MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by skissane | 2025-05-16 05:46:55+00:00
I think they use the original Gregorian cutover, in which 1582-10-04 is followed by 1582-10-15, and the dates 1582-10-05 through 1582-10-14 don’t exist.

However, in general, I think proleptic Gregorian is simpler. But in astronomy do what the astronomers do. And in history, dates between 1582 and 1923 (inclusive), you really need to explicitly mark the date as Gregorian or Julian, or have contextual information (such as the country) to determine which one to use.

1923 because that was when Greece switched from Julian to Gregorian, the last country to officially do so. Although various other countries in the Middle East and Asia adopted the Gregorian calendar more recently than 1923 - e.g. Saudi Arabia switched from the Islamic calendar to the Gregorian for most commercial purposes in 2016, and for most government purposes in 2023 - those later adoptions aren’t relevant to Julian-Gregorian cutover since they weren’t moving from Julian to Gregorian, they were moving from something non-Western to Gregorian

Large chunks of the Eastern Orthodox Church still use the Julian calendar for religious purposes; other parts theoretically use a calendar called “Revised Julian” which is identical to Gregorian until 2800 and different thereafter - although I wonder if humanity (and those churches) are still around in 2800, will they actually deviate from Gregorian at that point, or will they decide not to after all, or forget that they were officially supposed to
by yorwba | 2025-05-16 05:48:05+00:00
The issues mostly link to repositories that were created more than a year ago. So I think what happened is that they already forked the repo and made changes on top of it to get it to work on HarmonyOS, but there was no bandwidth for ongoing maintenance. Someone finally realized that this is unsustainable and demanded that the changes get upstreamed, but the people charged with implementing this directive don't know how you upstream changes. Hence this hamfisted attempt.
by Kiro | 2025-05-16 05:48:52+00:00
That's not vibe coding. You need to use something where it applies to code changes automatically or you're not fast enough to actually be vibing. Oneshotting it like that just means you get stunlocked when running into errors or dead ends. Vibe coding is all about making backtracking, restarting and throwing out solutions frictionless. You need tooling for that.
by motorest | 2025-05-16 05:48:57+00:00
> You are very very unlikely to trigger Linux overcommit behavior by not initializing a member variable.

The problem with your assumption is that you're just arguing that it's ok for code to be needlessly buggy if you believe the odds this bug is triggered are low. OP points out a known failure mode and explains how a feature eliminates it. You intentionally ignore it for no reason.

This assumption is baffling when, in the exact same thread, you see people whining about C++ for allowing memory-related bugs to exist.
by ziofill | 2025-05-16 05:49:10+00:00
A chemist friend of mine did his thesis on lipid vesicles, and I remember my mind being blown when he told me these are modelled as a liquid on the 2D plane of the membrane, but as a solid on the 1D orthogonal direction because the energy to swap two lipid molecules side by side is incredibly low (because it makes barely any difference), while the energy to swap them orthogonally to the membrane is much larger (because they would point in the wrong direction).
by timr | 2025-05-16 05:49:49+00:00
Yeah, it varies. I think fundamentally you're paying for square footage, so bigger rooms will always be "mid-market", to some extent. The ones in tourist spots are fancier than the ones by Exit 5A of a freeway interchange in rural Nebraska.

The suite hotel I used in Maui, for example was pretty fancy: pool, restaurant, bar, gym, balcony rooms, etc. But the price point was certainly below equivalent hotels in the same area.
by RajT88 | 2025-05-16 05:51:57+00:00
I am not shocked. I recently had a completely legitimate experience with Facebook, no fraud or anything.

My wife opened a restaurant a few months back. We're paying for Facebook ads. The early months of operating a food business is burning massive cash, so we had a ~10 dollar payment get rejected on FB ads.

Something about this rejected payment enabled all prior ad campaigns we had disabled. We are still trying to figure it out - noticed it just today. We're in for ~85 dollars in ad campaigns for just 2 days.

