MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by bitmasher9 | 2025-04-17 13:40:50+00:00
> To those presenting such arguments, do you think that applies to other activities as well?

You’re acting like it’s not normal for parents to decide which activities a child can do, cannot do, and must do, and to make these decisions with appropriate ages in mind. I tend to lean towards allowing parents a long leash in their own home and other private places but to regulate behavior in schools and public places.
by slau | 2025-04-17 13:40:51+00:00
What do you mean by “it’s what keeps me off sugar”? Do you otherwise have cravings for candy if you don’t satisfy the need with that chocolate?

Does fruit satisfy the same craving?

I’m asking because I genuinely don’t really get cravings for sweet stuff. There are plenty of candy stores where I live, and there’s a social norm to get “Friday sweets”, especially for parents with children, but I never understood the appeal.
by e40 | 2025-04-17 13:41:06+00:00
For me, sugar was the reason I couldn't lose weight. I got a CGM (continuous glucose monitor) and got my blood sugar under control, and with very little effort I lost a lot of weight.

I use 90% cacao Lindt to control my sweet tooth. 1/2 the bar has 4g of sugar, and I consume it over hours. It also has the side effect of reducing my hunger. If you eat much of 90% chocolate, it makes you feel nausea. The trick is to put a small chip in your mouth and let it melt. It's quite delicious and I've not had any sweets in 80+ days.
by danaris | 2025-04-17 13:41:22+00:00
How about we start with knowing that it's not "free" as in "costs nothing to anybody", as UncleMeat has already acknowledged that it's being provided by the government through taxation, and actually address why you thin that it's bad, rather than just repeating "it's not free! it's not freeeeee!!!!" over and over again, as if we're idiots who don't understand how taxes and public funding work?
by moffkalast | 2025-04-17 13:41:27+00:00
Well if decryption is so justified then brute force breaking that takes significant resources so it's hard to unnoticeably misuse would be a good approach. When you can only break into 100 phones a year, then there's no slippery slope or fascist governments that could wildly misuse it for their own gain because it's not physically viable.
by Cthulhu_ | 2025-04-17 13:41:27+00:00
Sure; it's a layered system, each one taking more effort or thinking than the other.

Easy diets: drink this shake 3x a day. Don't eat $food_category. Limit calory intake to $amount / day.

More complex: The above, plus macronutrients.

More complex: The above, plus micronutrients.

Add dimensions like lifestyle choices (vegetarianism, veganism etc) or food sensitivities (celiac, lactose intolerance).

I'm no diet expert and need to lose some weight myself but the main advice I'd give is to get stable first. Plan your meals, eat regular meals at regular intervals, keep excess / luxuries / "rewards" to a minimum. Only when you have reached a stable and sustainable pattern should you start to make adjustments. The problem with diets or major lifestyle changes is that they're hard to keep up, simply because they are so different from your usual. The shake diets generally don't work long term because people suffer and go back to their old habits, if not overcompensate because their body signals a deprivation of some kind.
by aaronbaugher | 2025-04-17 13:41:42+00:00
I haven't seen it either, but it should be doable as you describe. A TSX will transfer the stack pointer to the X register, so that would tell you where to start inserting the pointers you want to "jump to" on the next RTS. There's nothing to stop you writing directly into the stack page, other than sanity.

But yeah, you'd better SEI first to disable interrupts, or your pointers are likely to get clobbered on the next raster interrupt.
by Nick-W | 2025-04-17 13:41:47+00:00
This. It's insanely expensive, I'm unpaid and I've sunk about half a million into the network so far and 3+ years of work. We now have enough revenue to keep the lights on if I no longer support the company, but just barely so, and assumes zero growth and minimal support hours. I did this because it genuinely helps our community and the impact is directly visible and notable, but the economics are basically impossible, especially as a startup.
by pc86 | 2025-04-17 13:42:04+00:00
It's extremely likely that our demise will come before too long.

The problem is that "before too long" is on a universal timescale, not a human timescale.

