MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by GeorgeSpelvin | 2025-05-09 02:06:30+00:00
So say you buy a car and it serves you well. But one day you get an email from The manufacturer telling you that at a date in the not too distant future the car will stop making left turns - but here is a discount on a new car. Would that even be legal? I don’t think so and I see no reason why this bozostat event would be any different. So what now? Will you be joining the inevitable class action suit that will be coming soon? And don’t you think that Google hasn’t already factored the cost of one into their plans? And what about the cost to Google of lost customers that realize that purchasing anything else from them (including a cellphone) would render you vulnerable to the whims of the marketing guys? I can’t wait to get the email that tells me that the phone can no longer send texts - but here’s a discount on a new one! The idea really blurs the line between buying and leasing, doesn’t it? I’ll leave you with a final comment: don’t do business with people that don’t play fair. And definitely don’t with those that do evil things.
by recursivecaveat | 2025-05-09 02:06:33+00:00
You end up with different weights when using different random initialization, but with modern techniques the behavior of the resulting model is not really distinct. Back in the image-recognition days it was like +/- 0.5% accuracy. If you imagine you're descending in a billion-parameter space, you will always have a negative gradient to follow in some dimension: local minima frequency goes down rapidly with (independent) dimension count.
by Barrin92 | 2025-05-09 02:06:46+00:00
>It even accepts evolution and the big bang theory

There's no need for "even" in the sentence. Georges Lemaître who was the originator of the big bang theory was a literal catholic priest and theoretical physicist, and funnily enough the theory was originally accused of bringing religious bias into physics.

Likewise prominent Catholics who were Darwin's contemporaries like John Henry Newman had no issue with evolution back then either. The Church fathers never read the bible like a positivist text. (this is a very 20th century fundamentalist invention)
by vmh1928 | 2025-05-09 02:08:34+00:00
We are dependent on a relatively small number of complex weapons systems. In a high intensity conflict with a peer like China, say, we could expect to loose a significant number of our big ticket items within a few days. It's a big mistake that we don't have a swarm of cheap systems mentality but I suppose that doesn't benefit the MIC so it's a no go. We'll pay for it some day.
by vel0city | 2025-05-09 02:08:53+00:00
I linked to the commercial rates for USPS.

You're right Chinese dumping through UPU got a bit better several years ago, but its still usually cheaper for a small parcel to get mailed from China through China Post than it would be for a US business to ship through USPS despite the trucks and sorting in the US is still all the same.

And yes, I agree the USPS does essential work. We need to have it work better for our businesses and quit having our domestic mail continue to subsidize cheap junk from China.

> contrast the published retail UPS/Fedex rates with the prices of items with free shipping that ultimately go UPS/Fedex

Look at sites that still break out the price for shipping. Then realize those sites with "free shipping" are just rolling that into their average margins, increasing the prices for everyone or reducing the quality of their products. Realize they pretty much have to subsidize the shipping on the cheap things or else they'll just continue to bleed customers to Amazon.

There's a high cost to "free" shipping.
by exiguus | 2025-05-09 02:08:58+00:00
Think about product stock that change or you have a website with a cms and 100 Editors that push changes every 5min. If you have 5k pages. Then its likely, that builds take longer then 5min. And if you want to have a up-to-date website, you have to build it every 5min. This is where ISR and SSR comes into play, to update the pre-rendering on the server.
by 9o1d | 2025-05-09 02:08:59+00:00
Advice: Buy Bitcoin

Fifteen years ago, I made my own website and came up with a digital currency for it. These were PNG files with watermarks, with my money drawn on them. They were similar to the ones I printed at school with my friends. They were called "CHATL". At school, I didn't know how to give my money value, it turns out it had to be lent. Returning to PNG files, they could be viewed on a computer screen, printed and uploaded to a website to put into an account. But I couldn't solve the problem of simultaneous ownership. Such money turned out to be disposable. At that time, I had heard about Bitcoin, knew that it was worth about a dollar, but I didn't attach much importance to it. Besides, in Russia, I didn't have a dollar bank card to pay abroad. It's funny that the same thing is happening now, we have blocked international bank cards and I use Bitcoin.
by about3fitty | 2025-05-09 02:10:59+00:00
Unforeseen scope creep is the reason to utilise Django over Flask, I feel.

