MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by fragmede | 2025-05-05 23:53:13+00:00
What qualifies you to speak to the usefulness of techniques you've never personally used? Being able to learn without them doesn't mean they don't help in learning.

> I taught my 5 year old where C was and it took about 2 minutes.

Just 87 more keys to go! At 2 minutes per, only 2 hours, 52 minutes until they're playing Mozart's. Now if only that's how it actually works.
by ignoramous | 2025-05-05 23:54:43+00:00
> for each AAAA lookup, return a new IPv6 address that you'll NAT to the real address (you can use this for NAT64 if you want to let clients connect to IPv4 hosts)

We employ exactly this technique for our Android firewall app. It can do IPv4 (by mapping hash(domain) name onto RFC6598 reserved subnet [0]) as number of unique AAAA/A requests on a client seldom exceeds 35k/mo!

Another (simpler) control we offer users is, to drop all connections made to IPs that the user-set resolver did not do name resolution for.

> (this is going to be a big PITA, but that's how these things go)

You don't say.

[0] https://github.com/celzero/firestack/blob/2191381f/intra/dns...
by dorongrinstein | 2025-05-05 23:54:57+00:00
At https://controlplane.com we give you the power of Kubernetes without the toil of k8s. A line of code gets you a tls terminated endpoint that is geo routed to any cloud region and on-prem location. We created the Global Virtual Cloud that let's you run compute on any cloud, on premises hardware or vm's and any combination. I left vmware to start the company because the cognitive load on engineers was becoming ridiculous. Logs, metrics, tracing, service discovery, TLS, DNS, service mesh, network tunnels and much more - we made it easy. We do to the cloud what vmware did to hardware - you don't care what underlying cloud you're on. Yet you can use ANY backing service of AWS, GCP and Azure - as if they merged and your workloads are portable - they run unmodified anywhere and can consume any combination of services like RDS, Big Query, Cosmos db and any other. It is as if the cloud providers decided to merge and then lower your cost by 60-80%.

Check it out. Doron
by wmf | 2025-05-05 23:55:23+00:00
Yeah, when I heard that the largest supercomputer in the world was going to simulate the folding of a single protein (something that takes infinitesimal time and energy in reality) it was also obvious to me that simulating the universe would be incredibly wasteful. There's plenty of room at the bottom but not that much room.

Of course this argument does not apply if the outer universe contains extra dimensions or whatever, but that isn't the kind of ancestor simulation Bostrom and friends are talking about.
by investa | 2025-05-05 23:55:59+00:00
Building backends is easy. It is sort of weird. In 2003 no one would bat an eyelid at building an entire app and chucking it on a server. I guess front-end complexity had made that a specialism so with all that dev energy drained they have no time for the backend. The backend is substantial easier though!

These high value startups timed well to capture the vibe coding (was known as builidng an MVP before), front end culture and sheer volume of internet use and developers.
by mattrighetti | 2025-05-05 23:57:13+00:00
Do you actually need the container at that point?

I host all of my hobby projects on a couple of raspi zeros using systemd alone, zero containers. Haven’t had a problem since when I started using it. Single binaries are super easy to setup and things rarely break, you have auto restart and launch at startup.

All of the binaries get generated on GitHub using Actions and when I need to update stuff I login using ssh and execute a script that uses a GitHub token to download and replace the binary, if something is not okay I also have a rollback script that switches things back to its previous setup. It’s as simple as it gets and it’s been my go-to for 2 years now.
by koljab | 2025-05-05 23:57:45+00:00
It's not aware. The information that it had been interrupted would be something we can easily add to the next user chat request. Where exactly is harder, because at least for Coqui XTTSv2 we don't have TTS wordstamps (we do have them for Kokoro though). So adding the information where it had been interrupted would be easily possible when using Kokoro as TTS system. With Coqui we'd need to add another transcription on the tts output including word timestamps. That would cost more compute than a normal transcription and word timestamps aren't perfectly accurate. Yet directly after an interruption there's not that much concurrent need for compute (like in the end of turn detection phase where a lot of stuff is happening). So I guess with a bit of programming work this could be integrated.
by xpe | 2025-05-05 23:58:12+00:00
If you are a materialist, the laws of physics are the problem.

