MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by kqr | 2025-05-23 04:47:12+00:00
I agree. But you're also not supposed to have separate booleans for each special print, because when you have many special prints it gets annoying to extend.

I've always liked this solutiin, which avoids that: https://archive.is/KJ39B

fizzbuzz i = fromMaybe (show i) . mconcat $ [ "fizz" <$ guard (i `rem` 3 == 0) , "buzz" <$ guard (i `rem` 5 == 0) ] main = for_ [1..100] $ putStrLn . fizzbuzz

This allows you to add special prints by adding just the one line of code, changing nothing else.
by hiAndrewQuinn | 2025-05-23 04:47:29+00:00
Hm...

14 => 1 (3^1) + 4 (3^0) => 7 => divisible by 7.

21 => 6 (3^1) + 1 (3^0) => 7 => also divisible by 7.

7 * 53 = 371 => 3 (3^2) + 7 (3^1) + 1 (3^0) => 27 + 21 + 1 => 49 => ALSO divisible by 7!

My word! This is the intuition I always suspected was possible after studying how bases worked, but I never took the time to investigate on my own.
by willmarquis | 2025-05-23 04:48:05+00:00
Flatpak’s biggest bug isn’t in the code, it’s the bus factor.

> Tons of features are stuck in merge-request limbo because there just aren’t enough reviewers, and if we don’t swap some “+1”s for actual PR reviews (or funding), we’ll be shipping apps in 2030 with a sandbox frozen in 2024 while everything else rides OCI.
by metaphor | 2025-05-23 04:48:42+00:00
> La choy is to soy sauce what Maruchen is to real ramen

Oh come on now, surely Maruchan deserves a bit more credit...at the very least, no one is breaking the bank while desecrating their soul.

In contrast, at my local Walmart, a 15-oz bottle of La Choy is priced +50% higher than its (subjectively superior) Kikkoman alternative of the same size!
by forrestthewoods | 2025-05-23 04:48:58+00:00
Over here in Windows land I can’t fathom why you need something like Flatpak just so users can reliably launch and run a program. I mean trust me I understand that Linux is so broken it needs something like flatpak. But imagine saying you’re disappointed the Windows executable format isn’t evolving! Running an exe shouldn’t require decades of maintenance. It shouldn’t be that complicated. It doesn’t have to be.
by 90s_dev | 2025-05-23 04:49:15+00:00
For one thing, it's hard to know what to spend it on. What should take priority? Obviously your own basic needs, for starters. And then of course the needs of your immediate dependents. But then what? Do you try to increase your quality of life? Theirs? At what point do you draw the line and begin to help others altruistically? Are two coins worth more than billions in practice? Besides, what even is quality of life? It's a very difficult and heavy problem. One I'm glad I don't have.
by verisimi | 2025-05-23 04:49:43+00:00
> While Nature can’t do its selection on ethical grounds, we can, and do, when we select what kinds of companies and rules and power centers are filling which niches in our world. It’s a decentralized operation (like evolution), not controlled by any single entity, but consisting of the “sum total of the wills of the masses,” as Tolstoy put it.

Alternatively, corporations and kings can manufacture the right kinds of opinions in people to sanction and direct the wills of the masses.
by bmink | 2025-05-23 04:50:44+00:00
> The authors of the study also propose alternative ways of thinking about the dog-human bond, blending the characteristics of different human relationships – not only the child-parent relationship, but also friendship and partnership - resulting in a unique bond with its own dynamics.

This is only towards the end of the article but addresses what was bothering me throughout it all — that having dogs is only viewed here through the lens of how it relates to having children.

What if some people (like me) simply 1) like dogs 2) don’t want children, and there’s no link?
by skissane | 2025-05-23 04:51:58+00:00
> The US had no immigration laws for the first 100 years,

The Naturalization Act of 1790 limited US citizenship by naturalisation to “free white persons” of “good moral character” - yes, it didn’t technically bar immigration from people who didn’t meet that criterion, but it reduced them to an underclass who were denied citizenship - and this was prior to the 14th Amendment, so there was no constitutional right to birthright citizenship even for their children born in the US.