Also, you can pick and choose what to use in Django similarly to Flask - it just has a higher initial learning curve.

Once you get to sufficient levels of complicated, leaning on established, documented, community supported design patterns and abstractions helps vs. sorting out your imports, making bespoke design choices, and doing a bunch of non-core value producing work.
by creer | 2025-05-09 02:11:03+00:00
Sure but also see the benchmark creation to benchmark breaking race. The benchmark creation researchers have been doing their best to create difficult, lasting benchmarks that won't be broken by next week. They are not illiterate idiots. And yet the LLMs (or LLM-based systems really) have been consistently so far breaking the benchmarks in absurd time.

It's hard to say that nothing significant is going on.

Also the fine article's entire point is that these are not points on a continuum.
by krapp | 2025-05-09 02:11:07+00:00
So you - and a lot of people judging from the comments - believe that it's perfectly legitimate to steal from someone who has ever, themselves, done anything in the past you consider wrong. That morality, ethics and laws should only protect the blameless, and everyone and everything else is fair game.

I have to admit I don't agree, I personally think the morality of a crime doesn't depend upon a value judgement of the of the victim. Theft is theft even if you steal from thieves, and two wrongs as they say don't make a right. But I suppose some people need to assume the victims of imperialism had it coming, but of course they themselves don't.

Good luck with that, and keep your doors locked.
by bigiain | 2025-05-09 02:12:02+00:00
For a while, I was running an Arduino/PiZero gadget I built that sat under my a NAD 1100 preamp which had a pair of stepper motors and used orings and 3d printed pulleys to turn the volume and input selection knobs. This worked nicely, since I had both remote (IR & WiFi) control, and could still turn the knobs by hand.

You can almost always replace knobs and switches, usually with high quality ones, if you're prepared to hunt around various internet sites to fond them (and often you need to be prepared to just buy something that looks like it's close and accept wasting the money if it doesn't quite fit).

FOr me, and for no real good reason, I prefer to keep my vintage hifi gear as "original" as possible, and I'm not personally interested in "upgrading" the guts. Having said that, I dfrunk-eBayed a really nice old 70s vintage New Zealand built/designed Perraux 2100EXR power amp a while back, assuming I could repair the listed faults - but it turns out too many of the internal components are completely obsolete and unobtainable, and I'm _strongly_ considering gutting it and filling the enclosure with modern class d amp modules. It _might_ become a 7 channel home theatre amp hidden behind the old 70s rack mount amp faceplate. That kinda feels too much like cheating though?
by pclmulqdq | 2025-05-09 02:12:10+00:00
I am the one who argued you might be mistranslating (not the person you just replied to), and I am now somewhat convinced that you are, and that the intent of 1 Tim was to discuss church leaders in a more general sense than the modern term of "bishop." The etymology bears very little weight on the actual meaning of the translation. Lots of words change meaning over time.

Your quote of Aquinas also appears to disagree with you, and takes "episkopos" more generally than the modern usage of "bishop." It actually seems that the catholic bishops may have adopted a word that was in common use for an overseer of a parish.

More recent translations and scholarly commentaries all turn away from the "episkopos" = "bishop" idea. Again, the literal translation of "episkopos" is "overseer."
by andreygrehov | 2025-05-09 02:13:13+00:00
I used to love monoliths, but I just can’t do it anymore. After many years of development, my brain simply resists building another one. My solo side project now consists of 12 AWS accounts, separate code repositories, separate pipelines, and separate infrastructure-as-code repositories. Some might say that’s insane—and fair point—but to me, it’s insane to pack everything together. If I know that my public API is sitting right next to customer data, that’s a red flag. No network isolation? Red flag. DNS management in the same account? Another red flag. To me, separation of concerns makes development much leaner. Things just work.
by creer | 2025-05-09 02:14:24+00:00
This is also my impression "how could they not" but it goes a bit further: Can we predict it? Can we estimate the size of a system that will achieve X? Can we build systems that are pre-disposed to emergent behaviors? Can we build systems that preclude some class of emergent behavior (relevant to AGI safety perhaps)? And then of course many systems will not achieve anything because even when "large", they are "uselessly large" - as in, you can define more points on a line and it's still a dumb line.

