MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Bearstrike | 2025-05-02 17:00:52+00:00
This comment is correct as written: The U.S. is under-equipped with small UAS.

However, if you're suggesting that that the U.S. is blind to the importance of small UAS (given the context of the article), that is fortunately not the case.

The U.S. started taking note of the importance of small UAS as early as the second Nagorno-Karabakh war in 2020, where their use was prevalent. The continued appearance of small UAS (and their increased volume) throughout the war in Ukraine cemented the place of small UAS in future combat.

The recognition of how small UAS are changing the game is a big reason (but not the only reason) the Army cancelled the FARA program. Manned Aviation at the scale it is done in the past is not how wars will be won. It isn't going away, but it's roles/prevalance is changing.

If you're truly interested, see the DoD memos this week that include info about the Army's shift in focus with respect to aviation and unmanned systems.
by jajuuka | 2025-05-02 17:01:05+00:00
To me it's felt like coasting. Just release very minimal updates each year to all their main products let others die on the vine like HomePods. iOS 18 marquee features were Apple Intelligence and customizing the home screen. One that didn't ship and one that has been a staple of Android since day 1.

Only real advancement I've seen is in Apple Silicon. Which is fantastic but very much on a tik-tok cycle like Intel. Really wish these companies would cut back on constant model upgrades and instead spend more time polishing the products.
by dragonwriter | 2025-05-02 17:01:19+00:00
> gwern summarizes it appropriately

The key claims about the film that gwern's argument builds on are false, though. E.g.: "in a setting where there are no genuine consequences to any of this, no genetic engineering, no embryo selection"

It is a rather central part of the story that genetic engineering and embryo selection are routine, and the principal protagonist is noteworthy because his parents did not use such techniques, and he was instead a "faith baby".

gwern is clearly criticizing something, but it's not what is actually portrayed in the film Gattaca.
by tekla | 2025-05-02 17:01:42+00:00
You can't outrun your fork (Of course some smart guy will bring up Olympic level athletes, but we're not freaking talking about Olympic level athletes are we?

A 5K run for 30m burns ~300-600 calories. A single serving of a candy bar is ~250 calories. You NEED to restrict the CI portion since its the easiest part of the equation to control.
by bravetraveler | 2025-05-02 17:02:30+00:00
antirez isn't the focus of my ire, stop. They simply have the misfortune of proximity. The actual CTO told us 'always BSD'. Now Salvatore is telling us it didn't totally expire. Great!

Except... the CEO forgot. Here's a lesson about AGPL and the Big Bad Cloud. Give me a break or I'll take one.

At risk of confusing things further: YouTube is leaking, is kind of my point. Apologies again for not exhaustively phrasing my criticism. s/ging CEOs/gers/; better?

One last try: I'm happy for the evangelism, I'm less happy about the repeat license discussion. The blogs from all of the employees add a frustrating element. It's a trend now spanning businesses.

With what Mullenweg did, another conveniently forgetful CEO, I'm (admittedly, excessively) cynical.

How you thought I was saying antirez is the CEO is utterly baffling. I have a hard time thinking this is genuine, but rather, a troll. Entirely non-sequitur/failure of compound reasoning.
by alabastervlog | 2025-05-02 17:02:53+00:00
Early, strong reader here. Off-the-charts spatial reasoning, as measured by tests.

Terrible at math, I hate it and feel dyslexic trying to read most mathematical writing. I excelled at it in elementary school, then quickly came to feel frustratingly stupid at it as it became less about algorithms (more on that in a bit...) and all about equations and abstract stuff with unknown applications.

However, programming was natural and easy to pick up. I've repeatedly had to take more time convincing myself I actually understand some supposedly "hard" thing, like pointers or recursion, than it took to learn them in the first place, because they were in fact very easy to understand so I kept second-guessing myself—"I must not get it, because that was easy". I've been the go-to guy for "hard" and "low-level" problems basically everywhere I've worked.

