MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by rvz | 2025-05-31 17:50:32+00:00
Maintained systems built to last as long as 500 years is what engineers should be aiming to build, especially striving for both quality and to be highly battle tested in hardware.

This one didn't break 25 years ago with the Y2K bug and it won't break in 2038 either.

A vibe-designed version of this however could not even last 4 years (AI introduces leap year bug) or even 6 months (clock will break going back and forth adjusted for DST)
by atrettel | 2025-05-31 17:51:24+00:00
I'm a PhD and researcher who has worked in various fields, including at a national lab.

I think AI systems like this could greatly help with peer review, especially as a first check before submitting a manuscript to a journal.

That said, this particular system appears to focus on the wrong issues with peer review, in my opinion. I'll ignore the fact that an AI system is not a peer since another person already brought that up [1]. Even if this kind of system was a peer, the system appears to be checking superficial issues and not the deeper issues that many peer reviewer/referrers care about. I'll also ignore any security risks (other posts discuss that too).

A previous advisor of mine said that a good peer review needs to think about one major/deep question when reviewing a manuscript: Does the manuscript present any novel theories, novel experiments, or novel simulations; or does it serve as a useful literature review?

Papers with more novelty are inherently more publishable. This system does not address this major question and focuses on superficial aspects like writing quality, as if peer review is mere distributed editing and not something deeper. It is possible for even a well-written manuscript to lack any novelty, and novelty is what makes it worthy of publication. Moreover, many manuscripts have at best superficial literature reviews that name drop important papers and often mischaracterize their importance.

It takes deep expertise in a subject to see how a work is novel and fits into the larger picture of a given field. This system does nothing to aid in that. Does it help identify what parts of a paper you should emphasize to prove its novelty? That is, does it help you find the "holes" in the field that need patching? Does it help show what parts of your literature review are lacking?

A lot of peer review is kinda performative, but if we are going to create automated systems to help with peer review, I would like them to focus on the most important task of peer review: assessing the novelty of the work.

(I will note that I have not tried out this particular system myself. I am basing my comments here on the documentation I looked at on GitHub and the information in this thread.)

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44144672
by Workaccount2 | 2025-05-31 17:51:28+00:00
A case would probably have it back in spec, if its even out of spec on it's own. The energy is going to be so tiny in those high frequency waves because it's just signal and clock. Never mind that they are still pretty low frequency and those traces are going to be awful emitters in that range.

The highest energy part of the device is going to be the LEDs, which are switching well below the bottom of the standard EMI compliance range (10Mhz).
by Calwestjobs | 2025-05-31 17:54:14+00:00
germany tried what exactly? concept of passive house is universal thing.

most of US lives like caveman burning wood (which is not ecological nor health safe activity) and spreading nonsense about ondemand water heaters.

while there are multiple billionaires who earn insane amounts on "predicting energy market" i.e. scamming residential customers / citizens thru taxes.

it is like insane asylum.
by absoluteunit1 | 2025-05-31 17:54:53+00:00
Happy to help!

> Do i have a way to find which keys i need to practice more on ?

Right now, the best way is probably after finishing a session, in the stats section you can see the table of characters typed or in the "Keyboard" tab as well.

You can then see which were your slowest, had most mistypes, etc

And not only characters alone but also sequences (see "Bigrams" / "Trigrams" tab in the stats section) that you type slowly.

I personally found that practising specific sequences helped - epseically if they're a common sequence in English. I add an indicator to each sequence on how common it is in the English language.

For me for example, "c" -> "e" and "e" -> "c" was really slow. This is a very common sequence. So then practicing this in the Drills mode was my strategy
by bigyabai | 2025-05-31 17:55:15+00:00
Your question still implies a hysteric interpretation of a nonexistent featureset. I think you will struggle to foster a serious discussion without actually describing what you're worried about. "AI kills people" is not any more of a serious concern than household furnitute becoming sentient and resolving to form an army that challenges humankind.

You have to describe what the actual threat is for us to treat it as an imperative issue. 99% of the time, these hypotheticals end with human error, not rogue AI.
by tverbeure | 2025-05-31 17:56:20+00:00
A cheap GPS module without a disciplined 1PPS output (like the ublox MAX-M8 that's used in this project) typically has a jitter of about a few hundreds nanoseconds, so the potential is there for the precision to be much better than 1ms if the microcontroller on this clock has the 1PPS wired to an interrupt routine.
by quantadev | 2025-05-31 17:56:22+00:00
This can definitely happen, because the context windows even in a great Agent can become flooded. I often do prompts like "Add a row of buttons at the top right named 'copy', 'cut', and 'paste'", and let the Agent do that, before I implement each button, for example.

