skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yup. Most of this was culled from a 2001 conference (so small but distinguished sample set), and you really need to read the detail to understand what they were appreciative of. It's not a good/bad thing and probably represented what they were thinking about at the time (e.g. Alpert calls out Multiflow because it influenced a processor he built). Sites even includes a backhand at VAX by calling it the example of what they didn't do in Alpha; damning with faint praise.

I haven't fired up my Cell dev board (Mercury) in a while. Prolly should do that. :-)
24 != "almost 200"
Logging operator for Kubernetes (built on the Fluent ecosystem)
This might be relevant

A Retargetable C Compiler: Design and Implementation by David Hanson and Chritopher Fraser

https://www.amazon.com/Retargetable-Compiler-Design-Implemen...

Written in a literate programming style.
You could replace them with a centralized solution even. All you need is general agreement to use new root name servers. The new system could even fallback to the old one, providing a transition period.

Could probably be done by Microsoft, Apple & Google getting together and deciding how to split the billions and how much they toss the Linux Foundation & Firefox to come along for the ride. It doesn't have to be a great deal, just a better one than ICANN and its landlords provide.
Pentium Pro should be on the list. The out of order execution, especially with the micro-op translation was a huge breakthrough.
> when I see nice, big, round numbers like 0.5 or 1 billion thrown out there I wonder how we calculated this. How rigorous are these estimates?

Round numbers are much more scientific, honest, and every other good thing than precise numbers are. You can estimate that 5-600,000,000 things died and present that as "500,000,000", a number with one significant figure. If you instead claimed that 516,772,943 things died, you'd be claiming to have a lot more knowledge than you actually do.

You should be inclined to trust big round numbers more than you trust odd-looking numbers, not the other way around.
I really appreciate this, thanks!
> Regulators are important, but they also serve incumbent interests as they raise the barrier to entry for newcomers.

Call me crazy, but when it comes to products that could so easily cause death, a barrier to entry is a good thing.
Remote access and a single library of truth across multiple clients - keeping track of what’s been watched and when. There’s other bits, but that’s the most important.
Well, I suppose it depends on what exactly the facts being discussed are.

For example, are we discussing:

- numbers of fires actually started by people (and, deliberately vs accidentally)

- (the unknown) number of people who have actually engaged in risky behavior

- numbers of people who have been arrested (charged?) for any of the above

> The basis for those numbers is irrelevant

In terms of my "casual" accusation, agreed. I think it's fair to say that in this case it was actually me who was speaking too casually due to a preoccupation with the philosophical ideas around facts.
Verification by Gradient Descent: Fixed Perimeter and Maximum Area = Square
> With Google you can be sure that they sell your data to _anybody_

This is not true. There is no documented case of Google selling any user's personal data to anyone.
The Y/MP I got to use was pretty cool too...a multiprocessor Cray. But then that's a Chen design and I don't imagine Seymour would approve of everything that went into it.
I mean commercial small pitch LED panels made of modules, like ones used for outdoor advertising, but much smaller.
> And I think this GitHub project submitted will be an excellent practical source for analysis of how real world compiler might looks like from its beginning.

If you want to understand how people build production (or even prototype) compilers, this is not going to be a good source. Most compiler courses are going to take you from a compiler from the frontend through the middle-end and into the backend. But, if you were to build your own, you'd start with the backend (or probably just use LLVM instead) before going to the frontend. And you'd also spend some more time planning on what your IR needs to look like before starting the actual code (not that this project has any IR--it codegens directly to assembly from the AST).
I'm not a computer architect (so my opinion shouldn't count in this thread), but as someone who did a lot of numerical programming over the years, I really thought Itanium looked super promising. The idea that you can indicate a whole ton of instructions can be run in parallel seemed really scalable for FFTs and linear algebra. Instead of more cores, give me more ALUs. I know "most" software doesn't have enough work between branches to fill up that kind of pipeline, but machine learning and signal processing can certainly use long branchless basic blocks if you can fit them in icache.

