skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
can you add a button to get a link to some of these so you can go back to them?

for instance this is a nice sunset going on at the moment

https://player.vimeo.com/video/431141355?autoplay=1&title=0&...

but had to go extract it out of the code
> If your identity is not transparent to me, I won't enter a relationship with you that requries me to know who you are, which in practice is almost every one.

There are two things about this that don't require centralized identity.

The first is that it's very commonly not true at all. If you want to sign up for an account for an online service (e.g. email, YouTube, gaming), they don't need the name on your driver's license for anything. They don't need to know anything about you. You create an account, set up authentication to prove you're the account holder in the future, and that's it. The identity you use can be created along with the account; it doesn't have to exist beforehand or be associated with anything else.

Second, even where reputation is important, you still don't need a single identity, it's just that an identity without any history would be untrusted.

Suppose you go to the bank to take out a loan. If you tell them your name is Barrin92 and you have no financial history, they're not going to give you one unless you get some more trusted party to cosign it or you post enough collateral that they can be assured to recover their principal if you default.

But then you start off with a small loan with a large amount of collateral, or a cosigner, and build a credit history as "Barrin92" with financial institutions. Now you can get a bigger loan, or one without a cosigner or as much collateral. Until you default. Then "Barrin92" would no longer be creditworthy and you'd be back to square one.

This works fine even if you have a thousand separate identities, because identities with no credit or bad credit aren't trusted and good credit is valuable so that you lose something significant (the creditworthiness of that identity) if you default.

People having multiple identities is effectively just equivalent to the ability to declare bankruptcy. It doesn't really break any good important thing and it does break some important mechanisms of oppression that we should want to break.
You only need one data wire for 1-Wire buses, but it's even better than that: you'll note that the page talks about a "parasitic power mode". This chip (and other 1-Wire devices) operates in a mode where you only need two wires: DQ and GND; it uses an internal capacitor to draw power from the data bus.
Not to mention the obvious, but that glue isn't necessarily that great* for you either.

* allegedly of course.
Steve Jobs had a great explanation for this phenomena. Companies with monopoly power do not require or benefit from product development in any form on most reasonable investment horizons. In practice they can only benefit from increasing their market via marketing, or increasing profits by financial engineering. Eventually the promotion process of the company will leave you with Sales, Marketing, and Finance folks running the show.
Sure, people don't always ship. Companies and investors pay to throw things at the wall and see what sticks. It doesn't all stick, but if they threw nothing, nothing would.

The individual may not provide 100k, but N developers probably provide (at least) 100Nk value. That or the market is very broken.

As an aside, you and the parent both say "most", which I would doubt but is difficult to prove either way.
Amazing picture! Was this before sunset or sunrise?
Tsmc made about 3 bil in free cash flow. Fb made about 20 billion. Social media is much more profitable than semiconductors. However that kind of thinking will leave your country screwed because if you don't have chips facebook doesn't work.
PLASMA is a really neat project! I considered it and a few other systems before settling on C, assembly and Forth. Ultimately I left it out because I was focusing on performance not size, so a byte-code VM would not be a good fit.
>By law, that ingenious bit of design—known as shape coding—still governs landing gear and wing flaps in every airplane today. And the underlying idea is all around you: It’s why the buttons on your videogame controller are differently shaped, with subtle texture differences so you can tell which is which.

I'm not aware of any major controller that has done this outside of the GameCube controller.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GameCube_controller
Be afraid, humanity. All that stands between humanity and the short-term exploitation in unregulated niches where there are long-term negative externalities is human oversight with its pesky feelings.

And even that fails us too often.
oh, these aren't live, just recorded videos? even recorded, these are interesting.
Social Network for Events
I just use org mode
There are quite a few ideas and implementations on top of Ethereum for decentralized identity that are interesting as well. [1]

1. https://docs.ethhub.io/built-on-ethereum/identity/identity-o...
Comptime is certainly nice but not usable in this context I’m afraid.

Also I’ve heard that argument a ton. It’s total complete rubbish as far as I’m concerned. Extrapolating, if you see a function call, what really can you say about the “cost” of that function? To me, without actual investigation, the answer is zilch. The function might be inlined, in the i-cache, referencing a lazily loaded symbol. It might be a small function, it might be huge, it may flush the cache, idk. If the goal was to be able to estimate the performance at a glance, well, we should use assembly, and even then the performance isn’t always clear.
Could you reach out to the Georgia Tech OMSCS program? They have 9,000 concurrent students, and a $7,000 Master's in CS Degree.
Learnawesome has become my goto resource to find useful links.

Thanks for building this!