The Alien Enemies Act of 1798 (still on the books but long dormant until recently revived by Trump) gave the federal government the power to deport citizens of countries at war with the US - effectively banning them from immigrating. The Alien Friends Act of 1798 allowed the President to deport any foreigner based on the President’s subjective determination that they were “dangerous”- however, it expired in 1800 and was not renewed.

In the early years of US independence, there were state laws enabling deportation of immigrants - e.g. in 1794 Massachusetts responded to the “problem” of poor Irish immigrants with a state law authorising their deportation back to Ireland, and several were actually deported under this Act. While nowadays, state-level deportation laws would surely be struck down as intruding into an exclusive federal domain, the lack of broad federal deportation statutes for much of the 18th/19th centuries left open a (since closed) constitutional space in which state-level deportation laws could exist

Even prior to US independence, British law gave the colonial authorities the power to deport people they viewed as undesirable - rarely exercised, but it legally existed - and the main reason they rarely exercised it was they didn’t get many “undesirable” immigrants turning up

Note I’m not defending these laws - judged by today’s standards they were racist and deeply unfair - just pointing out that the “first 100 years” of the US wasn’t as “open borders” as you paint it as having been

And while no doubt historically (and even today) many immigration laws have been racist in their terms, motivation, or implementation - I don’t think the idea of having some restrictions on immigration is inherently racist. Almost every country on earth (even non-Western) nowadays has laws saying people convicted of very serious crimes cannot immigrate without special permission - is it “racist” if Botswana says to someone just released from serving a 20 year prison sentence for terrorism “sorry, we don’t want you”?
by chao- | 2025-05-23 04:52:36+00:00
Often the legacy of an engineer (or team) who "did what they had to do" to meet a deadline, and if they wanted to migrate to something better post-launch, weren't allowed to allocate time to go back and do so.

At least JSON or CSV is better than the ad hoc homegrown formats you found at medium-sized companies that came out of the 90's and 00's.
by popalchemist | 2025-05-23 04:53:39+00:00
I understood it fine. It took a long time to amass the requisite familiarity with a broad spectrum of thinkers and a lot of manual effort to parse and make sense of how they use specific words and turn of phrase to refer to specific things; and not often in a way that is compatible with others' way of speaking.

In short, philosophy by its nature requires a sort of jargon that is similar to technical (i.e. programming) jargon; without that understanding, you will be getting a limited layer of data; references without referents.
by natmaka | 2025-05-23 04:55:27+00:00
> ocean disposal of radioactive material still happens, and experts are OK

As far as I know ''certain Annex I materials dumping may be permissible if present only as "trace contaminants" or "rapidly rendered harmless"'' ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Convention_on_the_Preve... ), that is to say we are far, far away from the massive (hundred of tons) dumps from the previous era ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_disposal_of_radioactive_... ).

> take into account the unborn generations?

This is by definition impossible. We may consider opinions of the current generation as reasonable approximations.

> Or the unemployed created by high energy prices?

It could be an argument in presence of a consensus promoting a single way to establish the total cost of a given type of energy source. There isn't, and it doesn't come as a surprise as some unpredictable event (nuclear major accident, nuclear waste wandering in some populated area...) may hugely raise the total cost.

Moreover the total production cost (LCOE) of renewables is already way (and more and more) below nuclear's, and there is no consensual way to assess the cost of firming those sources (cancelling the effects of 'intermittency' on production). Add the general movement towards decentralization...

Nowadays the low-and-ever-lowering-LCOE of renewables more and more threatens the very business model underlying the nuclear industry which finds its foundation in a high load factor.
by CrulesAll | 2025-05-23 04:57:19+00:00
"You can't prove humans do either." Yes you can via results and cross examination. Humans are cybernetic systems(the science not the sci-fi). But you are missing the point. LLMs are code written by engineers. Saying LLMs understand text is the same as saying a chair understands text. LLMs' 'understanding' is nothing more than the engineers synthesizing linguistics. When I ask an A'I' the Capital of Ireland, it answers Dublin. It does not 'understand' the question. It recognizes the grammar according to an algorithm, and matches it against a probabilistic model given to it by an engineer based on training data. There is no understanding in any philosophical nor scientific sense.
by toofy | 2025-05-23 04:57:23+00:00
if ya love learning about secret spaces, there is documentary named Dark Days about the hundreds of people who lived in the Freedom Tunnels beneath Manhattan in the 90s. incredible incredible movie.