What I've noticed is that when I must read math, the only way I can get any headway is to turn everything into steps, through which some example values may pass and affect one another. I have to turn it all into algorithms. Algorithms, I can get. Attempts to express meaning through equations and proofs, no, I have to painstakingly turn every single boundary between every symbol into a step and "walk through" it to have any hope of understanding it, and once I do, this new understanding only barely illuminates the original representation.

I think programming clicked for me because, as typically encountered and taught, it's very heavy on algorithms and very light on other varieties of mathematical presentation. Plus, having so very much more context available about what variables represent and what routines do, than a jumble of letters and symbols. FFS, if we say Perl is line noise, what's mathematical writing? Straight gibberish from a brain-wrecked Cthulhu cultist? Perl's the clearest thing in the world by comparison!

... where I do run into trouble is languages with "mathy" syntax, where the idiomatic style favors single-letter variables and accomplishing-things-by-asserting-equality. I can't read Haskell to save my life. Put the same supposedly-tricky concepts (monads, type classes) in any more-ordinary language, and it's easy, but when I tried to learn them using Haskell, I couldn't get anywhere at all. Shit, it takes me forever just to understand fizzbuzz-level programs written in Haskell.
by wonderwonder | 2025-05-02 17:03:15+00:00
Gaining weight and keeping it is a choice. There are a myriad of solutions some simple like diet and exercise, some more complex like TRT and glp-1 drugs.

I gained a good amount of weight since I had kids, went from a healthy weight of 210lbs at 6'1 to 240lbs at 45 years old.

I always worked out so I had good muscle mass but my diet was terrible, often consuming a pint of ice cream at night once the kids went to sleep.

I got on TRT and compound semaglutide and now I am 215lbs with abs and in the best shape of my life. I recently benched 405lbs at 46 years old. Prior to this I could do 2 pull ups if I was lucky I can rep 10 - 15 now. My stress levels are down, my blood pressure is in a healthy range for the first time in decades. I go to the gym 5 days a week, sometimes 6 and I love it. There are always solutions, we don't have to accept a slow decay.
by dc396 | 2025-05-02 17:04:02+00:00
Maybe it could be called Mach (https://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/project/mach/public/www/mach.h...) :)

More seriously, I believe the historical challenge with microkernels for Unix(-like) operating systems was the performance hit taken when transitioning from the user processes to the microkernel.
by stryan | 2025-05-02 17:04:19+00:00
> the Bible (lots of really dry stuff about begetting and knowing)

I'd suggest replacing the Bible with just the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke[0], and John). Removing it entirely seems like a mistake since you'd lose a lot of the literary and moral underpinnings of Western culture, but having to read the bible in its entirely sounds exhausting. I did it (reading all four gospels) recently and can attest even outside of the religious aspects the retelling of the same tragic story in four different was is a fascinating literary experience.

[0] Technically we should through Acts in there too since Luke-Acts are essentially one book, but it's not a gospel so I left it out. Plus quite frankly while I did read it I found it way more boring than the others; turns out that Jesus fellow is a way more interesting main character than Paul :)
by luckylion | 2025-05-02 17:04:44+00:00
Freshbot was a well-known effect back then (arguably still is, at least I see effects that look very similar where some new content section will rank quickly and amazingly well for a week or two and then slowly sink to the level you'd expect from such new content).

But in the end, it's network effects, only that this banner seems to enforce it manually and explicitly. The old way would've been to not show apps with few users in the top spots.
by freedomben | 2025-05-02 17:04:55+00:00
> > Why cant this happen on Apple devices too?

> There are many ways to interpret that question - a hypothetical pondering, or a "why doesn't it work this way?" in the most direct sense. I interpreted it as the latter.

Yes, this is actually my point. That question isn't clearly saying, "you should do this on Apple devices too" it's asking, "why not?" The answer to that question could be anything like, "Because Apple and they're users believe it's better this way" or something more technical like, "software architecture limitations in <component>" or anything like that. You broadened your interpretation to assume that OP was advocating for Apple to make the change, but I don't see anything in their statement that would suggest that they are. You could maybe say, "well they should have clarified in the original" but then every comment would have to turn into a long list of what the person isn't saying, which could go on indefinitely. If you're really not sure what they meant, you could also practice the time-honored tradition of asking them and then dealing with their actual position, instead of assuming and addressing a strawman.

