skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It cuts both ways though, doesn't it? Either Apple spends time / effort vetting all applications, including those made by people that don't pay Apple and aren't sold through their store.

Or Apple doesn't vet all of these apps, and refuses to notarize any app that is not associated with a valid developer account.

It's a whole other can of worms if you want to get into the merits of being able to install and run any app you find. Apple made the decision to not allow the average user to do that, and I don't see the mass exodus of people showing that the public doesn't agree with this design choice. Just like iOS and the app store, the average user seems happy with a curated and largely vetted selection of things to use that... 'just work (TM)'.
Not exactly the same but that's a symbol in The Great Gatsby.

The eyes of Doctor T. J. Eckleburg are a pair of fading, bespectacled eyes painted on an old advertising billboard.
To clarify what I meant, I think devs should absolutely build for iOS. I just think they should consider the future very carefully before building exclusively for iOS.
I don't know if you meant to, but you just described Steve Jobs.
Step 1: User clicks ad that says they can download this app super easily and improve their phone's battery performance.

Step 2: User clicks and navigates to a side-load page/alternate store.

Step 2a: Pop-up appears - please adjust your settings to enable access to this app

Step 3: User does so and now downloads malware.

Step 4: Gets upset and blames Apple or calls up their more tech informed Hacker-News-using family member and asks how to fix it.

(this genuinely happens with my mother and chrome extensions - she somehow CANNOT avoid those "search engine takeover" extensions no matter how much I try to educate her on how to avoid it)
What does the parent comment have to do with payments? What are they "trying to do" that's relevant to that quote?
Actually, yes. If you have more than $75k in revenue per year, you are legally obligated to register for, charge, and pay GST[1] -- our equivalent of VAT -- and you have to register as an Australian business (though for most overseas companies the additional taxes are minimal). If you aren't GST registered then Aussies have to do pay for it during the customs process[2]. If I wanted to sell things to customers in the EU in large enough volume, I would probably have to do something similar. Paying taxes (or more generally, following the law) is simply something that businesses have to do if they wish to have access to a country's market -- you also have to follow our consumer laws and other relevant regulations (for instance, this is why Steam has to provide much more lenient return policies here -- we have very strong regulations on warranties and return policies and they were fined for non-compliance in the past).

Not to mention that Google employs lots of people in Australia (Google Maps was first developed in the Sydney office), has a subsidiary incorporated in Australia, and sells many millions of dollars worth of products in Australia. They are no less of an Australian company than Woolworths.

[1]: https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/GST/Registering-for-GST/
[2]: https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/GST/In-detail/Rules-for-spec...
intention doesn't have anything to do with mechanism
Actually, there was precedent. Previously, if you wanted to reach a lot of people you had to package your product in physical boxes and get it into brick and mortar stores. The cut that distributors took for that was around 50-60%, and you only had access to them if you were already huge.

Having worked with low-end shareware payment processors at the time, they charged between 15 and 30% and most of them are now out of business.

I remember people complaining about the 15% cut, too. No matter how fair you make it, people will scream that it's too much. Even when it's free. Just look at how people complain about open source software that they don't pay for and don't contribute to. Nothing is ever fair for some people.
If the camera is used to take a photo, the light would flicker for the briefest of moments. Most people would not notice.
But... it does describe the difference between Netflix, which is what the thread is about?
Meditation in the way western people think about it is kind of like shopping mall yoga: it's a tradition with a long religious history that's been turned into an anodyne "healthy" practice for American consumers.
you've really had it rough. I guess the lesson to all of us is to never rely on third-party platforms as much as possible
The appropriate note depends on context.

For example, if you're using it in the context of a minor plagal cadence, Bbm to F (iv--I) then it's a Db because it's the minor third of Bb minor.

If you're transitioning from F to A7 (i.e. I--III7, common in jazz standards) then it'd be C# because that's the major third of A major.
Also, processors turn electricity into heat - if you can find a useful way of harnessing that heat, the computation is practically free. Deep learning is fairly latency-insensitive and is almost never mission-critical, so it's not inconceivable to imagine that the boiler rooms of apartment buildings and office blocks could become mini-DCs.
Agreed insofar as legislating against this.

I’m wondering if the solution is forcing the platform vendors to allow the device owners to “bless” an App Store in the way that they can permit individual sideloaded apps.
For some historical context, IDs cost money in most states and there's no national identification system. So if you implement voting ids, all it does is end up being voter suppression because generally the poor cannot afford to get a driver's license or cannot afford to drive therefore don't have a license. State Ids have a similar issue.

Historically, voter ID laws have been associated with disenfranchisement.
Don't worry in not one of the zealots that'll try and convince you that Linux has a suitable replacement for something then recommend some this that does t match up (see you MS Office vs. Libre Office for example). Just genuinely interested to know where Linux is lacking for some people (and thus something I might be missing). While I'm definitely an open source advocate I too am a pragmatist and will happily use closed source software and gasp pay for software when the open source alternatives are lacking.