But to speak plainly, Musk is a complex figure, frequently problematic, and he often exacts a tool on the people around him. Part of this is attributable to his wealth, part to his particulars. When he goes into "demon mode", to use Walter Isaacson's phrase, you don't want to be in his way.
by kgeist | 2025-05-05 23:59:16+00:00
When a service is updated like this:

- is there downtime? (old service down, new service hasn't started yet)

- does it do health checks before directing traffic? (the process is up, but its HTTP service hasn't initialized yet)

- what if the new process fails to start, how do you rollback?

Or it's solved with nginx which sits in front of the containers? Or systemd has a builtin solution? Articles like this often omit such details. Or no one cares about occasional downtimes?
by c0balt | 2025-05-05 23:59:50+00:00
Traefik has some nice labeling for docker that allows you to colocate your reverse proxy config with your container definition. It's slightly more convenient than NGINX for that usecase with compose. It effectively saves you a dedicated vietualhost conf by setting some labels.

One can read more here: https://doc.traefik.io/traefik/routing/providers/docker/

This obviously has some limits and becomes significantly less useful when one requires more complex proxy rules.
by harel | 2025-05-06 00:00:05+00:00
One neat explanation I've heard is:

If we are in a simulation at some point we would create our own simulation which at some point will create it's own simulation etc. If we had indeed created a simulation, the chances we ARE in a simulations are great as we can be anywhere on that chain of simulations-creating-simulations. We're either the first REAL original existence, or one of infinite chain of simulations. Odds are against the real.

However, since we have NOT created such a simulation, we are either in the FIRST real existence, OR the last in line of simulations which have not yet created one. So the chance go down from infinite to 1 that we ARE in one, to 50-50 that we are NOT.
by ethbr1 | 2025-05-06 00:00:26+00:00
It makes one point: that LLMs are useful.

The other point is still suspect: that LLMs will ever scale to AGI.

Which specifically means reliability and explainability for higher-order thinking.

The writing is on the wall that LLMs are going to automate failure-tolerant work.

But the rub there is that failure-tolerant work is also tolerant of less than state of the art, cost-optimized LLMs.

Which leaves OpenAI where? AGI or bust.

And I wouldn't take that bet, when MS, Google, and Apple are alternative options.
by Bender | 2025-05-06 00:00:31+00:00
I doubt they would have an effect on the weather but they are great for cooking birds. The break area at one base had a bench about 500 feet away from a test radar and that was just far enough for the birds to fall out of the sky. It was interesting for us to see the reaction of new people as birds fell into their food or their lap. Test radar systems used to also be great for destroying police radar guns long ago. That sadly doesn't work any more.

On the topic of conspiracies I thought that was often around the HAARP weather monitoring program vs radar transmitters. Another set of conspiracy theories are cloud seeding programs and those indeed cause lawsuits due to flooding, mismanagement or alterations of water supplies and concerns of silver iodide and potassium iodide getting into farm animal food supplies. The only concern that makes sense to me is modification of where it rains and that is not much different than altering river flow with dams to steal water from a county or city or state.

A game I like to play is to place a bet on what percentage of a conspiracy theory will turn out to be true and if for the right or wrong reasons. It is especially interesting for me to see how different crowds respond to them before and after any semblance of validation.
by marcedwards | 2025-05-06 00:00:32+00:00
Yep, I’ve read that as well. The workflow and sound of the VP-9000 make me think it’s not what they used. It’s just so cumbersome to use, and it sounds pretty bad, and to my ears doesn’t match the results. The covers using DigiTech Vocalist EX models match so, so closely to the original songs.