Every stupid bug or dark pattern which makes a big tech company money does not get fixed. It will take getting hauled in front of congress to fix it.
by josefx | 2025-05-16 05:52:15+00:00
> In effect, you are assuming that your uninitialized and initialized variables straddle a page boundary

You are assuming that I am working with small data structures, don't use arrays of data, don't have large amounts of POD members, ... .

> That heap chunk descriptor before your block has to be written, triggering a page fault.

So you allocate one out of hundreds of pages? The cost is significantly less than the alternative.

> In that case your performance and memory usage are going to be highly unpredictable (after all, initializing a single thing in a page would materialize that whole page).

As opposed to initializing thousands of pages you will never use at once? Or allocating single pages when they are needed?

> Well, the default allocator for vectors will actually zero-initialize the new elements.

I reliably get garbage data after the first reserve/shrink_to_fit calls. Not sure why the first one returns all zero, I wouldn't rely on it.
by verisimi | 2025-05-16 05:53:55+00:00
I didn't know about this, thanks for the explanation.

> It's quite insightful to see how this error then spawned a whole new series of 'approved' explanations for why wine was supposed to be healthy for you, such as antioxidants or whatever.

Your analysis provides a very nice example of how science studies can be meaningless. And that this isn't a problem, as long as someone is making money. How many years did we see yet another study being rolled out about France, red wine, red wine extracts in pill form, etc. And yet all that literature is based on a pretty obvious false assumption. That no one was inclined to correct.
by bell-cot | 2025-05-16 05:54:18+00:00
> Everybody has to rethink sea power now that attacking ships from shore is working.

Nothing new there. Attacking ships from shore worked fine in WWII. (And in dozens of wars, over multiple centuries, before that.) Operationally, the drones and anti-ship missiles look very similar to WWII Axis shore-defense batteries and air forces. The latter included both kamikazes and stuff like the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_X - both of which knocked out multiple Allied capital ships. Major Allied air and naval forces could spend month wearing shore-based defense down, in preparation for amphibious invasions.
by almostgotcaught | 2025-05-16 05:55:24+00:00
Right before I refreshed this comment said

> There is no need to denigrate a political faction. It's flamebait and off-topic.

And like witnessing a shooting star, I've witnessed manipulation. What this person was upset about was the insinuation that MAGA is conspiratorially minded. That's bad - can't have people agreeing with that! So they first play at striving for fairness (to poor helpless political parties lol). But realizing it's so just beyond the pale at this point to try to treat MAGA as a good faith actor that it wouldn't fly, they pivot to citing tenuously implicated rules.

If this weren't so poorly executed (and if I hadn't caught the edit) I wouldn't have even noticed but given that it is so poorly executed I gotta wonder whether this is just someone slacking at their botfarm job.

Edit: just so no one can accuse me of making this up, here is the screenshot from my reader app which still has the original comment:

https://imgur.com/a/njjy4Fd

Edit 2: in case this person edits again, the comment currently reads

> Please don't instigate political arguments.
by jandrewrogers | 2025-05-16 05:55:55+00:00
Swiss French seems to have regularized some of this in a sensible way? Indian English does much the same with some things; not strictly “correct” English, to the extent those words don’t exist in British or American English, but I can’t argue that it doesn’t make more sense or isn’t more consistent so I never argue the case. I generally view those regularizing pressures from non-native sources as a positive thing for languages.
by natesales | 2025-05-16 05:56:34+00:00
All attestation verification happens client side. We have verifiers in Python [1] and Go [2] (which FFIs to our other SDKs like WASM and Swift). We push all the verification logic to the client so the verification process is entirely transparent and auditable.

[1] https://github.com/tinfoilsh/tinfoil-python [2] https://github.com/tinfoilsh/verifier
by sinuhe69 | 2025-05-16 05:56:44+00:00
Yes. I also see problems in other areas: -they didn’t define the threshold for sedentary behavior beforehand, so it could be they just move the threshold to hack the p-value. At least, they could analyze with different thresholds then publish the results open for interpretation.

- they didn’t control the effect of normal aging in older people. 7 years is a long period and by older people we can expect a decline in cognitive performance regardless of their life style. What we interest is however how much the sedentary live style contributes additionally to this decline.