Personally none of you use cases have even crossed my mind, I can count the number of things I've printed in the last decade on 10 years. I can definitely see the benefit of having tight coupling between accessories/phone apps though.
To save someone the search: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitaly_Nikolayenko
A recent case established that Australian news organisations are legally liable and may sued for defamatory comments posted against their stories on social media platforms
List of 200 Cryptography algorithms, articles, blogs, books, tools, and, libs
Baking those potatoes with microservices and vendors
i question that too

what marks humans out from the rest of the meaningless universe that suddenly blesses them as meaning bearers? almost seems to imply some sort of religious idea that humans are not a part of the ubiverse
It’s like The Sims in Japan, anytime genitalia comes out, a blur box is generated over top of it like the symbol of the Laughing Man in Ghost in the Shell.

Source: Have been to Tokyo several times
I don't know where you picked up the meme of "the US is a republic not a democracy" but you might want to read up about the reaction against it:

https://mises.org/wire/stop-saying-were-republic-not-democra...

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-04-11/is-u-s...

https://thebaffler.com/latest/were-a-republic-not-a-democrac...
He linked to his initial complaint about why Apple rejected his app.

My app has been repeatedly rejected because I do not offer free in-app trials (but offer money-back guarantee on my website) and also do not offer in-apps purchases.
I asked if I offered in-app purchases, would the app be approved?
No, since I offer 3-day money-back guarantee on website-based purchses, I must ALSO offer a free trial in the app.
But I don’t want to offer free trials. I’m ok offering a 3-day money-back guarantee, but Apple says that’s not an option for apps.
They insist that I (1) change my business model from 3-day money back guarantee to free trial and (2) purchase a shit ton more infrastructure to handle the audience that free trials attract (I’ve tried free trial business model and it created a lot of use but no more revenue than 3-day money back guarantee). The money-back guarantee seems to weed out a lot of free loaders, at least in this domain — not necessarily others.
Great question, and I personally believe it's driven by modern American communities being unable to maintain their own infrastructure at any level. 100 years ago people worked for a living, with their hands, and would often have to build, install, and repair their homes, roads, and other infrastructure themselves. They understood the process, and what it takes to get something done.

These days, most households, especially the wealthy ones like in Marin, are helmed by people who do NOT work with their hands, do not respect people who do, and who have no interest in learning more. Even worse, infrastructure work is so heavily regulated and specialized that gobs of accidental complexity prevent anyone who wanted to from learning more about it, reinforcing the ignorance.

And truly, it's easy to have sympathy. The world is a complex place, and no doubt they have their hands full dealing with the technology revolution and palace intrigues at work; who has time to understand something as boring as infrastructure? And besides, if infrastructure fails, it fails for everyone so there's no real benefit to being informed or prepared (in that sense being informed about city infrastructure would be very similar to being a "prepper", in a weaker sense, which comes with it's own stigma).

So if you say "That's ridiculous, be quiet" you will offend sensibilities to the extent YOU will be banned, banned for having dirty knowledge, for shaming those that don't, and for tacitly asserting the value of having such knowledge! Plus, your views aren't in their news-feeds, so there's no emotional juice to them. Emotionally driven opposition is the inevitable retarding force in the hyper-connected, capitalist info-sphere, and ultimately leads to civic ignorance and paralysis. Good luck overcoming that in your city council meetings! (But you have my respect if you even try.)
> Such as? If I'm making a mobile game, what other phones can I realistically target other than Android and iPhone? You don't really think that the Librem 5 is a real competitor right now in this space, do you?

Any phone that runs WebGL. Inconvenient? Tough life, why does Apple have to do anything about it for you?

> All of US antitrust law is based on the idea that the quantity of providers in a market matters.

US antitrust laws are deeply flawed and in no way serve the purpose they were enacted for. If your product (subjectively) costs too high you are a monopolist; if your product costs too low (hello IE) you are dumping the market; and if your product costs approximately the same as of your competitors then there's a "market collusion". You cannot win in this system if you are a successful economic player. The bottom line is this though - there was no time in history where monopoly existed without government's sanction and gate-keeping, and Union Pacific was a prime example of it.

> If you want to go full Libertarian

I don't as I'm not one of them, which doesn't negate the points that I've made before.

> Apple's dominant market position exists in no small part based on its exploitation of copyright, the DMCA, import laws, and heavy lawsuits over trademark and cross-compatible app runtimes, all of which only work because of artificial government intervention into the market.

Wasn't it the government that enacted them? Why asking for it from Apple?

> I'm also going to go full Libertarian and ask what your views are on abolishing copyright.

I'm not libertarian; if you are just asking, I'm for IP in principle, whether it's modern copyright laws or something else is another story.