It’s hard to know without an official word from our favourite robots, but I think you’d struggle to get the sound of any Daft Punk song out of a VP-9000. I’m really not sure where that rumour started.

I almost bought a VP-9000 to test, but sonically it’s so far off, I didn’t bother.
by socalgal2 | 2025-05-06 00:00:47+00:00
Any part of the universe you look at requires simuilating too much of the entire universe to get it from the state you last observed to the state it's supposed to be in now.

Time is important, if it takes too long no one is going to run the simulation.

The entire point of the simulation argument is they are fast and easy and therefore common. If simulations are common then it's likely we're in one. If you keep adding requirements that likely make them slow and hard then they are likely uncommon and the argument for us being in one disappears.
by pas | 2025-05-06 00:02:08+00:00
"At this point, he’d been using heroin every day for many years. " ... "As the DEA puts it in a fact sheet it circulates for parents and educators, “It is ironic that a drug that is taken to increase pleasure may cause damage that reduces a person’s ability to feel pleasure.”

Maybe years of pill popping had done just that to Jenkins. "

... eyes rolling
by pdfernhout | 2025-05-06 00:02:23+00:00
As a deeper issue on "justification", here is something I wrote related to this in 2001 on the risks of non-profits engaging in self-dealing when they create artificial scarcity to enrich themselves:

https://pdfernhout.net/on-funding-digital-public-works.html#...

"Consider this way of looking at the situation. A 501(c)3 non-profit creates a digital work which is potentially of great value to the public and of great value to others who would build on that product. They could put it on the internet at basically zero cost and let everyone have it effectively for free. Or instead, they could restrict access to that work to create an artificial scarcity by requiring people to pay for licenses before accessing the content or making derived works. If they do the latter and require money for access, the non-profit can perhaps create revenue to pay the employees of the non-profit. But since the staff probably participate in the decision making about such licensing (granted, under a board who may be all volunteer), isn't that latter choice still in a way really a form of "self-dealing" -- taking public property (the content) and using it for private gain? From that point of view, perhaps restricting access is not even legal?"

"Self-dealing might be clearer if the non-profit just got a grant, made the product, and then directly sold the work for a million dollars to Microsoft and put the money directly in the staff's pockets (who are also sometimes board members). Certainly if it was a piece of land being sold such a transaction might put people in jail. But because the content or software sales are small and generally to their mission's audience they are somehow deemed OK. The trademark-infringing non-profit-sheltered project I mention above is as I see it in large part just a way to convert some government supported PhD thesis work and ongoing R&D grants into ready cash for the developers. Such "spin-offs" are actually encouraged by most funders. And frankly if that group eventually sells their software to a movie company, say, for a million dollars, who will really bat an eyebrow or complain? (They already probably get most of their revenue from similar sales anyway -- but just one copy at a time.) But how is this really different from the self-dealing of just selling charitably-funded software directly to Microsoft and distributing a lump sum? Just because "art" is somehow involved, does this make everything all right? To be clear, I am not concerned that the developers get paid well for their work and based on technical accomplishments they probably deserve that (even if we do compete for funds in a way). What I am concerned about is the way that the proprietary process happens such that the public (including me) never gets full access to the results of the publicly-funded work (other than a few publications without substantial source)."

That said, charging to provide a service that costs money to supply (e.g. GPU compute) is not necessarily self-dealing. It is restricting the source code or using patents to create artificial scarcity around those services that could be seen that way.
by nimih | 2025-05-06 00:03:52+00:00
I think you're being profoundly uncharitable in that characterization of the author's work here, in that if you read the paper (and, really, even just the abstract), you'll see that they clearly understand the existence of such possibilities, and have simply chosen to limit their investigation to what their area of professional expertise (namely, the physical sciences) can assess with confidence. An illustrative quote from the concluding discussion:

Guessing how conservation laws for energy and information applies in a universe with entirely different laws, or whether they should even apply in the first place, appears impossible and this entirely prevents us from guessing whether the SH is possible in such case. For example, hypothetical conscious creatures in the famous Pac-Man video game in the ’80s will just be incapable of figuring out the constraints on the universe in which their reality is being simulated, even based on all the information they can gather around them. They would not guess the existence of gravity, for example, they would probably measure energy costs in ”Power Pellets”, and they would not conceive the existence of a third dimension, or of an expanding space time, and so on. Even if they could ever realise the level of graininess of their reality, and make the correct hypothesis of being living in a simulation, they would never guess how the real universe (”our” Universe, if it is real indeed) function in a physical sense. In this respect, our modelling shows that the SH can be reasonably well tested only with respect to universes which are at least playing according to the Physics play book - while everything else appears beyond the bounds of falsifiability and even theoretical speculation.
by wtallis | 2025-05-06 00:06:16+00:00
LaTeX isn't intended to take layout control away from the author so much as it is intended to automatically produce a good-enough layout allowing a single author to produce a very large document without employing a designer.

HTML by contrast explicitly does remove control over layout from the author and place it in the hands of the user (and their chosen user agent).

Both languages have mechanisms to (somewhat) separate the content from the formatting rules.
by sneak | 2025-05-06 00:07:05+00:00
I think this is more a symptom of the level of commonplace corruption in the American regulatory environment than any indication of the political views of the person directing such donations.

Tim Apple did it too, and we don’t assume he’s an authoritarian now too, do we? I imagine they would probably have done similarly regardless of who won the election.

It sure seems like an endorsement, but I think it’s simply modern corporate strategy in the American regulatory environment, same as when foreign dignitaries stay in overpriced suites in the Trump hotel in DC.

Those who don’t kiss the ring are clearly and obviously punished. It’s not in the interest of your shareholders (or your launch partners) to be the tall poppy.
by carlosjobim | 2025-05-06 00:07:07+00:00
Jornalists who hide their sources are usually also manipulated by those sources. How do you make sure as a journalist to get access to high ranking sources within the powers that be? You write the stories they want, or they're not talking to you anymore.

Every journalist will experience politicians and other powerful people wanting to tell them things "off the record". If they enter into those kind of agreements they are also betraying their profession and their audience.
by marcedwards | 2025-05-06 00:07:12+00:00
Thanks for the talk link! I’m going to try writing some harmonizer code next, so your video is right up my alley. I believe IVL’s algorithm also isn’t FFT-based. That makes sense, given the CPU power around on consumer tech at the time.

As for Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger: It’s difficult to know for sure without comments from Daft Punk themselves, but the DigiTech Talker has such a unique, throaty sound, and it’s all over the Human After All album. My confidence varies with my guesses, but Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger is one of the more confident ones, given how distinctive the Talker is. They also used so much DigiTech gear, especially on that album.

Hopefully they’ll see the article and let me know which bits are wrong.
by sneak | 2025-05-06 00:07:46+00:00
The number is well well below 1%. I would bet six figure sums it is below 0.1%.

Effectively nobody has it on. 99%+ of users aren’t even aware of the feature’s existence.

https://daringfireball.net/linked/2023/12/05/icloud-advanced...

You have to remember that there are something like a billion+ iOS users out there. 100 million people have not written down their 27 character alphanumeric account recovery key.
by timewizard | 2025-05-06 00:07:52+00:00
Previously the TRACON and it's equipment were located close together and connected directly.

Now they're separated by a commercial data link. When that link breaks ATC breaks, this is because they literally moved the staff from EWR to PHL, so you can't even revert when this occurs. This is why NATCA opposes and opposed the move.