> > I think you've been hit with what I call the "hidden agenda" fallacy, which is something many people seem to commit routinely (or almost non-stop on reddit). It's closely related to (and involves) the Strawman fallacy, but includes some specific flawed reasoning.

> Isn't this exactly what you've done to my comment?

Hmm, possibly, I don't believe that I have based on what I wrote above in this comment above, but I will definitely consider deeper whether I've committed the same fallacy.

Btw, FWIW I don't mean anything personal by it. Nearly everyone does this to some extent (including me I'm sure), especially when it's a subject that we've been around repeatedly with lots of different people. There definitely are people taht post with hidden agendas and ask questions that aren't in good faith, so I'm not even saying we're always wrong when we do this. However, I do think it's important for discussion/conversation to strive not to make assumptions about somebody that we don't know. Honest questions can frequently sound the same as the bad faith questions, but assuming bad faith is an instant conversation killer.
by jlarocco | 2025-05-02 17:05:32+00:00
Sure, that code fails with a memory fault with (safety 0). But I explicitly recommended testing and debugging with (safety 3) first, and in that case it gets a type-error and doesn't crash. Once the broken `(foo nil)` is fixed and it's time to ship a release build to the user, it should be safe to drop down to (safety 0).

I think we both agree that 99.9% of the time it's not worth using (safety 0), though.
by gaiagraphia | 2025-05-02 17:05:39+00:00
The internal operations of a company shoud be irrelevant to nations.

If a company is taking £billion out of a nation's spending power, and doing so with nefarious practices, that's what should be fined.

If bankruptcy is a worry, then comapnies shouldn't fly so close to the sun when adopting immoral practices.

Income is the only reliable thing you can tax. Trying to calculate profit for international companies is an absolute joke which is massively inefficient. Why an Earth should governments employ entire teams to second guess internal bookkeeping?

If you want to take a billion from a nation's citizens, better be sure you're providing a legal service. I mean, are drug dealers punished on profit?
by xnx | 2025-05-02 17:05:51+00:00
> One missed cancellation, and you’ve actually saved on all that “Apple tax”

Even more reason that apps will try and push users to their own payment systems: automatic renewals, difficult cancellations, and more dark patterns. As a user, I'd happily pay an extra 10% for those protections through Apple, but I know I wouldn't pay 10x. Apps will be A/B testing their way to find exactly that profit maximizing threshold.
by darth_avocado | 2025-05-02 17:05:59+00:00
It’s not just starting advantage, it’s also luck which gets talked about in the blog. You could start with a set of bad cards and still end up being much ahead than someone with good cards, if you have a little bit of luck.

> That you got lucky at a singular moment in history and now you're an old man is not an easy set of facts to accept.

This often gets talked about when we discuss CEOs and Billionaires, but it’s also equally applicable to engineers, managers and directors. You could go to the same college, start at the same company, work the same amount of hours, work similar projects, and bam, one of you gets laid off, the other one gets to see promotions and stock growth. And these successes then compound.
by woodruffw | 2025-05-02 17:06:06+00:00
> I almost never went near 125th Street, the unofficial boundary of Harlem

With my obnoxious local hat on: Harlem starts at 110th street and runs to roughly 155th street, narrowing on the West Side with each of the long parks (Morningside, St. Nicholas, Jackie Robinson).

125th street would be the "heart" of Harlem, not the boundary. This would have been even more obvious in the 1980s, when the racial divisions between Bloomingdale, Morningside Heights, Harlem, and Spanish Harlem were even more stark.
by seankeenanlong | 2025-05-02 17:06:33+00:00
This article makes a modest pitch: The Trump‑Vance Administration should hire venture capitalists (“VCs‑in‑Residence”) in antitrust agencies to help predict the trajectory of emerging technologies. Just as antitrust agencies enlisted technologists to understand the technology behind today’s challenges, they should now partner with VCs to anticipate the technology ahead.
by tapoxi | 2025-05-02 17:06:43+00:00
Same but I am literally math dyslexic (formal diagnosis of dyscalculia).