> If we're all OK with making that stuff legal, then I'm OK with dropping antitrust. If we're not OK with making that stuff legal, then I'm keeping antitrust. I'm OK with either having government regulation or not having it, but no halvsies

with all respect, it really is a funny position. Everything you mentioned here is a product of federal legislature, yet you want to blame an economic player that acts according to the law, in a system that is designed to eventually punish successful.
> Nothing gets put underground

That is too bad, I grew up in an desert locale that had all its power lines buried and I only experienced one power outage in fifteen years. Then I moved out to a coastal area where burying the lines wasn’t really feasible and pretty much every time it rained someone would hydroplane into a utility poll and knock out the power for a couple hours, and it rained at least once a week. If the climate permits them to bury, they should go for it.
> The actual details of how to implement zero and successor should be implemented as are left as someone else’s problem — we can survive without them. All we care about is that our numbers do the right thing, given whatever zero and successor someone may provide.

Zero is left as an implementation detail (it can actually be quite literally anything -- as long as it's not the successor). One is simply the successor function applied to zero. From http://www.cs.unc.edu/~stotts/723/Lambda/church.html --

Natural numbers are non-negative. Given a successor function, next,
which adds one, we can define the natural numbers in terms of zero and next:

1 = (next 0)
2 = (next 1)
= (next (next 0))
3 = (next 2)
= (next (next (next 0)))

and so on. Therefore a number n will be that number of
successors of zero. Just as we adopted the convention TRUE = first,
and FALSE = second, we adopt the following convention:

zero = Lf.Lx.x
one = Lf.Lx.(f x)
two = Lf.Lx.(f (f x))
three = Lf.Lx.(f (f (f x)))
four = Lf.Lx.(f (f (f (f x))))
Not to mention the "old 'bento box' models where the screen release lock also allows you to lift up the keyboard to access all of the internals."

https://imgur.com/a/sbMiIRG
https://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=131119
> He prefers Emacs over Vim

I wasn't expecting to laugh, haha. This is great, good stuff!

...But seriously why? How could such a thing be possible?! I would like to know his reasons.
It’s still retaliation. No way around that.
I'm having a hard time parsing your comment - you're making a lot of aspersions and ending with the generic platitude "there are no panaceas". Can you frame your objection a little more concretely or specifically?
Can bitcoin ASIC's (or ASIC's in general) be reprogrammed to do another task? I have always heard that they are only designed to do cryptographic hashing, but are they just fundamentally that way? Would programming them to do something else be impossible or very unfeasible?
When Apple announced Apple news it was widely reported (there is no official figure) that they were demanding and getting a 50% cut.

Gawd I hope the web can remain competitive with the proprietary platforms!
Related: https://ycombinator.chibicode.com/functional-programming-emo...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_R._Mickelsen_Safeguard...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safeguard_Program
Sure. I mean part of it will be finding and exploiting symmetries, improvements to it alternatives to backprop, parallelism as well.
The NSA doesn't need to know a backdoor exists in order to worry about one. The ME is infrequently exercised code with a large attack surface and highly privileged access. If you are security conscious and don't need the functionality it's quite logical to want to turn it off, whether you're the NSA or anybody else.
This seems way beyond the "hyper-competitive" excuse (that I didn't buy in the first place). Claiming control of the store is one thing, but they have locked Epic out of the platform entirely. This is shameless anticompetitive behavior.
And all these devices certainly should be able to run the code their owner wants them to run, full stop.

That this is often not possible is stupid but also incredibly dangerous. Not by the standards of the evil Apple just did, but what even more malicious actors can do to you is they can run code on your device & you can't do anything about it.

It could be state actors pressuring the company making the think & or exploiting vulnerabilities in the closed source firmware running on it.
Just started a run of play_char on my 8GB 2070. Had to drop batch size to 128. Getting ~2.2 iterations per second, so it looks like it's going to take two hours for training to finish. I don't expect my training to differ from karpathy's, but I'm curious to play around with the trained model a bit. Already ran the math one and got the ~same results.
To fully understand this, it would be a good idea to understand the degree of influence that the Murdoch media has on the Australian landscape.

Murdoch media owns the vast majority of newspapers across Australia and is also more or less the only cable TV provider in Australia.

A good highlight of the power the Murdoch press has over Australia would be to look at the fact that the vast majority of journalists who work in the Canberra press gallery (parliamentary journalists), work for The Australian or other Murdoch entities, and have such a stranglehold on political journalism that it is a commonly accepted truth in Australian journalism that "if you want to know tomorrows news, read The Australian today."

The real kicker is that the Murdoch presses political biases are not subtle or secret, they are about as overt and blatant as you can possibly get with The Australian frequently running full front-page articles trashing one political party (Labor, the "left" leaning party) and heaping praise on the other (Liberal/National, the "right" leaning party).