Humanity could exist for a million times longer than it already has, expand to other planets in our solar system and even to another solar system or two, be wiped out completely, and on the appropriate timescale we were absolutely "short lived."
by chupasaurus | 2025-04-17 13:42:05+00:00
> Remember you are not banning all air.

Nope, it's about exactly that. This policy would work only for law-abiding citizens which terrorists are not, that's the point.

Added: The current gulag expeditions in US nor Guantanamo have nothing to do with US citizens, which is a big difference from GGP's comment.
by ookdatnog | 2025-04-17 13:42:38+00:00
Not commenting on general trends, but I don't think my opinion on IP shifted massively as a result of the rise of LLMs. I can summarize it as follows:

- It seems desirable to have some system that allows creatives to be paid for their work.

- Whether current IP law is the best system we can come up with is highly debatable. But nevertheless it is the system we have, and its existence is to some extent justified.

- If we look at the "pefect case" where IP law functions as intended (for example, an author publishes a book in which they invested years of their life), then breaking IP law (sharing that author's work without their consent) in that instance seems, to me, immoral.

- Nevertheless there are plenty of excesses in the system where I would judge that the application of IP law is unjustified and breaking the law is morally justified (naturally I still don't recommend it). This includes, for example, paywalled papers from publicly-funded research, works that can no longer reasonably be purchased (for example games for old consoles), most if not all software patents, ...

So the question simply boils down to: is sports commentary justifiably protected under IP law? I think the answer is a pretty clear-cut "yes" here, I don't see how it falls under any case of IP law overreach.
by socalgal2 | 2025-04-17 13:43:04+00:00
There is every reason to do this. Because it affects the next customer in a negative way which dissuades riders. I for one will rate my ride as 1 out of 5 stars if it's not clean and has flyers/ads/notes left by previous riders. Will you enjoy it if you get into a car and it's got a bunch of Maga propoganda or if you get in ar with your children and it's got a bunch of flyers for sex workers? Both are vandalism.

If you can't leave the car clean then you shouldn't be allowed in the car except in exceptional circumstances.
by AlexandrB | 2025-04-17 13:43:22+00:00
Why does being "neutral to friendly" with Trump mean you're not a centrist? There are only two options in the US political system. Would being "neutral to friendly" with Kamala mean someone is more centrist somehow?

There's the assumption infused to a lot of these conversations that Trump is uniquely bad or uniquely extreme and so that "centrism" would still mean opposing him.

I also don't get what's particularly "grass roots" about support for the Democrats. During the Kamala campaign we had a string of celebrity endorsements including a cringey Avengers reunion zoom call. These are rich, privileged people from a specific social milieu - not grass roots by any means.

The last "grass roots" candidate was probably Bernie Sanders (someone Joe Rogan also supported, incidentally), but he was too dangerous to corporate profit margins for the DNC to let him win.
by sebastiennight | 2025-04-17 13:43:29+00:00
I love that as soon as he writes,

> The plan was simple.

You know you're in for a funny read.

More seriously though, the JSON example from a vision language model is interesting but does not take into account how much extrapolation (hallucination) the model will insert over time.

For instance, even if not visible in the image, your VLM will probably start inserting details (such as the color of the team's jersey) based on knowing the team's three-letter identifier.

So the reliability of the system will go down over time, and it probably compounds if you're using some of that info to feed further steps in the loop.
by jccalhoun | 2025-04-17 13:43:43+00:00
Community college isn't free but it is much less than 4 year colleges. You can take out loans that will cover things like books and other expenses. I'm not in financial aid so I don't know exactly how it works. I assume they aren't really "bots" but are people in another country who have faked an identity. Anyone could do it but if they used their real name the government will find them eventually. As faculty I could look at the "student's" schedule and see they were taking multiple online classes from different campuses in our system. I called the number on their accounts and two of them were no answer and the third I called was someone else who didn't know that name.