How do you plan to scale this collection while also ensuring quality and up-to-date content/minus the link-rot?
how familiar are you with the space they are in? can you name some of their competitors? from what i can tell, they were basically competing at the $999/mo price range for inventory management software to tie into Amazon/eBay/Shopify
10 min recordings.
Podium+Adjustable+Bed+Savings+$600
There is a huge difference. While progress before meant that workers could be more productive, the amount of workers you needed increased as the amount of goods that were produced increased. It took more people to produce more value.

It doesn’t take any additional people if MS sells one copy of Windows or Office than if they sell a million. The same is true for Facebook, and AWS (of course the retail side needs more but that’s even becoming more automated). As I said below, Apple and Amazon are the only two of the five big tech companies that have products or service that requires a lot of people as they scale and Apple’s “employees” are contract workers overseas.

That also means that the modern “factory workers” - software engineers, product managers, etc. produce an outsized value, are a larger multiplier and get paid a lot more.
Before Boeing bought McDonnal-Douglas, Boeing had a lot of executives with engineering experience. After the merger, the MD executives took over, move the HQ to Chicago and started running it like MBAs.
I mean one way to do it would be that when someone brings up a specific term that they feel is a problem, we decide to change the term or not, and if we choose not to, we can revisit later.

If someone brings up that they feel the verb abort is an issue, the community can have that conversation. There are no shortage of idioms that are synonymic -- halt, stop, terminate, end -- and it would be trivial to make the changes if it came to that. Either the decision will be to replace with another idiom, or to keep the existing one.

If Linux had never used master/slave, and instead used primary/secondary, no one would open up a discussion to say "replace primary with master, primary is unclear and too much work to type" or whatever. So clearly there's no obligation to use the disputed terms, just as there wouldn't be for "abort". Are you hung up on using "abort"?

Like, we don't need some cosmic answer once and for all about whether or not ever possible term will ever be offensive. We can just respond to people who bring the issues up. If they seem to be bringing it up in bad faith (for example, if the username is "DefendTheWestGroyper" and they have an anime avatar, probably you don't need to take them seriously) then that can be part of the conversation too.

If this is the worst bikeshedding you're experiencing in a team project then you've got an uncommonly productive group. But also you can just opt out of the conversation. If you try to submit a PR later with a banned word in it, someone will flag it. The consequences on the code side seem de minimis.
It’s why the dials and knobs in your car are all slightly different, depending on what they do.

This has become a real problem with newer cars where everything has been replaced by a touchscreen.
You're definitely correct that GAI is not necessarily going to be human-modeled. Who knows how that's going to happen if it does. However, I'm betting that it will be, or at least heavily inspired by it. I think you are underestimating biomimetics. For example, convolutional neural layers and residual neural networks were both based on cat/primate visual cortex systems. And both were huge advances in computer vision.

The most "advanced" GI we know of right now is human intelligence, and I think it would be wasteful not to extract as much as we can from it. You mention octopus brains, but I would argue that for GAI we're more concerned about what humans are good at with their oversized prefrontal cortex, which is higher-level, abstract, executive cognition. Pulling color information out of grascale doesn't sound all that impressive to me (especially since that sounds like an easy unsupervised deep learning task) compared to being able type all this out.

You mention the limitations of evolution. I think the key limitation of evolution is that it is largely append-only. Our brain is like a nested doll where the deeper you go, the further back you go in evolutionary history. The way evolution plays out means that things are always built on top, there is never really a large overhaul, since 99.99999...% that just means the zygote isn't even viable. Do we really care about the lower levels beneath higher executive function? Do we really care about modeling emotions (e.g. fear/flight) like the limbic system, or modeling how the brain stem maintains homeostasis such as monitoring carbonic acid levels in blood? Perhaps. But I think the prefrontal cortex is what is most interesting. But I guess it depends on what you want from a GAI.
This is a comparison of an iPhone part to a laptop/desktop part. The iPhone part doesn't have anywhere near the same power budget, nor does it have active cooling. The SPEC benchmarks take a couple of hours to run, so cooling is definitely a factor.

Apple's laptop part will be the first time they have a level playing field on both.

The Apple laptop part is also going to have a process node advantage. It will be built on TSMC's 5nm node while AMD is sticking with an enhanced version of TSMC's 7nm node and Intel will still be on 10nm.

The word was that Apple's entry level laptop part will have 8 next generation Big cores and 4 next generation little cores, which is quite aggressive for an entry level laptop part. The A13, in comparison, only has two big cores.

We'll see how Apple's laptop chip fares when it ships.
I don't have direct experience with products in this space but I've done extensive contract work for companies in the sleep apnea wearable space, so here are some insights:

i) Strategy wise, for a small startup, it is always better to place yourself in the 'wellness' product space.

For a startup business selling directly to costumers it is _always_ better to frame your product as wellness/lifestyle or 'life-improvement' wearable.