With all of that context, the bill suddenly takes on a slightly more sinister tone when you realise that it is more or less designed to benefit one man and his media empire.
Without looking ahead to see what's next, I would agree, there's no solid way to determine if the pitch should be displayed as C# or Db.

If you are speaking in terms of a single melodic line, it could be a fair compromise to display C# if your previous note was lower than the current note, or Db if your previous note was higher than the current note, as it is traditional to spell with sharps when ascending and with flats when descending.

If you are displaying a chord (or some other system of harmony; four staves of a string quartet or whatever), then you could make a reasonable guess based on the other concurrent pitches: if you have an A and an E, or an E and a G, then C# might make more sense than Db.

Again, I think looking ahead to the next note/chord would offer a stronger heuristic for judging enharmonic spelling, but even then ... it's hard to know for certain what the arranger intended. MIDI just isn't robust enough for that.

Whatever solution you come up with, THANK YOU for being thoughtful enough to try. Some software is comically lousy in this respect.

--

Another thought: if you are dealing mainly with live/streamed data (maybe interpreting a live performance?) you could very likely detect patterns based on previous notes played. You might not know the next notes, but if your program was paying attention, it could probably make an increasingly good guess what's coming next, and thus get better at guessing how to spell the notes.
Not to mention the selection bias that occurs with a cohort of people who want to try meditation (who already might be predisposed to certain kinds of mental aberrations)
Which ones, it doesn't mention it in the article.
I think they go a bit more advanced than that - IIRC they use their own networking stack.

But yeah the rendering / JS interpreter is all Safari.
Reading this paper reminds me how important it is for AI to continue to evolve it’s core algorithms.

Deep learning models are effectively pattern matching machines that cannot separate causality from correlation. As we throw more compute and $$$ at deep learning models we will experience diminishing returns in performance because of this.

For us to achieve AGI[0], the holy grail of AI, we will need to develop algorithms that can recognize causality somehow. Judea Pearl’s “The Book of Why”[1] does a great job articulating why this is important. Deep learning is a big leap forward and we’re only beginning to see its impacts, but it’s not sufficient to achieve AI’s most ambitious goals.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_general_intellige...

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Book-Why-Science-Cause-Effect/dp/0465...
Rank polymorphism is genuinely important and useful and a lot of languages are missing it.

Cryptic symbols, I agree, less so. If your language doesn't arbitrarily restrict identifiers then you can just define the APL operators as functions and write code that looks like APL - I tried doing this in Scala once, and it worked ok. But it's hard enough to convince people to take the time to learn what "map" or "filter" or "<* " does, never mind anything further in that direction.
I'm curious: Did you get comparable results to openai? I know a few people tried to train GPT-2 themselves (before it was openly released) and their results were quite inferior.
In this context it's probably better to think about them as FIDO/ CTAP tokens rather than as U2F (which is obsoleted by WebAuthn and focused on the Web) or, as the author does, just narrow it explicitly to Yubikeys and not the wider menagerie of similar products. Yubico's own Security Key implements FIDO2 (and so could also be used for U2F) but won't work for the author's approach.

Anyway, the main thing I wanted to mention is that the use of public key encryption means this is quite different from the device having "my password". Even in the on-device ("resident credential") scenarios the authenticator doesn't have a password which is a shared secret, it actually has a private key which it won't divulge - much better.

Implementation errors by a web site can leak your password, which because it's a shared secret can then be used by adversaries to log in. It's impossible to be sure a site didn't get this wrong, even if you're confident they are competent and well meaning.

In contrast the WebAuthn (and U2F) design doesn't give sites enough information to impersonate you even if they wanted to, only to authenticate you. This is a familiar pattern from public key cryptography, receiving the certificate for news.ycombinator.com allows me to verify this is news.ycombinator.com but not impersonate them. Likewise, when you enroll a FIDO authenticator to use Facebook, Facebook doesn't learn how to impersonate you, even on Facebook, only a way to verify that you still have that authenticator. [And the design is even more careful, it uses completely independent credentials for each site, so when Microsoft bought GitHub they actually could not merge the FIDO-based authentication between GitHub and Microsoft properties, even if they thought that was a good idea it's deliberately impossible. ]
California already has variable pricing. It is the main driver for solar installations in the Central Valley.
rent seekers. why, what do you call them?
In two weeks, when the developer access goes away, so will all in-app purchase. I'm not sure whether Restore Purchases will work or not at that point. I don't think they're trying to avoid complaints, or they wouldn't have taken this step at all.
If you get a chance to read it, the Begriffsschrift (literally “concept writing”) in which Frege explains the system and uses it is a fascinating read. Last time I checked it’s pretty hard to find a copy—mostly university libraries have it.
ASICs are not reprogrammable. FPGAs are.