I assume that one person is running accounts for multiple "students" and from the boiler plate that one person submitted I wouldn't be surprised if it was an organized business like many internet/phone scams.
by pogue | 2025-04-17 13:43:52+00:00
The group, Lead Safe Mamas, seems to be advocating for products to be lead free & I think that's a perfectly reasonable position to take. But, it's not possible for some food and other products to be free of lead and other heavy metals. AFAIK, there's no way to filter heavy metals out products, unfortunately.

The only other issue is that the Lead Free Mamas is providing affiliate links to sell some of the products they test and could definitely be seen as a conflict of interest.
by inglor_cz | 2025-04-17 13:44:03+00:00
Which governments are the good ones?

Is Indian government a good one, or Hungary's, or Turkish, German, or British, or the US? In the last case (well, in all cases), does "goodness" of a government depend on the current incumbent? What if a previously "good" government turns into an atrocious one?

See also: the detailed Dutch census, which was mostly harmless, until it fell into hands of the Nazis in 1940 and helped them to identify and exterminate almost all Jews in the country.
by floatrock | 2025-04-17 13:44:23+00:00
Another possibility is we're looking for the wrong techno signatures, or just haven't conceived what the technosignatures for a 10,000-year technologically advanced civilization are.

We've been a techno-civ for what? Maybe only 200-ish years? Our paradigm is gobble up all the energy and grow at all costs. So extrapolate that out, and the logical conclusion is a dyson megasphere that radiates all over the infrared.

But then again, that paradigm is careening us towards an environmental and ecosystem collapse: the hunger for infinite growth is warming our climate, it's unclear whether our nuclear-armed social structures can handle the coming disruptions and migrations, and if we don't kill ourselves, unclear how big a population all the environmental degradation and pollution can support.

So we can project our cute 200-year-old patterns out to a maybe-discoverable 10,000-year civilization driven by the same motivations and flows, but those extrapolations quickly run up against some pretty existential pragmatic threats.

Maybe the answer is we aren't seeing any of the technosignatures because the techonsignatures on the other side of the Great Filter look very different from the ones we conceive of now.
by mjburgess | 2025-04-17 13:44:29+00:00
Yeah, and as of a month ago, I was in exactly the same position.

The extrajudicial enslavement of legal immigrants into foreign prisons, "crosses the rubicon". You cannot have presidential power operating in this way. It's not the immigrant part, it's the extrajudicial part. If trump has this power against anyone, he then has it against everyone.

Against that backdrop you have the targeting of law firms that have represented political opponents of the president; the attempt to totalise control of universities, and so on.

The whole thing is now tettering on the edge of what was previously just hysteria.

Perhaps the final nail in the coffin for me has been seeing online how credulous the right has been about the government's propaganda. This tells me that the conditions for totalitarianism are here in the people -- a mass of people identify with trump, uncritically believe the propaganda. The dismantling of rival power centres in all of american society and government is taking place whilst a large number of people applaud.

People havent yet seen the transition that has taken place within the Trump government. Before the Musk programme, the deportations, etc. were all on the extreme-side of constitutional presidental power.

We are actually now past that, and his supporters are operating as if we're not. They don't realise they're applauding what they will severely come to regret. They think they're applauding the end of DEI, of elite power, of the stock-owning class. When in fact, it's pretty clear now, these are just the grievances benig used to establish unlimited intrusion of the presidency into all aspects of civil and political life.

The next mass protest will precipitate a crisis of the legitimacy of the federal monopoly on violence in the US. Unless some means can be deployed soon to constrain the president, america is in a very dangerous position.
by ajsnigrutin | 2025-04-17 13:44:45+00:00
These are not 20 something college students with jobs and rented apartments, doing stuff without their parents knowing.

These are kids younger than 13, they don't have jobs, they live with their parents, no internet/data planes outside of control of their parents, no nothing.

The goal of these laws is to get ID checks on social networks for everyone, so the governments know who the "loud ones" (against whatever political cause) are. Using small kids as a reason to do so is a typical modus operandi to achieve that.