To me the "how could they not" comes from the idea that if LLMs somehow encapsulate/ contain/ exploit all human writings, then they most likely cover a large part of human intelligence. For damn sure much more than the "basic human". The question is more of how we can get this behavior back out of it - than whether it's there.
by chasil | 2025-05-09 02:14:31+00:00
Life really answers that question for you.

If you are successful and established, friendship often means obligation. Money, skill, resources and effort are requested, sometimes politely, sometimes not.

If you are not successful and established, finding someone to engage in this relationship can provide significant advantage.

Some might say "a real friend would not ask such things, what you speak of are fairweather friends."

I would reply, "have you ever found your perfect equal in a friendship?"

I haven't.

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/fair-weather_friend
by toomuchtodo | 2025-05-09 02:15:04+00:00
Citations in my comment below [1] that the Navy is operating ~14k sailors short of what is needed to operate safely, per the GAO. Assuming structural demographics and ongoing forward looking labor shortages, we can predict with significant confidence that the situation will only degrade further, as young labor has superior options for both operations and shipbuilding [2] [3].

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43921352 ("As of late last year, the Navy was lacking nearly 14,000 enlisted sailors to keep its aircraft carriers, surface ships and attack submarines properly manned, according to the GAO. The watchdog also found that aircraft carriers, cruisers and amphibious assault ships did not have enough enlisted sailors assigned to them to meet requirements for safe operations as laid out by the Navy Manpower Analysis Center.")

[2] The High-School Juniors With $70,000-a-Year Job Offers - https://www.wsj.com/lifestyle/careers/skilled-trades-high-sc... - May 7, 2025

[3] Amid shortage, Navy recruiting program struggles to keep half first-year shipbuilders: Official - https://breakingdefense.com/2025/03/amid-shortage-navy-recru... - March 26, 2025 ("Difficulties in competing with the service industry wages in particular is a common complaint among shipbuilding executives. “It used to be that there was a big gap between manufacturing wages and other wages in any other industry,” Ingalls’ Shipbuilding President Kari Wilkinson told Breaking Defense in August. “Now you’ve got service industry wages — you can go down and be an attendant at Buc-ees for the same as an entry wage at a shipyard.”)
by architango | 2025-05-09 02:16:59+00:00
This is the problem that the Pentagon’s Replicator Initiative is trying to solve.[1] However, the initiative (while well funded) only began less than two years ago. As MacArthur once said, every failure in war comes down to two words: “Too late.” We shall see.

[1] https://www.diu.mil/replicator
by mitthrowaway2 | 2025-05-09 02:17:21+00:00
Charles Paxton's Crystal Palace from the 1851 Great Exhibition belongs on the list too. Designed in 1 month, opened less than 10 months later, including a redesign to accommodate some trees instead of cutting them down. 3 times the size of St Paul's cathedral. Taken down and reassembled into a different building after the fair. Using entirely new technology including modular prefab cast-iron-and-glass-pane construction, interchangeable fasteners, and flush toilets.
by kazinator | 2025-05-09 02:17:50+00:00
> the same loss can be achieved with many different combinations of parameters

Perhaps it can be, but it isn't. The loss in a given model was achieved with that particular combination of parameters that the model has, and there exists no other combination of parameters which which that model can appeal to for more information.

To have the other combinations, we would need to train more models and then somehow combine them so that the combinations are available; but that's just conceptually the same as making one larger model with more parameters, and lower loss.
by baobun | 2025-05-09 02:17:54+00:00
Close pet peeve of mine is "simply" in documentation.

Aside from emotional aspects in OP, there is (not-so-well) hidden complexity, implicit assumptions, and/or non-intuitive implications papered over almost every time I see it.

"In CrabFramework, a StateCrab is simply a Crab which carries state."