At the time, it seemed (to me at least) that it really only died because the backwards compatibility mode was slow. (I think some of the current perception of Itanium is revisionist history.) It's tough to say what it could've become if AMD64 hadn't eaten it's lunch by running precompiled software better. It would've been interesting if Intel and compiler writers could've kept focus on it.

Nowdays, it's obvious GPUs are the winners for horsepower, and it's telling that we're willing to use new languages and strategies to get that win. However, GPU programming really feels like you're locked outside of the box - you shuffle the data back and forth to it. I like to imagine a C-like language (analogous to CUDA) that would pump a lot of instructions to the "Explicitly Parallel" architecture.

Now we're all stuck with the AMD64 ISA for our compatibility processor, and it seems like another example where the computing world isn't as good as it should be.
Where I work, we're shifting away from using Spreadsheets that perform analysis to platforms such as Alteryx.
Healthcare Marketing Strategy
This was India's moment to shine. But as usual, it looks like this opportunity will also be squandered.
That's not a thing. The problem isn't self referential statements. The problem is much larger, and self referential statements are the easiest way to construct a counterexample. Self referential statements are a symptom, not a cause.

Trying to construct a mathematical system of axioms is like trying to construct the most powerful system of computation possible that isn't subject to the halting problem.

You want to prove stuff, so you want a powerful system. Eventually, you end up with a system of axioms that is so powerful it can prove contradictory results, or you end up with a language where you cannot prove it halts or does not halt.

You want to not be able to prove untrue true, and you want true things to be unable to be proven false, so you weaken your tools. Either you fail to weaken your tools enough, or you eventually end up unable to prove true statements are true.

In programming, the fact that it's unprovable that a program halts isn't actually a big deal. Most of the normal problems we deal with don't need algorithms which probe the boundaries of halting, and QA picks up the stuff we miss. (usually, and if not, it's the customer's problem, not mine) That doesn't work in math. In math, if you want to publish a paper that proves x, you want to be sure that nobody's going to publish a paper proving !x anytime soon. So you need a restricted language, unlike programmers.

It turns out banning self referential statements makes it really, really hard to prove stuff.
If the car can't drive without you, then it's not self-driving. Those features do not allow the the car to drive by itself. It can't go anywhere without a licensed, attentive driver. This is so thoroughly not complicated.
Portal: Current Events
You're listing specs which are a proxy for how much money the incumbent has, and saying that the regulatory barrier should be set at those specs for some reason.

None of those specs give any indication to the relative safety of the two systems though. And this is exactly what incumbents want. They want a small player to have to match their massive cash holdings to enter their market, even if the small player has a better product.

Here's some food for though: Tesla has been slapped with multiple lawsuits for misleading advertising of Autopilot. Regulators all agree that Autopilot is just an SAE level 2 system, same like those found on much cheaper cars with far less hardware and none of the marketing oversell.
There’s native support for HDHomeRun tuners, and M3U files.

There’s other plugins to enable TVHeadend access and more IPTV.
Alpha is also unique in that it's the only architecture that doesn't preserve data dependency ordering.
And many of those processes are spreadsheet based, ie CRUD!
Yeah, both the CDC 6600 and the Cray 1 did things that nobody even imagined were possible before. There were a bunch of attempts to do what the Cray-1 did, but none of them worked. Kind of like how C (about the same time) was the first portable language you could write an OS in.
Boeing 737 Crashes in Iran Shortly After Takeoff
Because (a) then you'd end up with things like pacemakers designed by sole operators because their regulatory burden would be that much lower than what a biomedical engineering firm would face, and (b) any such system would be trivial to game anyway.
I'm currently rocking a 125" screen with a 1080p projector. I'd love 1440p with super dark black.
I find this surprising. It seems obvious to me that areas in countries that are much less wealthy grow much faster than wealthy countries (if they're improving). They are essentially catching up by implementing many of the same techniques wealthy countries already figured out.
IRL too, now.
Seems reasonable enough to me. There haven’t been any scientific studies linking social media usage to serious health effects similar to tobacco usage or obesity. And while there definitely are clear causal links between excessive sugar intake and type 2 diabetes, that still hasn’t resulted in bans of sugar products.