the Freedom Tunnels where the crew did their filming are miles and miles of unused tunnels under Manhattan, formerly used for trains. once the trains stopped using them people built entire shanty towns, the director of Dark Days got thousands of hours of footage of the people inside one of these shanty towns. it’s amazing what the crew got footage of. people building entire little shanty houses and little villages. wild stuff.

i mean, i wouldn’t have lived there, but id be lying if i didnt admit a part of me finds it amazing what they threw together. for years, entire secret shanty villages right under the city with small village sized populations.
by intended | 2025-05-23 04:57:27+00:00
Fox and the rest of the media network is the main player. They spend the energy required to present an alternative reality for their base, and have insulated their viewers from any discussion on a shared common reality.

Furthermore, they are effectively part of the Republican Party. So they create and maintain a political reality which is purpose built to achieve political goals.

The underlying assumption of western liberal democracies is that participants can figure things out together. You cannot figure things out when you have one side intentionally creating alternate narratives to stymie conversation and debate, to shore up negotiating power for the leaders of their bloc.
by shegby | 2025-05-23 04:58:10+00:00
Thanks!

We can't wait to test Nostria's fully peer-to-peer design in an environment that shares our values of decentralisation and freedom.

If you're interested in finding out more or would like to support the project, please take a look at our early fundraiser: https://www.nostria.app/funding.

We would love to hear your thoughts!
by valenterry | 2025-05-23 04:59:03+00:00
You have a point.

When using MD5 (128bit) then when AWS S3 would apply this technique, it would only get a handful of collisions. Using 256bit would drive that down to a level where any collision is very unlikely.

This would be worth it if a 4kb block is, on average, duplicated with a chance of at least 6.25%. (not considering overhead of data-structures etc.)
by a_bonobo | 2025-05-23 05:01:26+00:00
Could the exclusion of CoT that be because of this recent Anthropic paper?

https://assets.anthropic.com/m/71876fabef0f0ed4/original/rea...

>We evaluate CoT faithfulness of state-of-the-art reasoning models across 6 reasoning hints presented in the prompts and find: (1) for most settings and models tested, CoTs reveal their usage of hints in at least 1% of examples where they use the hint, but the reveal rate is often below 20%, (2) outcome-based reinforcement learning initially improves faithfulness but plateaus without saturating, and (3) when reinforcement learning increases how frequently hints are used (reward hacking), the propensity to verbalize them does not increase, even without training against a CoT monitor. These results suggest that CoT monitoring is a promising way of noticing undesired behaviors during training and evaluations, but that it is not sufficient to rule them out.

I.e., chain of thought may be a confabulation by the model, too. So perhaps there's somebody at Anthropic who doesn't want to mislead their customers. Perhaps they'll come back once this problem is solved.
by ninetyninenine | 2025-05-23 05:01:45+00:00
>I don't think I can match the inconsistency of your "logic": human brain is on Earth so it's by definition "realizable", but fusion isn't?

Another human brain can be as much as 2 feet away from you. You're it. The core of the sun you can't even touch it and it involves unimaginable forces and energy levels never generated on earth. If you can't see the consistency of my logic, then you're illogical. Plain and simple.

>"Trendlines", before being trusted by "scientists to predict things", are carefully examined and only some of them have any "probability" attached to them. Statistics is not probability (which speaks of chance for something to happen), but instead observation of past patterns. Extrapolation into the future is applied very carefully and with sufficient backing.

They have probability. Past patterns are more likely to happen in the future. Extrapolation given what information we have is the best bet. It's not a sure fire bet but it's the best one we have. Your bet of zero information, random gut feelings, anecdotal facts with zero quantification is utter bullshit.