The rule of thumb I've learned is to give an Agent the smallest possible task at a time, so there's zero ambiguity in the prompt, and context window is kept small.
by LeoPanthera | 2025-05-31 17:57:16+00:00
“I remembered once, in Japan, having been to see the Gold Pavilion Temple in Kyoto and being mildly surprised at quite how well it had weathered the passage of time since it was first built in the fourteenth century. I was told it hadn’t weathered well at all, and had in fact been burnt to the ground twice in this century. “So it isn’t the original building?” I had asked my Japanese guide.

“But yes, of course it is,” he insisted, rather surprised at my question.

“But it’s burnt down?”

“Yes.”

“Twice.”

“Many times.”

“And rebuilt.”

“Of course. It is an important and historic building.”

“With completely new materials.”

“But of course. It was burnt down.”

“So how can it be the same building?”

“It is always the same building.”

I had to admit to myself that this was in fact a perfectly rational point of view, it merely started from an unexpected premise. The idea of the building, the intention of it, its design, are all immutable and are the essence of the building. The intention of the original builders is what survives. The wood of which the design is constructed decays and is replaced when necessary. To be overly concerned with the original materials, which are merely sentimental souvenirs of the past, is to fail to see the living building itself.”

― Douglas Adams, Last Chance to See
by efortis | 2025-05-31 17:57:19+00:00
Fun fact: my coworkers who use “Show whitespace chars” in their IDE find the padding too distracting. So for them I switch my font before sharing my screen.

I got used to the padding in a few minutes, the first version had a 1/4 space padding and then I pushed it to a 1/3.

To me, the main problem is tabularized alignment. So I don’t use it for example on nginx.conf
by doawoo | 2025-05-31 17:57:49+00:00
AtomVM is super fun to prototype MCU projects with. It’s what I tend to reach for over micropython etc.

For beefier machines that have SoCs it’s Nerves usually.

And recently a project called Popcorn uses the AtomVM to run BEAM VM code in the browser! Super neat seeing more places to deploy Elixir and Erlang :)
by Rendello | 2025-05-31 17:58:21+00:00
There's a little more to it. Ken Whistler is the vice chair of the Unicode Technical Committee [1], and he's responding to tongue-in-cheek to:

> I really like the idea of questioning whether or not ASCII should even be taught [...] Wherever in a programming curriculum, text processing/transmission/storage/presentation/encoding is taught, then it should be Unicode text

His point is that it's still worth it to learn ASCII, since the now-dominant UTF-8 has basically subsumed it.

1. https://www.unicode.org/consortium/techchairs.html
by AStonesThrow | 2025-05-31 17:58:26+00:00
Forsooth! "Palimpsest of Horological Technology" shall heretofore be the moniker by which I dub a rag-tag band of madrigal performers, and/or the Macguffin from Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny!

Growing up in San Diego, we often visited Presidio Park, site of the San Diego Mission, or was it?

It was only 17 years ago when I managed to untangle the relationship between the Mission de Alcala in the valley and the Presidio on the hill.

I told my friend from Spain that we could go visit, and she exclaimed "a prison? why visit a prison?"

And one or more buildings of the Presidio has been completely rebuilt, as replicas, as a museum and tourist attraction. And everyone told me the grass mounds outside were burial sites or something.

But as a child I didn't get it; the building just looked like an old mission from the photographs and they had nice exhibits about what life was like tending crops and winepresses. Also, there is an observation point on the third floor, where you can see the Pacific Ocean and all of Mission Valley.
by absoluteunit1 | 2025-05-31 17:58:54+00:00
Hey!

> I like this site, I have been trying.

Thanks a lot - was nervous to release it so having validation is great! I would have happily continued tinkering with it in my code cave while continuing to delay the release date lol

> One suggestion to you OP, if there is a way you can make lessons and if one can practice through one by one, it would be great!

I have a feature I'm working on that's exactly this - a progression type mode. I will prioritize it on next release! Thank you for the feedback and confirming the feature idea :)
by accrual | 2025-05-31 17:58:57+00:00
This is insanely cool. It's a beautifully written article that covers all the major design decisions and issues that affected the final outcome. I'm considering purchasing one for myself and to support the developer. It would be a very cool addition to a homelab or tech/hacker space.

I think my own minor issue is the use of a micro-USB port instead of USB-C - I wonder why, I don't see it mentioned in the article. Maybe adding a PD controller would have complicated the already complex dance of components on the board. Standard USB can supply 5V at 1A (5.0W) no problem, so maybe that was just a simpler way to go.
by erikig | 2025-05-31 18:00:28+00:00
Red Wrench films did a comparison of the B-17 and B-24 bomber's results based on flight characteristics, bombing accuracy, loss rates and more. Even though more B-24s were produced than B-17s the latter had much better results.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hM8eKEqiO2Y
by hinkley | 2025-05-31 18:00:46+00:00
There was a period where NFS was faster, particularly on windows and OSX where you were paying a double indirection.