It prevented me from having a CS degree, I was unable to complete the math courses, but as far as actual programming and "software engineering" goes (design, etc) it's never hindered me. I can work out the logic and I let the computer do the math.

Edit: I'm downvoted below zero for this comment. I don't know what people are so offended by?
by kstrauser | 2025-05-02 17:07:00+00:00
No one's that purely altruistic. It's like people who eat hot chilis and claim it's for food testing or quality control purposes.

At some point, you've gotta come to grips with the fact that you like getting bit by snakes.

Edit: Sorry, I really did mean that to be funny. I don't care what his motivations are for letting himself get bitten so many times. Whatever the root cause, it looks like we might benefit tremendously from it, and for that, I'm sincerely grateful to him.
by michaelsbradley | 2025-05-02 17:07:37+00:00
Well, science came a long way in general. There were a number of objections to Galileo's ideas that were not religiously motivated.

See The Great Ptolemaic Smackdown, in 9 parts, a must read!

Part 1: http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-great-ptolemaic-smac...

Part 2: http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-great-ptolemaic-smac...

Part 3: http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-great-ptolemaic-smac...

Part 4: http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-great-ptolemaic-smac...

Part 5: http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-great-ptolemaic-smac...

Part 6: http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/09/6-great-ptolemaic-smackd...

Part 7: http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/09/7-great-ptolemaic-smackd...

Part 8: http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/10/8-great-ptolemaic-smackd...

Part 9: http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/10/9-great-ptolemaic-smackd...
by GeoAtreides | 2025-05-02 17:07:41+00:00
>You also have to remember that tons of these regulations are vague and unclear and massively open to interpretation, and that companies can genuinely believe they are complying, and their lawyers agree, but then judges still rule otherwise, because it's ultimately just a matter of opinion because of the vagueness.

This is the equivalent of the famous Babbage anecdote, but for the law. That's absolutely not how the law or regulatory compliance works, not in Europe at least.
by aurareturn | 2025-05-02 17:07:52+00:00
I don't think it's valid to say you can only criticize somebody if you are doing better on that front. We should all watch and criticize other countries so humanity can improve.

I think it's valid. Fix yourself first. Telling someone else to stop doing something you're doing yourself is meaningless - especially when the EU is trying to position as the morally superior entity.

I fail to see why that could be the case. Why would different values support peace?

Because we've seen what happens when Europe has more power than the rest of the world. It wasn't pretty for the rest of the world. Let's see what China can do.

Again you assume one is only able to voice concerns if you are doing better in a certain area. You are also treating different governments of different times in a country as a single entity. FYI: In most countries there is more than one party in government over time and parties have different values.

Yes, I'm assuming that. EU wants to be a leader. EU wants to sanction countries they think is doing something wrong. So why doesn't EU sanction itself first?
by lordleft | 2025-05-02 17:07:52+00:00
Galileo's treatment by the Church was abominable, but it's often forgotten that the Church not only drew the lines of permissible thought, but also served as the primary vehicle for advancing and enabling the life of the mind through its patronage of the university system. It was not merely an oppressor, nor just a benevolent enabler; it was somehow both.
by rconti | 2025-05-02 17:08:22+00:00
Oh, absolutely, fair point. I used linux exclusively on the desktop from 95-02.

Even commercially; I worked at a decent-sized digital services company in 99-02 that, from the day I started, had 2 ALR 6x6 pentium pro machines as database servers (6 proc, 6 hot swap drive bays). When they crashed, our main issues were with really long-running `fsck` because journaling filesystems were not a thing.

All the app servers were white label intel boxes. We had issues, sure -- the one that comes to mind chiefly is that we were doing IP-based virtual hosting (I don't think name-based virtual hosting was a thing yet), and Linux seemed to get unstable and randomly drop the virtual interfaces once you exceeded maybe a few hundred per NIC, and you'd have to restart the i/f to fix it. I don't think these were behind LBs yet, but I can't really remember.