>You also seem to suggest that OpenAI releasing ChatGPT to the public at a huge financial loss has not led to huge investment in generative AI all over the industry and all over the world since there was no "feedback loop" — my point was that this has provided a huge push by getting many smart people working on it after ChatGPT became available to everyone, thus leading to a continuing upward "trendline" in LLM development: it's as self-reinforcing as the example you give with stocks. In statistics, one aberrant huge spike like this one is usually smoothed over a longer time period: the hustlers usually look for the steepest part of the curve and promote that instead.

Did I suggest that? How about no i didn't suggest that. You suggested that. There is no feedback loop genius. AI is tech nobody has ever seen before and they invested into it because of how obviously exciting it is. There is no feedback loop of buying at the peek and selling at the dip by observing a trendline. You're just arbitrarily trying to bend the whole situation to fit the analogy and it only makes your argument worse.

I'm done with you. We can agree to disagree but I'm sorry to say anyone seeing your argument will just laugh. Good day sir.
by csomar | 2025-05-23 05:02:03+00:00
> And competitors who _didn't_ jump on the AI bandwagon, but instead kept grinding with a strong focus on quality will eat their lunches.

If the banking industry is any clue they'll get bailout from the government to prevent a "systemic collapse". There is a reason "everyone" is doing it especially with these governments. You get to be cool, you don't risk of missing out and if it blows, you let it blow on the tax payer expense. The only real risk for this system is China because they can now out compete the US industries.
by Joel_Mckay | 2025-05-23 05:02:06+00:00
Depends which of the hundreds of C compilers you used, as some "bool" are cast as uint8_t, others unsigned char, and others bit-packed with an optimizer.

With C, any claim one makes about repeatability is always wrong at some point depending on the version compliance.

I like C, but Haskell is a happy optimistic syntax... Julia is probably the language I'd wager becoming more relevant as Moore's laws corpse begins to stink. =3
by rashunain | 2025-05-23 05:06:10+00:00
Daily current affairs updates are available in English, including news headlines, GK questions, and answers. Overall, the Current Affairs 23 May 2025 covers a range of topics, including national and international news, sports, education, and daily current affairs quizzes. It is essential to stay updated with the latest news and developments to remain informed and prepared for competitive exams and other challenges.
by n8cpdx | 2025-05-23 05:07:39+00:00
> If you have tentative plans like “lunch with a friend sometime next week” there is no obvious way to add this to your calendar in a way that differentiates it from an important appointment that can’t be missed.

Does Google Calendar not let you mark events as tentative? Outlook does and I’ve always taken that for granted.

Speaking of Outlook, they used to have a board view that I think was conceptually quite close to achieving the large free form canvas experience of a paper calendar. Retired years ago though. https://www.computerworld.com/article/1616186/how-to-use-out...
by mshockwave | 2025-05-23 05:08:58+00:00
> In the case where one of the structs has just been computed, attempting to load it as a single 32-bit load can result in a store forwarding failure

It actually depends on the uArch, Apple silicon doesn't seem to have this restriction: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43888005

> In a non-inlined, non-PGO scenario the compiler doesn't have enough information to tell whether the optimization is suitable.

I guess you're talking about stores and load across function boundaries?

Trivia: X86 LLVM creates a whole Pass just to prevent this partial-store-to-load issue on Intel CPUs: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/llvm/lib/Targ...
by goku12 | 2025-05-23 05:10:04+00:00
It has been a while since I used Wallabag on KOReader and I have no experience using wallabako (that project wasn't around when I tried Wallabag). But seeing that you're already using KOReader, I don't expect either of them to present a challenge to you. As far as I remember, using Wallabag on KOReader, including sync was simple enough.

The only issue I have with Wallabag is that it reduces the battery supported time significantly. This isn't a big issue in my case, but a longer backup would be nice. However, others have reported that they don't suffer the problem to the same magnitude. Perhaps wallabako can reduce that power usage when KOReader can be exited.
by nayuki | 2025-05-23 05:10:55+00:00
> I have heard "bare K" refer to a great many different things

The worst of the worst is when it refers to kilometres. Like, "I'm selling my car on the used market and its odometer is 150k", where they mean "150k km", but stacked prefixes are not allowed in metric, so the correct notation is "150 Mm" or "150 megametres".