Overlays are always tough because docker doesn’t like you writing to the filesystem in the first place. The weapon if first result is deflection; tell them not to do it.

I had to put up with an old docker version that leaked overlay data for quite a while before we moved off prem.
by Terretta | 2025-05-31 18:02:03+00:00
> If humans remain in the loop, the promise of AI is broken.

In any craft, if assistants remain in the loop, the promise of mastery is broken.

Or is it?

In the contemporary art world, artists and their workshops enjoy a remarkably symbiotic relationship. ... It can be difficult, however, from our contemporary perspective to reconcile the group mentality of workshop practice with the pervasive characterization of individual artistic talent. This enduring belief in the singular “genius” of artists ... is a construct slowly being dismantled through scholarly probing of the origins and functions of the renaissance workshop.

The modern engineer would do well to model after Raphael:

Soon after he arrived in Rome, Raphael established a vibrant network of artists* who were able to channel his “brand” and thereby meet (or at the very least, attempt to meet) the extraordinary demand for his work.

https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/renaissance-reformati...

* read: agents
by Animats | 2025-05-31 18:02:05+00:00
The discussion of traits vs. classes glosses over a major difference - Rust traits have no associated data, and you cannot access the data of a parent trait. Trying to do object-oriented programming in Rust quickly leads to a mess. This is a huge problem if you try to write C++ in Rust.

There's no mention of ownership at all.

> Many libraries in Rust will offer two versions of an API, one which returns a Result or Option type and one of which panics, so that the interpretation of the error (expected exceptional case or programmer bug) can be chosen by the caller.

Huh? Usually, in Rust you just put .unwrap() or .expect() on a function call that returns a result if you want a panic.

More generally, most of the differences between Rust and C++ relate not on how to write imperative code, but how to lay out connections between data structures. Most hard problems in Rust relate to ownership design. That's true in C++, too, but you don't discover them until the program crashes at run time.
by absoluteunit1 | 2025-05-31 18:02:21+00:00
Oh interesting! Was a course in school that was required?

It's a shame that there's no standardized typing courses or tests nowadays. It's such a critical skill...

I often compare touch typing (and just typing fast in general) to a chef's knife skills in the kitchen.

You'd be bullied out of a kitchen immediately if you didn't know how to cut/chop properly. Yet when it comes to typing, it's not the case even though folks type on keyboards on their jobs all day long.
by dataflow | 2025-05-31 18:02:58+00:00
> This is total nonsense. The point of Lipschitz continuity is that it is more than continuity and less then differentiability. If you assert that it is differentiable the concept looses all meaning.

How is Lipschitz less than differentiability? e^x is differentiable everywhere but not Lipschitz continuous everywhere, right?
by silisili | 2025-05-31 18:03:01+00:00
FWIW, most phones allow dual time display, and GMT watches would be extra helpful here as you can essentially track both at once, using either as your 'main.'

> After an eight-hour flight, if you went to bed at 21:00 yesterday, you’ll do the same today.

The problem is, depending on where you landed, 21:00 could be typical start of the workday, and you'd be showing up to an empty office.

> If you had a call at 13:00 yesterday, it’s still at 13:00 today

This part sounds nice, until DST comes along to sabotage you. For only being twice a year though, it's probably still a net gain, one I hadn't really considered for someone who travels a lot.
by Thorrez | 2025-05-31 18:03:04+00:00
"It was the war with Russia that drove the fed to raise interest rates in 2022" sounds like the fed or the US was at war with Russia. Your links 1, 3, 4 mention Ukraine in the same sentence as "war with Russia", which makes it clear that the US and the fed are not at war with Russia. Link 2 talks about a threat of war, not an actual war.
by qbit42 | 2025-05-31 18:04:17+00:00
If a function is Lipschitz, then it is differentiable almost everywhere by Radamacher's theorem. Moreover, if you want to prove things about Lipschitz functions, you can often (though not always) prove things about continuously differentiable functions with bounded gradients, and then lift to all Lipschitz functions via an appropriate compactness argument.
by duxup | 2025-05-31 18:04:40+00:00
Agreed, it is a surprisingly consistent pattern.

I worked at a company acquired by another company.

There were two tech support departments and the other department loved to make accusations about our department faking numbers and cases.

So finally after years of insinuations and accusations another department was asked to look into it.

The team throwing around the accusations were the theam faking numbers and closing cases without resolving them and so on.

It was bizarre.
by MobiusHorizons | 2025-05-31 18:04:50+00:00
the C# decimal type is not fixed point, its a floating point implementation, but just uses a base 10 exponent instead of a base 2 one like IEE754 floats.