As soon as you make any claims of clinical benefit it becomes classed as a Medical Device, at which point you have to go through the very long and expensive process of getting it approved for each major market (FDA, CE, etc.).

You should only aim for a 'medical device' if:

1) You're able to secure VC level funding to carry you through expensive clinical trials and more expensive hiring with medical staff that can sell your product and convince other doctors and key opinion leaders.

2) You are able to build enough patents around the product that give it uniqueness as a competitor in this space. Realistically the only exit strategy in the medical device industry is to get acquired by a major Medical Device company. The key thing for these companies is usually competitive advantage through IP more so than talent acquisition or acqui-hire.

ii) When selling directly to costumers anything that can happen will happen.

Having a product that works as intended is great but it is simply not enough once you release it out in the open for a wide enough cohort. People will find every possible way of misusing/abusing your product or misinterpreting instructions etc. There are a multitude of failure modes that will occur in the 'real-world' that you likely didn't plan for.

iii) (Related to the previous point) User 'compliance' exponentially drops as soon as they have to physically 'wear' something in their sleep.

Looking at the competitors you mentioned, they are trying to get some form of EEG info, at which point they _need_ a headband with electrodes to be worn.

Immediately things start going south, people in warmer climates will probably report that it makes them sweat, users with hard pillows will refer discomfort if the headbands wedge on there skull, some users will report that they repeatedly remove the headband in their sleep and can't get a full night of data, some users will not tighten the band enough resulting in poor electrode contact, resulting in bad data, etc, etc.

All of these will likely cause users to stop wearing your device after a few trials and likely reviewing it poorly both online and as word-of-mouth.

So your ideal product would be:

-Something that address a user problem without making a 'medical claim'

-Something that requires minimal user setup and user input

-Ideally a wearable that is not worn (very zen), a 'wearable' that is on your mattress, or inside a pillow case or near the bed but not directly worn by the user during their sleep

Edit:formatting
Apple Silicon-powered Macs will be better than Intel-based laptops, at least after a few product cycles. I say "better" in terms of performance/watt.

But will their margin of superiority be large enough to cause the seismic shifts in Windows/x86 land that this article suggests?

I'm not sure.

If Apple's laptops are 25% or perhaps 50% better, I'm really not sure that's enough to cause a major upheaval.

I think we will wind up in a middle ground different from the upheaval JLG suggests.

We are already at a place in which your average laptop is "good enough for most people"; being 25%-50% better than "good enough" is a nice competitive advantage but that's not going to necessarily turn the world upside down.

- "Power users" will appreciate the CPU improvement. At this point, that essentially means video editors. It would mean gamers, but Macs still won't be the first choice for gaming.

- "Extremely mobile users" will appreciate battery improvements. However, I suspect most laptop users use them chained to a desk most of the time anyway. I would love 50% more battery life, but it's not really actually that much of a factor for me personally.

- "Cheap laptop buyers" won't be buying Macs anyway as Apple (wisely) doesn't seem like it wants to play in the sub-$1000 space. Though... maybe it will now.
For anyone with some hours to burn, there is an idle game that lets you play the role of a paperclip maximiser.

https://www.decisionproblem.com/paperclips/index2.html

I find idle games odd. My rational mind knows they are traps, but I still want to see what is next. They tap into some kind of need for exploration, progression, and learning. This one at least explores a few ideas and has a set endpoint so I enjoyed going through it.
There’s a YouTube channel called cctvuser that has the most complete record of what happened in the Chaz. It is hundreds of hours of video collected from dozens of sources covering almost all the important bits and a lot of the boring parts. It’s as unfiltered as you’re likely to get in my opinion.
“True for n implies true for n+1, provided n >= 2” is a perfectly good inductive step.

However, it must be coupled with a base case >= 2, which isn’t the case here. The only base case proven is 1.

See also “Induction basis other than 0 or 1” [0].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_induction#Inducti...
Prices have gone up roughly 5000% since then (assuming a reasonably high-end restaurant in Manhattan). The menu looks pretty awful. Am a stout USA patriot who does not like most American food at all. I absolutely adore the diversity of modern cuisine.
Why do you interpret this as dismissive? Everyone I've ever met in the military seemed quite aware and respectful of their role in a larger system--they want people who understand chain of command, not cowboys, even more so than other large organizations.