- because the authors rely solely on the smartwatch data and put all kinds of movements together (sitting, walking around, laying down), we can not see whether changing posture and moving around can help.

- most importantly, they didn’t isolate and control for the amount of cognitive work. Doing cognitive demanding work is known to delaying worsening symptoms in AD and related diseases.
by asielen | 2025-05-16 05:57:34+00:00
As a formally very active BYOND community member (joined 2003), BYOND's heyday was probably 15 years ago. Space Station 13 is its last vestige of relevance unfortunately. I've always wished for a new/updated equivalent version of it to crop up but nothing has really filled the same niche. It used to be a pretty vibrant community of (very) amateur game developers.

It seems it is going through a DDOS attack right now. https://www.reddit.com/r/BYOND/comments/1kl4bjs/byond_hub_do...

Some history of BYOND here: https://tig.fandom.com/wiki/BYOND

Basically it is a fully contained multi-user game development environment created by two friends, Dan and Tom around 2000. It has its own language, DM (DreamMaker), roughly based on C and Python. It has a map editor and server software. You would write a game and then host it and then anyone else who had the BYOND client software could connect to the server and run it. The server acted as the source of truth and the clients were effectively dumb clients just rendering. It had limitations (frankly a lot of limitations), but for the time it ran pretty damn well for reasonably sized 2d top down games. While you could publish your game to the BYOND site, you could also run it will no connection to the centralized BYOND hub.

The secret sauce was the combined game dev environment and how simple it made networking. You basically didn't have to think about any of it because the total game state was run by a server the you or someone else would host. The client just had to download the interface.

The development environment was bare bones but the language was so simple that it didn't really matter. Over simplifying but basically movable objects were of type "mob" and background tiles were of type "turf". Both inherited from "atom". You could also write like 5 lines of code defining 1 mob and 1 turf and walk around in your new world with others online. You could then add "verbs" basically functions that the mob could take and "procs" which are just all other functions you'd want to write.

You can read the language reference here on internet archive while the main site is down: https://web.archive.org/web/20200229044355/http://www.byond....

Some other links:

- Forum entry from 2000 by one of the creators https://web.archive.org/web/20250325092124/http://www.byond.com/forum/post/194515 - Getting started writing games post (formatting is all broken on this archived version but the text is there): https://web.archive.org/web/20190402034657/http://www.byond.com/forum/post/46230 - Interesting crash course on everything from 2023: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzAzMtWa0u0 - Probably the biggest game that made it out of just cult following was NEStalgia: http://www.silkgames.com/nestalgia/
by orange_puff | 2025-05-16 05:59:39+00:00
I have been trying to find such an article for so long, thank you! I think a common reaction to Agents is “well, it probably cannot solve a really complex problem very well”. But to me, that isn’t the point of an agent. LLMs function really well with a lot of context, and agent allows the LLM to discover more context and improve its ability to answer questions.
by motorest | 2025-05-16 05:59:55+00:00
> Ideally, what you want is what Rust and many modern languages do: programs which don't explain what they wanted don't compile, so, when you forget to initialize that won't compile.

I think you're confusing things. You're arguing about static code analysis being able to identify uninitialized var reads. All C++ compilers already provide support for flags such as -Wuninitiaized.
by MobiusHorizons | 2025-05-16 06:01:37+00:00
Atomics are hardly “C”. They are a primative exposed many CPU ISAs for helping to navigate the complexity those same CPUs introduced with OOO execution and complex caches in a multi-threaded environment. Much like simd atomics require extending the language through intrinsics or new types because they represent capabilities that were not possible when the language was invented. Atomics require this extra support in Java just as they do in rust or C.
by ValtteriL | 2025-05-16 06:02:57+00:00
The book Beautiful C++: 30 Core Guidelines for Writing Clean, Safe, and Fast Code recommends initializing/providing default values for member variables in default member initializers intead of the initializer list used here.