It's even a little worse since this type of failure had occurred before and some of the controllers who experienced it took leaves from their positions reducing staff availability even more. It was an absurd change that set of a chain reaction of consequences for the system as a whole.
by chris12321 | 2025-05-06 00:08:25+00:00
It's simply not true that "regular AR calls are painfully slow." In the context of a web request, the time spent instantiating Active Record objects is negligible. For example, on my laptop:

Customer.limit(1000).to_a

completes in about 10ms, whereas:

Customer.last(1000).pluck(:id, :name, :tenant_id, :owner_id, :created_at, :updated_at)

runs in around 7ms.

Active Record methods are defined at application boot time as part of the class, they're not rebuilt each time an instance is created. So in a typical web app, there's virtually no performance penalty for working with Active Record objects.

And when you do need raw data without object overhead, .pluck and similar methods are available. It’s just a matter of understanding your use case and choosing the right tool for the job.
by willy_k | 2025-05-06 00:08:28+00:00
Just pointing out that that is the case for Christianity too (not religion in general because others that I am aware of require some sort of actions be taken, although some would say that true acceptance necessarily leads to actions so there is room for debate there). Also, if the creator of the simulation did want to guide us in a specific direction, might they send avatars into the simulation with messages, rather than simply banking on individuals like yourself to come up with the “goal” on their own? I’m not coyly suggesting you must convert, just raising some thoughts that I’ve had.
by panarky | 2025-05-06 00:09:39+00:00
Staffing shortages also preceded the incident.

The controllers themselves were exempt from the Trump administration's voluntary buyout of federal employees, and from their across-the-board hiring freeze.

But to actually hire a new controller requires so many special exemptions and waivers to cut through the hiring freeze, there's now a huge amount of friction and delay to onboard new people.

And many of the support staff needed to recruit, train, test and medically certify new controllers are now gone, so the capacity to onboard thousands of new controllers just doesn't exist right now.

And the overtime needed to pay experienced controllers to support noobs is now cancelled.

And that ancient Philadelphia TRACON that failed because a copper wire burnt out? Approximately 400 of the PASS and NATCA level one techs who keep the surveillance radars, radio links, NAVAIDs and facility power maintained, repaired and supported were purged on Valentine's Day.

A court eventually reinstated some of them, but the five-week delay before a court could countermand the inexplicable decisions of Trump and Musk set everything back.

While the reinstated 132 PASS techs are back, hiring remains frozen for all the support categories (mechanics, telecom, aero‑info) because the public‑safety waiver applies only to controllers and ATSS. The pipeline is dry.

The work order to fix the Philly TRACON was filed in December, but it couldn't get priority over the other five billion dollars of deferred maintenance and broken primary systems that are already hanging by a thread.

The FAA's own internal dashboard (leaked to Reuters) shows unscheduled equipment downtime at New York‑metro facilities is up 38% in March‑April versus the same period in 2024.
by zharknado | 2025-05-06 00:11:08+00:00
I feel this. I had a very productive convo with an LLM today and realized that a huge part of the value of it was that it addressed my questions in a focused way, without trying to sell me anything or generate SEO rankings or register ad impressions. It just helped me. And that was incredibly refreshing in a digital world that generally feels adversarial.

Then the thought came, when will they start showing ads here.

I like to think that if we learn to pay for it directly, or the open source models get good enough, we could still enjoy that simplicity and focus for quite a while. Here’s hoping!
by timewizard | 2025-05-06 00:11:49+00:00
> If you are a materialist, the laws of physics are the problem.

I'm a citizen, the laws of politics are the problem.

> Musk is a complex figure

Hogwash. He's greedy. There's nothing complex about that.

> and he often exacts a tool on the people around him

Yea it's a one way transfer of wealth from them to him. The _literal_ definition of a "toll."

> When he goes into "demon mode"

When he decides to lie, cheat and steal? Why do you strain so hard to lionize this behavior?

> you don't want to be in his way.

Name a billionaire who's way you would _like_ to be in. Elon Musk literally stops existing tomorrow. A person who's name you don't currently know will become known and take his place.

His place needs to be removed. It's not a function of his "personality" or "particulars." That's just goofy "temporarily embarrassed billionaire" thinking.