That system likely provided these SAS operators both with direct support here (like briefings on what route to take travelling, who would and wouldn't be hostile, etc.), and with the indirect support inherent in anyone who hoped to end up controlling Albania not wanting the British as an enemy. I'd guess the operators felt appreciation for that support and pride in their own contributions to that system, and no diminution of their individual achievements.
I think that's what I had seen before. Thanks for scratching my itch.
Bees and alors have a clear goal. To survive and thrive. Which is very similar to a company's actual goals. How they do it is ever changing. Corporations dont survive by making the same product for hundreds of years, so whatever subgoal they have keeps changing as well.
Is no one going to comment about how it looks and sounds like their voices were overdubbed by professionals? It just doesn't sound natural _at all_. I know it's not actually overdubbed, but it's so smooth, the inflection is perfect... it's freaking me out.
Faith in PCR Quick Test Leads to Epidemic That Wasn’t (2007)
> Arch’s greatest asset is its speed and excellent binay distribution.

And its wiki.

> If you just want to “learn” I suppose, then by all means.

Yep that was the only purpose. But I don't see this happening anytime soon.
I think they're already working with Luxottica who is the dominant (close to monopoly player) in the glasses/lenses market, although an acquisition of them would be huge (current market cap is about 57B euro)

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/17/facebook-enlists-ray-ban-mak...
I think we just realize now how meaningless it was to begin with.
Technically, as long as you only have a finite amount of memory, there is only a finite number of states the computer can be in, so the output must repeat eventually. Though "eventually" can be long after the heat death of the universe.
Sensible discussion ?

How are you even supposed to determine what is fraudulent advertising as a publisher ? Are you supposed to inspect every product or verify the existence of every event before accepting a campaign ? This would basically wipe out the option to run small/local campaigns because of the upfront costs.

And how would this benefit small players ? Their campaigns are smaller so as a % the flat cost of verification is going to be a significant price hike. Are they in a better position to verify that the ads they are running are not fraudulent ? And how would they cover their risk exposure considering a few missed fraudulent ads could put them out of business entirely compared to a large market player ?

It would have radical consequences to a huge industry and it sounds like a knee jerk reaction because you don't like ads.
“Viable” isn’t about how good it is technologically. It’s about people being willing to buy it in a large enough quantity that it will be profitable.
The take on Facebook profiting from the advertising of deplorable pseudoscience is interesting, and this is a good story, but what struck me was the idea that the author recognized that they were being manipulated when these ads appeared.

What is interesting to me is that they did not believe they were being manipulated and lied to before.
why is this on github? has this guy not heard of literally any blogging platform ever?
Not OP, but I don't see any data suggesting that assets are inflating. For real estate, inflation adjusted price per square foot hasn't changed for most of the US [0] (west coast admittedly has ballooned but that's because their cities are built in valleys with a fixed amount of land and restrictive zoning causing a fixed amount of housing and thus bidding up home prices; not a problem for most of the country though). As for equities, Annualized S&P 500 Return (Dividends Reinvested) from 2005-2020 are 6.738% [1] versus 7.690% for 1990-2005 [1].

Or are you talking about another asset?

[0]: https://www.supermoney.com/inflation-adjusted-home-prices/

[1]: https://dqydj.com/sp-500-return-calculator/
Xbox controllers have large buttons, small buttons, joysticks, a D-pad, and two different triggers on the back.

The A/B/X/Y aren't distinguished between each other, but I suspect the four throttles for a B-17 aren't either.
Fascinating article in its own right. Thank you. I would totally read your book or blog.
I'm a programmer, have done server sysadmin since I was 12, Linux on the desktop since 16, startup since 25. I'm now 29. Edit: Because other replies in the thread complain that "technically competent" is not well defined, I guess it makes sense to add some detail: I've spent >10k hours on open-source contributions, and believe I can bend most userspace software to my will.

I run NixOS because of its high reliability, stability (upgrades on Ubuntu servers these days go wrong more often than years ago, and NixOS allows you to roll back any change), low maintenance (fully declarative config for all machines, little state to manage), and extreme hackability / ease of contribution (you can override and patch anything declaratively to fix things quickly, and upstreaming is very easy to do via a simple Github PR, which leads to broken things being resolved quickly by its users).

I use it on the startup's servers (for 4 years) and my laptop (for 1 year), and the desktop will join as soon as I have time.

By now I think NixOS is a technically fundamentally better way to build an OS, and as an open-source project it has a great trajectory and community. Also, to my surprise it was the first distro where the Nvidia proprietary driver worked out of the box, and stayed working.

Before this I've used Windows 95 to 7, Suse 9.3, Ubuntu, Gentoo, Arch, Ubuntu again.

What changes would I like NixOS to make? Even more automatic QA, re-running all the GUI intregration tests of e.g. Firefox when any dependency changes. I've written about it on https://discourse.nixos.org/t/steps-towards-even-more-pr-aut....
I thought "text-only" meant it was somehow riding over SMS which was blowing my mind.

Still a nice idea.
Slackware on 3.5" floppies was my first install.
Lambda school ?