""" Default member initializers define a default value at the point of declaration. If there is a member that cannot be defined in such a way, it suggests that there may be no legal mechanism by which a default constructor can be defined. """
by eden-u4 | 2025-05-16 06:03:34+00:00
why don't you ask the model about the shrinked system prompt and the original system prompt? in this way you can infer whether the same relevant informations are "stored" in the hidden state of the model.

Or better yet, check directly the hidden state difference between a model feed with the original prompt and one with the shrinked prompt.

This should avoid remove the randomness of the results.
by rvz | 2025-05-16 06:04:59+00:00
> As you well note, Ollama is Ollamaing - I joked, once, that their median llama.cpp contribution from Ollama is asking when a feature will land in llama-server so it can be copy-pasted into Ollama.

Other than being a nice wrapper around llama.cpp, are there any meaningful improvements that they came up with that landed in llama.cpp?

I guess in this case with the introduction of libmtmd (for multi-modal support in llama.cpp) Ollama waited and did a git pull and now multi-modal + better vision support was here and no proper credit was given.

Yes, they had vision support via LLaVa models but it wasn't that great.
by IshKebab | 2025-05-16 06:05:23+00:00
> It has no mandate to organize content or care about the quality of its content.

That's fundamentally where SO went wrong. The mods think they're building programming Wikipedia, but normal users are using it as a Q&A forum.

> Questions can be reopened, and this has always been the case. What is not allowed is for the OP to reopen a question unilaterally, because that defeats the entire purpose of question closure.

No it doesn't. It's far too easy to close a question and they very rarely get reopened. The suggestion was that users only get to unilaterally reopen it once.

> I have found that reputation scores say very little about whether one understands the purpose of the site or how it's designed to work.

See this is exactly the problem. You have the mods' view of how it is supposed to work, but that isn't how people want it to work!

Mods want it to be this highly curated reference site where only perfectly written questions that exactly fit an FAQ style of questioning. They don't care that that makes it useless (or at least extremely frustrating) as a Q&A forum.
by weinzierl | 2025-05-16 06:05:39+00:00
"And really, that’s the most important thing you can ask of a leader, that they set the right north star."

That's an interesting way to see it . I've heard[1] Rust called "Correctness, Performance, DX, in that order" and I think it would be nice to contrast this with other programming languages.

For example Zig could be "Performance, Correctness, DX". Only a small difference, but the consequences are huge.

[1] I think I have this from Steve Klabnik, but I don't remember the exact words.
by bobbyraduloff | 2025-05-16 06:06:41+00:00
at the very least that article was definitely edited with ChatGPT. i had someone on my team write “edgy” copy with ChatGPT last week and it sounded exactly the same. short paragraphs and overuse of bullet points are also a dead giveaway. i don’t think it’s super noticeable if you don’t use ChatGPT a lot but for the people that use these systems daily, it’s still very easy to spot.

my suggestion to OP: this was interesting material, ChatGPT made it had to read. use your own words to explain it. most people interested in this deeply technical content would rather read your prompt than the output.
by jandrewrogers | 2025-05-16 06:06:52+00:00
For better or worse, modern C++ is still the most capable and expressive systems language. To replace it, we need (at a minimum) a language with similar capability and expressiveness in the low-level systems domain. The options are really thin; Zig probably comes the closest but it is a bit austere coming from recent C++ versions.

I think we can do significantly better than C++ as a systems language. We just haven’t landed on a language that really nails the design.
by thaumasiotes | 2025-05-16 06:06:56+00:00
Well, based on the document complained about in the post...

> The broadcasting mechanism permits index arrays to be combined with scalars for other indices. The effect is that the scalar value is used for all the corresponding values of the index arrays

Because you're using advanced indexing in the second example, 0 is an array of shape 2, [0, 0], not a scalar value.

So the first thing that happens is that you select two coordinates in `array`, those being (1) where i=0 and k=0, and (2) where i=0 and k=1.

Then,

> In general, the shape of the resultant array will be the concatenation of the shape of the index array (or the shape that all the index arrays were broadcast to) with the shape of any unused dimensions (those not indexed) in the array being indexed.