Yes, those "one or two adults" I meantioned should be the parents, and yes, parents can legally confiscate their kids phones if they're doing something stupid online. They can also check what the kid is doing online.

If a 12yo kid (or younger) can somehow obtain money and a phone and keep it hidden from their parents, that kid will also be able to avoid such checks by vpn-ing (or using a proxy) to some non-UK country, where those checks won't be mandatory. This again is solved by the parents actually parenting, again... it's kids younger than 13, at that age, parents can and should have total control of their child.
by londons_explore | 2025-04-17 13:45:06+00:00
This seems like a pretty complex setup with lots of features which aren't obviously important for a deep learning workload.

Presumably the key necessary features are PB's worth of storage, read/write parallelism (can be achieved by splitting a 1PB file into say 10,000 100GB shards, and then having each client only read the necessary shards), and redundancy

Consistency is hard to achieve and seems to have no use here - your programmers can manage to make sure different processes are writing to different filenames.
by bko | 2025-04-17 13:45:12+00:00
I get it, it helps to have wealthy foreign donors and you don't have to give them aid.

I was more asking why is this acceptable? If its an American university, benefiting from American tax dollars, shouldn't it primarily benefit American students?

So many things we just accept at face value and don't question. I never really thought about it before, but it's weird now that I think about it. This is necessarily a scarce resource (by design). It doesn't have to be, they could vastly grow their class size without lowering standards. But they choose not to, to maintain elite status and make their donor class happy.

If they wanted to keep their class size the same, they could probably fund it entirely through their $53bn endowment, yet they still charge 50k+ a year.

And then they have the audacity to reject thousands of qualified American kids and give their seats to rich foreign kids? Come on
by throw4847285 | 2025-04-17 13:45:19+00:00
This is where the discussion, as it always does, silently transitions from science into science fiction.

We know absolutely nothing about extraterrestrial life. We can only project our own singular experience onto the rest of the universe. We only have one data point. There is no scientifically acceptable method of induction from a single data point. The possibilities are endless, and are capacity to narrow them down becomes warped by our love of stories and the kinds of art that we have created about extraterrestial life, all of which are in one way or another metaphors for the human condition.

There is nothing wrong with saying, "Anything is possible and we have 0 evidence allowing us to narrow it down." It isn't fun, but it's true.
by nopelynopington | 2025-04-17 13:45:57+00:00
sure, here's my conversation with BitNet b1.58 2B4T

https://pastebin.com/ZZ1tADvp

here's the same prompt given to smollm2:135m

https://pastebin.com/SZCL5WkC

The quality of the second results are not fantastic. The data isn't public, and it repeats itself mentioning income a few times. I don't think I would use either of these models for accurate data but I was surprised at the truncated results from bitnet

Smollm2:360M returned better quality results, no repetition, but it did suggest things which didn't fit the brief exactly (public data given location only)

https://pastebin.com/PRFqnqVF

Edit:

I tried the same query on the live demo site and got much better results. Maybe something went wrong on my end?
by goranmoomin | 2025-04-17 13:46:28+00:00
From the title, I hoped so much that this was about using UTM on Apple Silicon iPads – don’t really want the person who always complains about Apple, but it’s really a pity that the iPad has such a strong CPU inside (I own an M4 iPad Pro) and can’t do any realistic development on it.

Last time I checked, there really isn’t any way to virtualize ARM machines on the iPad with UTM (unless you’re on a lower iOS version), and emulating x86_64 machines were slow enough (even on M4 iPads) and not really usable.

I’m on an environment where iPads are fine but equivalent MacBooks aren’t (stupid rules), and got this machine for hope that I might tinker development with iPads, but I gave up running stuff locally and just boot up an EC2 instance whenever I really want to do something. It’s a pity.

(BTW, from the article, why would anyone really emulate a Linux machine with UTM on Apple Silicon? From my experience ARM64 Linux images are really good at compatibility…)
by ZeroGravitas | 2025-04-17 13:46:37+00:00
It basically made criticising Israel automatically "anti-Semitic".