Just because people don’t like social media doesn’t mean we should abandon all logic in legislation against it, or carry out outrageous comparisons that sound like clickbait titles. “Facebooks is as harmful as smoking or overeating!” Is just not true. What is true is that certain people don’t like Facebook and would love for such a title to be true because it aligns with their bias, and therefore they feel we should all just accept it as truth without the evidence.
Its pretty common to have to deal with Ad hominem attacks when your pushing for change so all I can hope for is you can see how much your resistance to change is hurting those around you.
I loved working on DEC Alphas. They seemed to me like the best of breed conventional 64 bit machines, and it was sad when we quit buying them because x86 boxes were cheaper.

> it seems to me that almost all the innovations Intel brought to the Pentium lines of CPU over many years were basically reimplementing features pioneered by the DEC Alpha

I can't find a strong source to link, but I thought most of the Alpha team ended up at Intel. If so, that would explain the trickling in of re-implementations.
>Even Gosling isn't advocating that the APIs were copyrighted....

And neither did the parent implied he was. He is merely stating Gosling wasn't OK with Google using Java without paying a dime, but didn't have much of a choice.
I'm not sure what testing a regulator can do today that's more rigorous than the 10.5 million miles already driven by Open Pilot equipped cars.
It was never intended as a comprehensive list. Best if you actually read the article. It's been floating around for more than a decade.

Alpert is a bad architect...funny.
same goes for CATIA V5...
Doesn't that just mean that Vietnam is becoming the new China? China started their improvements in somewhat similar circumstances.
I did that in the past, but now I can run "npx WHATEVER"

The only problem is that npx ALSO defaults to installing things, which is ridiculous.
All this article has shown is that std::sort is much more optimal than std::unordered_map on the C++ standard library used.

Every std::unordered_map I've used is surprisingly slow. Normally hash-tables are slow because it's so easy to write a slow hash-table, but std::unordered_map is slow for other reasons that I have had explained to me and then quickly forgot :(.

I also find it strange that unordered_map is used rather than unordered_set. Not sure if it would make a performance difference, but if we are going for naive implementations, that should be at the top of the list.
Frankly not sure this piece really said anything other than the big 4 or 5 are so unbelievably strong that we're all left playing in the spaces, usually small, leftover.
> It's funny that Buzzfeed is reporting this

Buzzfeed news, not Buzzfeed. This isn't "funny", this isn't even interesting or relevant, which is exactly why this tripe is the top comment, once again. Thank fuck for the collapse feature. May you investigate your own role in dumbing down people and licking boots -- that will never happen though.
I don't have a problem with mine at all. I've had Sonos speakers for about 4 years now. Two play 3's, playbar, Sub and a Play 1.

Works better than when I got it, everyone in the house knows how to use it to play music and watch movies etc. Allows me to play my Spotify playlists and them to play their Apple music playlists.

The stuff works fine and I update it all as soon as a new update comes out. I'd like to know if other people are having issues, just to know what to look out for. But I've had it for quite a while now and it blows people's minds when they see how it all works and how easily it works.
Sydney Uni has posted an updated link: https://sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2020/01/08/australia...

They use "killed" and "affected" interchangeably. The exact quote is:

Professor Chris Dickman has revised his estimate of the number of animals killed in bushfires in NSW to more than 800 million animals, with a national impact of more than one billion animals.

I'm not an expert in this area, but from my reading over the past few hours it appears the distinction between "killed" and "impacted" is not something ecologists think about a lot. It appears that they expect most of those "impacted" which do not immediately die, to die soon after (from predators or from habitat loss), or if they don't die they expect them not to be able to reproduce successfully (the young are too vulnerable in destroyed habitats).