You didn't use the j dimension. The value at each of the two coordinates you selected is a size 20 array, so your result is an array with two rows, those being the two arrays you pointed to.

----

Your example appears to be identical to indexing example D from the article. Example C looks harder to explain.
by jaza | 2025-05-16 06:08:14+00:00
Yes, there are a lot of people working in places in Sydney other than the CBD, and yes, a much higher proportion of those people drive to work.

And yes, there are still enough people who drive into the Sydney CBD in peak hour, to cause massive traffic (and to keep the carparks, aka parking lots, being very lucrative businesses!). Nevertheless, they're a minority - more than 75% of people commute to the Sydney CBD on public transport [1].

Also, re: traffic from Balmain in peak hour. Plenty of places you can be going to, eastbound on the Anzac Bridge, apart from the CBD! I'd say a significant number of those drivers would be heading north of the harbour to work (eg North Sydney, St Leonards / Crows Nest, maybe Chatswood, maybe Macquarie Park), and they'd be bypassing the CBD thanks to the Western Distributor (could also be connecting to Cross City Tunnel to eg Bondi Junction, also Eastern Distributor to Randwick / Waterloo).

[1] https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/media/d...
by bradley13 | 2025-05-16 06:08:59+00:00
I can certainly confirm that learning German grammar as an adult is...challenging. Even though I am now fluent, learning as an adult means that you will always make mistakes on the gender of nouns. There are effectively four genders (male/neuter/female/plural), plus four cases (nominative/accusative/dative/genetive), so you have a 4x4 table giving you a choice of 16 articles that can appear in from of a noun. Only, the 16 articles are not unique: the table contains lots of duplicates in unexpected places.

Of course, most Western languages have gendered nouns - English is pretty unique in that respect. That likely comes from English being born as a pidgin of French and German.

Verbs in German are valuable things. You collect them, hold on to them as long as you can, and then - at the end of the sentence - they all come tumbling out. The order of the nouns at the end of the sentence differs by region. In purest German, they come out in reverse order, giving you a nice, context-free grammar. In Swiss dialects, they come out in the order they were conceived, meaning that the grammar is technically context sensitive. In Austrian dialects, the order can be a mix.

Of course, every language has its quirks. French, for example, puts extra letters on the ends of words that you are not supposed to pronounce. Well, unless the right two words are next to each other, in which case, you pronounce the letters after all.

English, meanwhile, gives learners fits, because the pronunciation has nothing whatsoever to do with spelling. Consider the letters "gh" in this sentence (thanks ChatGPT): "Though the tough man gave a sigh and a laugh at the ghost, he had a hiccough and coughed through the night by the slough, hoping to get enough rest."
by littlestymaar | 2025-05-16 06:10:03+00:00
What you've written doesn't change anything to the fact that there's a contradiction in the author's writing. And as ithkuil said in another comment[1] it's not surprising at all that such a contradiction would occur in a work of fiction written by a human, because we are first an foremost emotional beings and we cannot really imagine how would a society of purely rational beings would be.

I don't really understand why you want to pretend that there's no inconsistency in a piece of fiction, by invoking pseudo-technical arguments that are entirely foreign to the said piece of fiction.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43992932
by jf | 2025-05-16 06:10:29+00:00
I’ve been paying more attention to Náhuatl after reading “The Aztecs: A Very Short Introduction” [0] and seeing the names of my great uncles and great aunts in there (e.g. Xochitl, Nezahualcoyotl) which opened a mystery of sorts. My grandmother and her older brother had very classically Mexican names and the four younger siblings had Náhuatl names, but why? My great aunts didn’t know but I suspect that the answer is related to the “Indigenismo” movement in Mexico [1], which may also be behind the linguistic renaissance that this article describes.

My personal ties to this history aside, it’s fascinating to see how many Náhuatl words made it into Mexican Spanish and into English and beyond! [2]

Footnotes:

0: https://academic.oup.com/book/481

1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenismo_in_Mexico

2: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Spanish_words_of_Nah...