I get immense pushback whenever I point this out - the response is usually along the lines of "but you know what I meant", and it inherently assumes that km is the universal unit for talking about distance traveled by car.

I point out that this is as ridiculous as saying "the hard drive is 4k GB" because they grew up with gigabytes; no, the correct notation is either "4000 GB" or "4 TB".

Also regarding bare k or kilo (especially キロ in Japanese), you can say something ridiculously ambiguous like "My scooter goes up to 30k for 90k and weighs 20k" (respectively km/h, km, and kg).
by intended | 2025-05-23 05:12:59+00:00
I dont, and instead would build on this argument further.

There is no political winning, at any time in the future, unless the structural issue with information and news ecosystems is dealt with. The best evidence I have seen, shows that news consumption on the right in America is sealed, and has no traffic with the center or left.

There is no future for ANY liberal democracy, if there is no fair debate between its citizenry. We aren’t even fighting for the table stakes of informed citizenry, but we are talking about the scraps of not debating fantasy.

This isn’t even about misinformation; the total consumption of misinformation as a portion of total content can only shift so much, given the number of hours in a day. It’s not the production of more misinformation which matters - it is the championing of misinformation by leaders that makes it a ‘fact’.

This then decides the talking points for debates. The side which has to do research that requires interrogating reality - slower, probabilistic, uncertain processes - is inefficient when competing with a party that can create facts.

The reason that the Stanford Internet Observatory and other content moderation arms are being targeted, is because for all their warts and issues, these teams were trying to ensure a fair market place of ideas, and as a result ended up slowing the spread of narratives on the right. Or potential new recruits.
by csomar | 2025-05-23 05:13:07+00:00
Maybe you are not reading what we are writing :) Here is an article of mine https://omarabid.com/gpt3-now

> But for certain use cases (e.g. simple script, written from scratch), it's absolutely fantastic.

I agree with that. I've found it to be very useful for "yarn run xxx" scripts. Can automate lots of tasks that I wouldn't bother with previously because the cost of coding the automation vs. doing them manually was off.
by Calwestjobs | 2025-05-23 05:14:10+00:00
VR headsets can be modified by removing IR filter if there is one, you should be ableto see near ir with them, same as with phone. or replacing it with ir only filter... or change camera sensor for SWIR one, for example here in video showing of unexpected industrial use cases of such sensor https://youtu.be/mS4EBbALAFM?t=153

im not sure "VR headsets" have cameras with good enough resolution to provide reliable magnification without AI/ml full of artifacts nonsense.

but you can connect different camera sources to them / to PC they are connected to,

for example some webcams have removable optics, so by removing that lens you get great macro camera, without replacing optics, just removing lens. i used that trick multiple times for reading PCB components type, covered with conformal coating. or with little ingenuity it is possible to replace with different lens altogether.

you should check out mobile phone microphone, where guy put drop of water on mobile phone lens and created microscope. or- lens from laser pointer - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOHxNbxm-m4

different angles of incidence of light can make huge difference in legibility, be it for fine work or home.

or changing color(s) can increase contrast in some interiors. or just using one color of light i.e laser flood
by nilslice | 2025-05-23 05:14:53+00:00
> Each MCP server still needs to handle auth differently depending on what it's connecting to.

Setting aside expected criticism about this being some middleware layer, but we’ve launched a solution to this problem:

An MCP “SSO”, where you install and auth your MCP servers into profiles (collections of servers), which we virtualize into a single MCP server with only a single OAuth flow — simplifying the experience substantially for both the user of the MCP servers and the clients connecting to them.

https://docs.mcp.run/blog/2025/05/14/mcp-sso/
by verisimi | 2025-05-23 05:16:18+00:00
Nothing to do with scruples, but I don't think casinos need to load dice too. They already have 'loaded the maths' and this is in the open - over time they win. Why act covertly in an underhand way, whilst also providing the opportunity for gamblers to test themselves against probability? You'd think they wouldn't want to jeopardise their market provision and need the belief of their consumers to maintain this.