I'd note this from the report (part you quoted):

The true mortality is likely to be substantially higher than those estimated in this report.

Edit: here's the interview where he makes the updated number claim: https://www.kosu.org/post/1-billion-animals-have-died-austra...

Edit 2: But it is true I'd like to see some more rigour around the estimates. I'd note that estimates for the 2009 Black Friday bushfires were for 1M animals killed with 400K hectares burnt. These fires have already burnt 8.5M hectares, but taking the 2009 death rate produces a number roughly an order of magnitude less.
> What about Thumb-2 with its unequaled code density?

It came out in 2003, and most of the people were queried for their opinions in 2001.
Do you aspire to be a professional or are you going to settle for being an employee? I have no need to whitewash Alpert's catastrophic industry-wide legacy of technical mediocrity and failure. I suggest you aspire to honesty instead of clutching your pearls.
Well sure, the methodology is touched upon, but not terribly thoroughly (perhaps there is a link to their actual calculations in there). But, that methodology rests upon other methodologies in other studies. I mean, not that that's inappropriate, this is simply the complex nature of scientific studies. But on any kind of topic like this, I get a constant impression from comments that "the science" is right there for the reading, no gaps or uncertainty exist whatsoever.

Are people literally saying exactly that? Well ya, a lot of the time they are literally saying that. But even if not, this is what is usually being implied, and it's certainly the impression readers are walking away with. In my experience, it's a rare person who can unemotionally acknowledge the fact that much of what we loosely refer to as "the truth" is actually just a big messy collection of approximations, if not outright imaginations in many cases.
You’re missing the huge “works incorrectly” space of outputs.
Side note: Whoever is flagging all the reports on this incident, quit it. This is a legitimate topic of discussion and there are a lot of people on HN with aviation insight who I would like to hear from even if it takes time for full details to emerge.
Which authors are you thinking of?

Up until the web existed, I think it was extremely hard to usefully predict the Internet's impact. TCP was invented in 1974, but it wasn't until 1993 that we started seeing things that really pointed to where we were going: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_websites_founded_befor...

Of course, everybody knew computers would be important. But that was true starting in the 1960s. E.g., Stand on Zanzibar has a supercomputer as a central plot element.
Aaaaand that's why Americans need to pay 500 bucks for an insulin injector pen while Indians pay 10 bucks for the same device.

The problem with regulatory capture and arguing it's a good thing, is that there's a downside/cost to the barrier it creates. And often that downside outweighs the upside.

To be clear, no one is arguing regulation shouldn't exist. Just that the nature of regulation is to be captured by incumbents and serve a purpose orthogonal to protecting the people.
Since when does Sonos stop playing when your phone battery dies or your laptop? Doesn't for me.
Not any longer, drop a file into iCloud, go to VLC, enjoy movie. The files app upgrade is pretty neat.
Oh, sure, maybe trivial isn't the best word for it, but it's all relative (to me). $20k is remarkably cheap for a practical cryptographic attack compared to the rest of the field, and there's plenty of software to do it, and it's been done before (many times).

Apparently there's even a SaaS offering to do it for you in some cases (for staggeringly cheap, like $300), but I had no idea that existed when I wrote my comment.
That C like language is called "Verilog". (Yes I know it's a HDL but the point still stands. FPGAs are commodity these days.)
> The improvements are usually in the 1% range, from old models to new models, and the models are complex. More often than not also lacking code, implementation / experiment procedures, etc. [...] no idea if the paper is reproducible, if the results are cherry picked from hundreds / thousands of runs, if the paper is just cleverly disguised BS with pumped up numbers to get grants, and so on.

Personally, I'm bearish about most deep learning papers for this reason.