All that stuff was on RedHat, the first time of 2 or 3 times that Redhat went through the v7 -> v8 -> v9 period :)

Even in much later years (eg, 2008-ish), I remember that too many vendors (HP, Dell, etc) would ship these prosumer grade RAID cards that absolutely fell over (locked up) at sustained high util %. You could (probably correctly) argue that was because we didn't pony up for the true high-end x86 hardware, but the fact that enterprise server companies shipped this stuff at all meant it made the x86 option look less robust compared to the big iron.
by motorest | 2025-05-02 17:08:28+00:00
> LLMs are laundering machine in the sense that they allow anybody to just ignore licences and copyright in all code (...)

No. Having access to the code does that. You only need a single determined engineer to do that. I mean, do you believe that until the inception of LLMs the world was completely unaware of the whole concept of reverse engineering stuff?

> Once it's been used to train an LLM, there is no right anymore.

Nonsense. You do not lose your rights to your work just because someone used a glorified template engine to write something similar. In fact, your whole blend of comment conveys a complete lack of experience using LLMs in coding applications, because all major assistant coding services do enforce copyright filters even when asking questions.
by floxy | 2025-05-02 17:08:57+00:00
I don't know anything about this new company, but muon-catalyzed fusion is legit. Because the muon is 200 times heavier than the electron it is much closer to the nucleus, and creates a better shielding effect. The question is what it takes to make muons in an energy efficient manner.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon-catalyzed_fusion
by nonethewiser | 2025-05-02 17:09:15+00:00
> I mean, apparently not - this author alone takes Plato’s cave allegory at face value without spending even a moment to criticize it.

Does HE say hes over romanticizing it? No.

He would probably argue hes not over-romanticizing it. So the question isnt if over-romanticizing is improper (which is true by definition of “over”). The question is if he actually is over romanticizing.

>It is not. Read Meno. Socrates thought this, and has a very painful example of trying to prove it. Plato thought the exact same.

Im not contesting that Plato believed in reincarnation. But its not true that he thought knowledge comes from "past lives" (as in when you were previously some other person). He believed the _soul_ had direct access to knowledge. In a past life you would have only had an impression as well. This is all downstream of his actual theory of the forms though. Why not attack that if you want to attack his theory of knowledge.
by klabb3 | 2025-05-02 17:09:23+00:00
> who is taking the concept of free markets seriously

The EU. Let me explain, because this was confusing:

In US political debate, free markets have become synonymous with ”let companies do what they want”. Today, most of US ”markets” are neither free, nor (arguably) even markets at all, such as Amazon or health insurance. It is a mix between feudal system and protection racket.

Just like ”freedom isn’t free” in terms of civil liberties, same goes (imo) for markets. If you want to optimize for ”freedom” of markets, that means a non-zero amount of regulating them. This is obvious both in theory and by opening your eyes and looking outside.

As far as how to regulate them, I believe the EU is doing a good job, especially in the face of novel technology and business topologies. Basically, allow everything that isn’t deliberately anti-competitive. Because, drumroll, competition is fundamental for markets to work, at all.

Sorry for the confusion. It’s hard to make points when words mean completely different things in different parts of the world.
by jghn | 2025-05-02 17:09:25+00:00
Indeed. But it cuts both ways.

The typical person who is maligning CICO because it doesn't explain why they're still fat, that person would do much better by better focusing on CICO and performing the all time best exercise for weight loss - the "table push away"

Meanwhile the typical strict advocate of CICO as the end all be all also needs to understand that there's a lot of nuance in both the CI and CO variables.
by dfxm12 | 2025-05-02 17:09:53+00:00
To be clear, the definition of "exploit" I'm using in this case is like: "use (a situation or person) in an unfair or selfish way." The point is game companies are exploiting people who can't control themselves.

You might be interested to read about whales as it relates to loot boxes (in particular sections 1.E-F): https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?articl...

I don't know what autozone has to do with this particular discussion, but I'm not familiar with their business practices, so I'm not going to venture a guess.