While someone who has previously said that the Jews are importing immigrants to intentionally undermine the USA who gave multiple Seig Heils was an ambiguous situation that they didn't want to rush to judgement on.

They basically destroyed all their credibility by becoming an advocate for Israel not for Jewish people.
by sebastiennight | 2025-04-17 13:46:50+00:00
He's diffing the frames, and then the only pixels that stay the same are the UI, from which he doesn't directly get the UI (see the example, it's illegible) but he can extract the POSITION of the UI on the screen by finding all the non-red pixels.

And then he does a good ol' regular crop on the original image to get the UI excerpt to feed the vision model.
by mistrial9 | 2025-04-17 13:46:53+00:00
thx for this link.. there is something important missing in the post. Some kinds of inert materials are "bio-accumulative" .. the dose is important but the lifetime dose is the real enemy with lead. The bulk of lead does not naturally pass out of a human organism, it accumulates. Similarly with vegetable eating animals, that humans eat. The dose of lead in one toothbrush session is not the point in this case.
by spacemark | 2025-04-17 13:47:15+00:00
Don't be bothered by the down votes. HN consensus is not something worth pursuing. Your criticism is valid, it's just that it runs against what HN readers want to believe in this instance. Readers here like to think they're motivated by reason and intelligence and whatnot, but that is laughable - examples of logical fallacies and assertions of fact rocketing to the top comments abound. Overconfidence and readiness to accept bold claims is a more dangerous cultural dysfunction than the lack of seriousness and ubiquitous monetization that plagues other platforms.

In any case this study will likely go on the pile of papers judged by time to be an overreach of conclusions and a dead end.
by haswell | 2025-04-17 13:48:03+00:00
I don’t think this particular devil needs more advocacy.

Law enforcement agencies currently have more data about each of us and more sophisticated tools to investigate crimes than at any time in human history.

> Politicians are (mistakenly) asking for a master key - but what I feel we should as a community support is some fine-grained legal process that would allow limited access to user information if justified by a warrant.

The problem with all backdoors is the human element. Master keys will be leaked. A process to gain access to a temporary key is also subject to the human factor. We’ve already seen this happen with telecom processes that are only supposed to be available to law enforcement.

The other issue is one of a legitimately slippery slope. The asymmetric nature of the power dynamic between governments and their citizens makes it even more critical to avoid sliding down that slope.

And finally, in the environment you propose, criminals will just stop using services that are able to provide such services to the government. Criminality will continue while ordinary citizens lose more and more of their rights.
by arp242 | 2025-04-17 13:48:14+00:00
This type of fraud is not entirely a new thing, e.g. from 2014: https://leb.fbi.gov/articles/featured-articles/pell-grant-fr...

But the numbers mentioned there seem tiny for a federal programme like the Pell Grant. A lot of times it's a matter of scale: a bit of fraud isn't ideal, but entirely manageable, so whatever.

Since then the scale expanded greatly. This is often a problem when you move things online: you're instantly connected with everyone on the world, which also means you're instantly connected with every asshole in the world. And with AI a single asshole can now pretend to be 200 assholes.

The solution is to do less things online and more in person. There are some advantages for some people in doing things online, but it also negatively affects everyone, and in general it just doesn't seem worth it to do everything online. It's not binary: you can do many things online while still requiring some bits in-person (e.g. registration, exams, occasional events).
by jccalhoun | 2025-04-17 13:48:20+00:00
Sort of. As a professor who has encountered this, on one hand if I have fewer papers to grade then I'm happy but on the other hand the "students" do submit work for at least the first couple weeks that I still had to grade. (After that we caught on and got them out of the class). Additionally, I would rather just grade good papers than try to figure out why their work seemed weird. Is it AI generated? A non-native english speaker? Good old fashioned plagiarism? or just bad work?

Last semester was the first time I encountered it and I was suspicious and then I talked to a colleague who noticed identical irregularities.