I'm not driven by a particular task/problem, so when I'm reading ML papers, it is primarily for new insights and ideas. Correspondingly, I prefer to read papers which have new perspectives on the problem (irrespective of whether they achieve SOTA performance). From what I've seen, most of the interesting (to me) ideas come from slightly adjacent fields. I care far more about interesting & elegant ideas, and benchmarks to just sanity-check that the nice idea can also be made to work in practice.

As for the obsession with benchmark numbers, I can only quote Mark Twain: “Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination.”
If you think about it, what's happening in Shenzhen is basically what has happened in most major cities in wealthy western countries. As the city becomes richer manufacturing slowly disappears, because new manufacturing is too expensive to set up.
The causal link suggested was because flying animals would need to be light, their digestive system evolved to be shorter than similar land based animals and also save the weight of the microbiome passengers(or it could be with shorter digestive time, no bacteria evolved to be symbiotic quick enough to be beneficial), so there is nothing like the symbiosis between microbiome and host animal that we humans and all other animals with backbones possess (phylosymbiosis). I'm curious how much they sampled non flying birds - it seems like a reasonable test for their hypothesis. There was some bacteria in flying animals guts, just not consistent in species like it is in animals that need phylosymbiosis or as much as non flying.
almost simultaneous announcement from Chrome: https://blog.chromium.org/2020/01/introducing-quieter-permis...
AMD actually licensed a good bit of Alpha technology.
I listed miles driven. That is a direct indicator of safety.

I also listed the number and type of inputs each system has. This might correlate with money, but it clearly also correlates with safety. One simple example, it is impossible for the Comma system to have 360 degree visual coverage of what is around you with just two cameras in the locations they are in.
It sounds like they just went around the room and asked some folks to list off some systems. I don't think a terrible amount of thought was put into this.

I'd add the Tandem NonStop to my personal list. I don't know why I overlooked the LGP-30 [1], I'll have to find a schematic. 113 vacuum tubes is really impressive, I wonder if there is any overlap with this design and System Hyper Pipelining [2]. Do you know of other architectures that use time multiplexing to reduce part count?

What bit serial computers do you like?

Ahh, it is the Story of Mel computer, awesome.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGP-30

[2] https://arxiv.org/abs/1508.07139
I worked on a project with machines that used the pa-risc cpus. The importance of optimized compilers can’t be understated (and math libraries) which made those machines really shine. My understanding was the Itanium (which basically replaced pa-risc in hp Unix machine lineup) never got the compiler support to realize the architectures strengths, so everyone looked to the safer bet in 64bit computing.

It’s hard to compete with the scale of x86. Like software I feel the industry tends toward one architecture (the more people use the architecture the better the compilers the more users ...) Even Apple abandoned PowerPC chips.
Serious question for you gamers out there:

Why would a person go to such great lengths to cheat at a video game? Is there a monetary incentive? Otherwise, it seems like a lot of effort just to increase one's standing on a leader board.
I don't follow your logic. What makes you think Samsung is applying consumer-grade smartphone design/cost-optimization hardware hacks to modules targeting a completely different market segment, let alone form factor?
Ok but it implies/states that the secrets will be broadly divulged.
This is in reference to the Boeing 737 that just went down over Tehran:

https://twitter.com/TheBelaaz/status/1214757041123803136

https://twitter.com/Asylumseeker111/status/12147702487436738...

Iranian sources state it was a "technical malfunction", but given current geopolitical events, it may be a anti-air malfunction in their defense system downing a civilian airliner, which looks bad, obviously.
Would we need new software license with regards to Copyright protection once this case is closed in Orcale's flavour?
> I'm not sure how it works in the production side of the film industry but I imagine it is not dissimilar.

I don't know about films, but credits on TV shows apparently work more like lifetime achievement awards than like a list of who worked on what. Everyone touches a lot of different things, your total contributions are tracked informally, and when they exceed a certain amount you get an episode credit. You need to have touched the episode, but you might have done much less work on that particular episode than a dozen uncredited people.

Source: Mark Rosewater's writing about his time on Roseanne.