Fixed point is a general technique that is commonly done with machine integers when the necessary precision is known at compile time. It is frequently used on embedded devices that don't have a floating point unit to avoid slow software based floating point implementations. Limiting the precision to $0.01 makes sense if you only do addition or subtraction. Precision of $0.001 (Tenths of a cent also called mils) may be necessary when calculating taxes or applying other percentages although this is typically called out in the relevant laws or regulations.
by anthk | 2025-05-31 18:05:01+00:00
From Forth, here's how I'd set the rationals:

: gcd begin dup while tuck mod repeat drop ; : lcm 2dup \* abs -rot gcd / ; : reduce 2dup gcd tuck / >r / r> ; : q+ rot 2dup \* >r rot \* -rot \* + r> reduce ; : q- swap negate swap q+ ; : q\* rot \* >r \* r> reduce ; : q/ >r \* swap r> \* swap reduce ;

Example: to compute 70 * 0.25 = 35/2

70 1 1 4 q* reduce .s 35 2 ok

On stack managing words like 2dup, rot and such, these are easily grasped under either Google/DDG or any Forth with the words "see" and/or "help".

as a hint, q- swaps the top two numbers in the stack, (which compose a rational), makes the last one negative and then turns back its position. And then it calls q+.

So, 2/5 - 3/2 = 2/5 + -3/2.
by fuzzfactor | 2025-05-31 18:05:07+00:00
Don't laugh, there's enough strategy behind it that it's clear it didn't come from Trump himself.

Looks like it's working exactly as structured.

Nothing could be making more logical progress.

It's just one of the things that Trump can smile about with pride, so he's doing his key part to deflect the heat since he's got faithful followers, he wins undue admiration in the spotlight. Meanwhile behind the scenes who knows what compromises are being made and what damage they may do because so much is non-transparent even to Trump.

A lot of things were not transparent to Nixon either, he just got caught for criminal behavior during a time when there was much less tolerance for a dishonest President. As a citizen of both times I can assure you we are breathing the same atmosphere about now, it smells the same way but people have been reacting to it with too much indifference now. I guess they have been conditioned to get used to the stink. Blind faith will tend to do that.

As fewer and fewer Americans can afford to buy Chinese products of many kinds, the leading Chinese technologies will have to cater to the rest of the world, who will potentially be able to benefit by different degrees of affordability in different currencies.

Those Chinese technologies may have to advance at a different rate in a different direction to cater most to non-US interests in ways they have never done in the 21st century. From the USA this is forcing their hand, and it's a sizable force.

Economically, right now millions of Americans who could afford cars, especially new cars, can no longer do that like they could just a few years ago. Domestic or not. Eventually it could end up where almost all Americans can no longer afford even the cheapest Chinese disposable items they have gotten accustomed to, naturally many millions more will no longer be able to afford cars or lots of other domestic products any more either. So we've got a long way to go. And hobbling tech just sounds like it can only get more expensive. I guess it's plain to see why so many people think it would be in their interest to accelerate the process.

Whatever it takes to make Americans unable to afford almost any Chinese products ever again, no matter how cheap or easy it was in the past.

You can't control the Chinese from Washington, but there's whole lot of Americans that can be controlled, right now like never before

And that's when Chinese technology will be most hobbled relative to the USA, when the absolute fewest dollars are passing from the US to China for any reason, the ultimate end game. But the curtailed tech and commerce will surely be concentrated in many areas which American companies used to profit quite handsomely from.

That's OK, they've already made their money.

And America needs some new economy other than a consumer economy anyway. Consumer outlook is not looking too bright.

Plus do you know how cheap labor needs to become for a production economy to even make a dent as an attractive enough alternate investment?

Hobbling could play an important part here too according to some plans.
by usefulcat | 2025-05-31 18:05:11+00:00
It matters if the strategy is designed to do very different things depending on whether or not the offers are locked (when bid == ask, or spread is less than 0.01).

In this example, I’m talking about securities that are priced in whole cents. If you represent prices as floats, then it’s possible that the spread appears to be less (or greater) than 0.01 when it’s actually not, due to the inability of floats to exactly represent most real numbers.
by ajkjk | 2025-05-31 18:05:22+00:00
Don't know much about this kind of thing, but it seems like it would be useful, if possible, to store the actual displacement (dx,dy) vector to the surface instead of just its magnitude, the SDF. I can't evaluate the tradeoff of storing an extra value, but it seems like it would make the recursion in the first section a lot easier: when you want to test if a particular box contains the object, if [v+d, v-d] contains 0, you would know a lot more where to look: you need only continue the iteration on subdivisions that are in the correct direction.