - all the sprites and graphics modes). So the standard was to release programs that were in a form that would look like a BASIC program.

So C64 BASIC doesn't have a BLOAD command but ... it kinda did in a janky way. The ,1 in LOAD"*",8,1 means to "not relocate the file" - and any PRG file on a 1541 disk will have the intended address of the "program" as its first two bytes. If the ,1 is present, BASIC will tell the Kernal to load the file at the address it specifies. (There was no SAVE"xxx",8,1). Some software would load to an address that would overwrite the BASIC main loop vectors and immediately start without having to type RUN afterward. Without the ,1 BASIC will load it into the BASIC program text space at 2048.

Much other software was a hacked BASIC program that had one command, something like 10 SYS 2057 or similar, and then 6502 code right after the necessary codes that told BASIC the end of program text was reached. BASIC program text started at memory location 2048, right after the 1K of screen RAM at 1024. SYS is a command that simply jumps to a machine language program - and in this case, it's jumping to the binary tacked on to the end of the small BASIC program, which would be the game or at least a booting program for the game.

Programs like this had the actual address in the PRG matching what BASIC would want, so LOAD "*",8 or LOAD"*",8,1 typically made no difference unless the game was that auto-RUNing type.

The C64 had 4K of RAM not used for anything else at 49152. It was common for utilities to live there, so you'd load those in with a LOAD"something",8,1 and then SYS 49152 to start them.
by _hyn3 | 2025-04-16 15:47:35+00:00
> President isn't CEO

The President is literally the Chief Executive officer in the United States.

https://people.howstuffworks.com/president4.htm

> Laws and budgets are set by Congress

That's correct, under Article 1, but the President does not have to spend every dime that was allocated.

> EOs do not have the force of law

"Both executive orders and proclamations have the force of law, much like regulations issued by federal agencies"

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/publicat...

You seem to underestimate the power that is vested in the office of the President as the Chief Executive.

> have been invalidated by courts

As have many, many legislatively-passed laws; this is simply checks-and-balances and allows the judiciary to act on other laws (which originate from Congress) and regulations (which originate from the Executive Branch).
by throw28198 | 2025-04-16 15:47:46+00:00
i mean, it still is, it's just that the window of nostalgia shifted so "vaporwave" has mutated into various strains of Y2K [0] and "windows 7" feeling music [1]

[0] https://open.spotify.com/playlist/37i9dQZF1DX9D5dmCM8Lo3

[1] https://open.spotify.com/playlist/47t3ywNfFeeqSj6gJDjvgF
by esafak | 2025-04-16 15:49:19+00:00
It is a service, not an open source tool, as far as I can tell. Do you intend to stay that way? What is the business model and pricing?

I am a bit concerned that you want users to swap out both their storage and workflow orchestrator. It's hard enough to convince users to drop one.

How does it compare to DuckDB or Polars for medium data?
by indigo945 | 2025-04-16 15:49:32+00:00
As a digression, the definition of knowledge as justified true belief runs into the Gettier problems:

> Smith [...] has a justified belief that "Jones owns a Ford". Smith > therefore (justifiably) concludes [...] that "Jones owns a Ford, or Brown > is in Barcelona", even though Smith has no information whatsoever about > the location of Brown. In fact, Jones does not own a Ford, but by sheer > coincidence, Brown really is in Barcelona. Again, Smith had a belief that > was true and justified, but not knowledge.

Or from 8th century Indian philosopher Dharmottara:

> Imagine that we are seeking water on a hot day. We suddenly see water, or so we > think. In fact, we are not seeing water but a mirage, but when we reach the > spot, we are lucky and find water right there under a rock. Can we say that we > had genuine knowledge of water? The answer seems to be negative, for we were > just lucky.

More to the point, the definition of knowledge as linguistic agreement is convincingly supported by much of what has historically been common knowledge, such as the meddling of deities in human affairs, or that the people of Springfield are eating the cats.
by Aurornis | 2025-04-16 15:49:38+00:00
Can anyone parse what this is? No examples, no documentation, just a lot of thinly implemented files?

Some of the files are just empty Rust files with names matching industry technologies, like the 0-byte prometheus.rs: https://github.com/iot-ecology/rust-iot-platform/blob/4f3ef3...

This reminds me of a lot of the “side projects” I’d see on resumes from juniors. A fun sandbox for their own experimenting and learning but impenetrable for anyone else.
by gus_massa | 2025-04-16 15:50:01+00:00
Someone I know got partial constipation, lack of apetite and stomach reflux. After some month of triying to fix the reflux, they discovered it was intestine cancer when the cancer was big enough to block almost all the flow.

IIUC from a sibling reply, you already used a few laxative, so perhaps a CT scan was the next step.
by HelloMcFly | 2025-04-16 15:50:34+00:00
The commenter is right that you shouldn't have to state those kinds of beliefs, but pragmatically this is a message board that invites all sorts of responses. Those additional notes are an attempt to head-off annoying and wrongly-based counter-responses built on assumptions that shouldn't have been made. But just because they shouldn't be doesn't mean they won't be.

Your comment evoking a victim complex on the other hand I find a far more annoying element of online discourse.
by margalabargala | 2025-04-16 15:50:58+00:00
It's not exploitable in that way.

The bill received is a "you must pay this if you want the package. If you do not, we will destroy the package". It's not a contractual obligation where you get sent to collections or take a credit hit if you don't pay.

In the situation you described, the end result is that your nemesis does nothing, pays nothing, and you are out $100.
by josefresco | 2025-04-16 15:51:35+00:00
This resonated with me based on my recent experience using Claude to help me code. I almost gave up, but re-phrased the initial request (after 7-10 failed tries) and it finally nailed it.

> 3. Performance improves with multiple attempts Allowing the o1 model 7 attempts instead of 1 nearly tripled its success rate, going from 16.5% to 46.5%. This hints that current models may have the knowledge to solve many more problems but struggle with execution on the first try.

https://newsletter.getdx.com/i/160797867/performance-improve...
by bunderbunder | 2025-04-16 15:52:06+00:00
I'd add that that, for this calculus to work out in a straightforward way, a competitive market is necessary but not sufficient. You also need other factors that help drive economies of scale, such as the thing in question being a manufactured good that can be sold to many people, or the production requiring expensive and specialized equipment that can be used for more than just that one thing.

I'm no expert, but I'd guess that these factors are more likely to line up in manufacturing and construction, or even R&D, than they are for things like maintenance of specialized IT systems or administration of services.