"In order to garbage collect a Nest, you simply apply the GC op: Nest.applyOp(nest, Nest.GC, { tuningParams: Nest.StandardGCTuning }). That's all there is to it!"

One does not just simply.
by bigstrat2003 | 2025-05-09 02:18:34+00:00
Maybe not, but:

1. You need to draw the line somewhere. It is simply not possible (nor even desirable) to redress all historical wrongs. It seems reasonable to not attempt to redress wrongs which are out of living memory for anyone involved.

2. As others pointed out, the people currently living in Egypt is not the same people who lived there when these things were built anyway, and there was a hell of a lot of conquest to get from there to here. This is not a case where the Ottomans stole it from the original owners. That makes this not a very good candidate for giving it back.
by svat | 2025-05-09 02:18:50+00:00
Knuth also says that "Algorithm R is due to Alan G. Waterman", on TAOCP vol 2 page 144, just below "Algorithm R (Reservoir sampling)". This blog post seems to be a good history of the algorithm: https://markkm.com/blog/reservoir-sampling/ (it was given by Waterman in a letter to Knuth, as an improvement of Knuth's earlier "reservoir sampling" from the first edition).

> All in all, Algorithm R was known to Knuth and Waterman by 1975, and to a wider audience by 1981, when the second edition of The Art of Computer Programming volume 2 was published.
by IIsi50MHz | 2025-05-09 02:19:59+00:00
The outcome can vary wildly, even in the same EMR software, depending on the implementing team. I worked a place where it was the implementation team's first time, but they listened heavily to requests from different departments. The most common request was to reduce the number of different views and screens, compared to the old custom software that was being replaced. Resizable fonts without having to change screen resolutions was another one.Staff also wanted to keep the rest as much the same as possible, but add a few little things here and there..

The new EMR software was highly configurable, so lots of this happened. Staff teams signed off on it, and had training from the implementation team.

Fewer screens? Check! …Wellll, sorta: some very long scrolling views…which didn't play nice with mousewheels. It would seem like the page randomly and mysteriously stoppe scrolling, then suddenly scroll normally. There were lots of weird data entry errors, from all staff, regardless of prior reputation for accuracy. They were just getting used to new software, right? Nope. I tracked this down to the dropdown lists scattered on the long scrolling pages. As a page scrolled, random lists ate scroll events, changed the list item to either the first or last item, then permitted scrolling to continue.

Fonts worked mostly great…except some of the typefaces follow the should-be-criminal design of allowing various characters to to look identical. Font sizing worked as expected. I think Pre-cert desk liked Candara, for the way numbers stood out.

Notes fields…these were our downfall, sometimes multiple times per day. Anything put into them was inserted as raw text into SQL:

Patient said xxxxxxx -- ESR

…or…

something-something 'quoted thing'

…would mean the database locked up, no exams savable or queryable, no patient intake, no checkout until I.T. admin could fix it. The implementation team was gone, and non-responsive, so sticky notes with a list of forbidden characters seemed to be everywhere.

I believe some contracts for referrals were lost, due to delays and errors. Some staff quit, after months of no fixes. But I later heard from one of the most affected staffers that the same EMR software was installed at our biggest competitor, and no issues at all.
by bigstrat2003 | 2025-05-09 02:24:23+00:00
Honestly, I would have more respect for people who do land acknowledgements if they tried to give the land back. I don't think they should (because I believe that we shouldn't attempt to fix the sins of those who are long since dead), but at least then they would be attempting to walk the walk. Right now it comes off very poorly because people go "this land belongs to the natives" and then happily continue to possess it as if saying "well you own this technically" makes everything alright.
by hayst4ck | 2025-05-09 02:24:26+00:00
It's not bolshevism, it's jeffersonianism/locke-ianism and this administration is ticking away the grievances in the declaration of independence like it's a recipe.

We have a consent based government, that's plainly stated in the founding document. Now this government is doing things no person of good conscience can consent to, such as talking about wars of aggression against Greenland, Panama, and Canada, denying due process in clear violation of the constitution we were taught in school regardless of what any judge rules (and they are ruling it is a constitutional violation), and sending people to death camps in foreign countries. The leader said "I wish I had Hitler's generals".

I am being ordered to deny the evidence of my eyes and ears daily.

Unfortunately there aren't very many lessons about what withdrawing consent for a consent based government looks like.

Calling us rich benefactors is accusing us of not having morals, values, or red lines we hold in higher esteem than money. If our values are violated but we can't be bribed by our privileged position in a corrupt society then that's Bolshevism? It's having a conscience. It's having integrity. We are getting the society we deserve right now, one where money is the only thing that matters, one where integrity is punished and even judged as "endlessly funny".

There was nothing random at all about the actions being referenced, that's why you find so much support online and even more support with virtually every city dwelling person who is not a boomer in person.

I don't think it's the best way to promote change, but he did start a conversation about justice and its relationship to the judicial system that needs to be had.
by maxglute | 2025-05-09 02:27:18+00:00
Some #s.

39-45:

- US, pop 130m, 40m Gross Tons. ~0.05m GT/m

2023:

- JP, 125m, 10m GT, ~0.08m GT/m (kind of in decline)

- SKR, 51m, 18m GT, ~0.35m GT/m (increasing in value)

- PRC, 1400m, 33 GT, ~0.02m GT/m (increasing++ in GT and value)

If modern US was serious as efficient as JP or SKR, it can do 30-120m GT per year. Meanwhile PRC casually building about entire 6 year US WW2 ship building program per year (2024 puts it close to 37m GT). But it's not out of question for US to be competitive in a few generations. But also kind of lulz that SKR peacetime ship building is like 7x more efficient than US during WW2.
by amathew | 2025-05-09 02:27:48+00:00
Hi all, I'm an analytics professional looking for a role as an analyst, data scientist, or analytics engineer

Location: Arizona Remote: Yes Willing to relocate: Yes Technologies: SQL, R, Python Résumé/CV: https://www.linkedin.com/in/abraham-mathew-21221b29/ Email: mathewanalytics@gmail.com
by creer | 2025-05-09 02:28:04+00:00
This is a strange viewpoint, do you care to elaborate? I mean, for ancient Egypt, understanding the writing has its origin in a very clear, well understood event and a very specific researcher's career (Rosetta Stone and Champollion), after which there is a sea of research papers which anyone can go and (spend an education and career) judging for themselves. The documentaries easily skip all that but it's not a big mystery that "all that" is there?

It would be nice if someone created a video similar to the "distance ladder" video but for hieroglyphs. Beyond Champollion and into the progress to now. That would be fascinating. It may exist already.
by 0xDEAFBEAD | 2025-05-09 02:28:34+00:00
You're strawmanning.

>It is about the distribution of resources to reach goals. It would be quite easy for example to ensure, that every school meets some standards, enabling children to learn well.

In the US, educational spending went up massively without much improvement in outcomes:

https://slatestarcodex.com/blog_images/primary_scost.gif

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2015/mar/02/dave-brat/...

Small-government types like me aren't against good things. We just believe that it takes much more than simply throwing resources at a problem to solve it.

In my view, the "you're just against good things" finger-pointing merely gets in the way of a constructive discussion regarding what actually works.

Based on what I've read about WW2, the US was able to rapidly mobilize because it had great leadership at the time. We're not able to mobilize in the same way nowadays because our government leadership sucks. The civic culture is weaker (in part due to political polarization, and also demoralization due to our failures in Vietnam, Iraq, etc.). There's lots of anti-Americanism in America nowadays. Even the right has become anti-American. (Arguably, that's a good thing if it gets us in fewer wars!) And politicians seem to care more about signalling to their constituents that "something is being done" rather than actually succeeding at the thing.

Salaries are higher and projects are more exciting in the private sector. US multinationals are growing fast, and starving the US government of the brilliant, hardworking individuals that would be needed for the government to do awesome stuff. The government turns those people off due to red tape, lower salaries, and a generally bad working environment. I graduated from one of the top universities in the US, and I don't remember talking to any student who even considered working for the government.