skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The advantage of working primarily on a thin client is that turning off the client doesn’t stop the computation. Also, the worst part of modern IT tech is messing with projectors/keyboards/etc. for presentations and meetings. I’d much rather swipe my card at the projector and have my current desktop automagically broadcast to the projector. (AirPlay is pretty close to this, I guess).

Anyways, the killer feature is a remote-first workflow that treats your client device as ephemeral: you can cobble something like this together, but I’d think that the integration of an end-to-end solution built and maintained by one company
Tried a few songs that I know I've found successfully before via SoundHound's same feature - no results.

Also attempted Grieg's Hall of the Mountain King and got this, not quite what I expected but close enough: https://youtu.be/e1kwr-C78mI
Copyright violation is not hacking.
They have no accountability or oversight. Their reviews are completely up to them and they have nothing to prove to anyone about efficacy beyond increasing advertising revenue as much as possible for investors.
Merriam-Webster Changes Definition of 'Sexual Preference' Seemingly Overnight
> You're assuming that there is no way to adapt to the new rules.

If you're liable for user-posted content, you either need massive resources to review literally everything your users post (and a sufficient delay for such review to take place, and a massive insurance policy for the inevitable mistake), or you stop allowing user-posted content entirely.

This proposal would make it nearly impossible to simultaneously have user-posted content and moderation. Sites that post read-only content for user consumption would do just fine, but any site that enables the usage of the Internet in a read-write contributory way would be dead. There's no "adapting" to that, nor should there be.

> if you're providing essential services to the masses

Twitter is not in any way an "essential service". The collective set of communication platforms that people use are, in concert, important, but it'd still be a stretch to say even that combination was "essential"; I certainly don't think it's reasonable to consider any one of them "essential" by itself. If any one of those sites went away, people would adapt and use others, and more would arise rapidly to fill the void.

If the power goes out, people die. If Facebook goes down, people probably become on balance happier.

Ignore for a moment that Facebook is publicly traded; imagine it weren't. Do you believe, by way of example, that Facebook should be prohibited from pulling the plug and formatting all the servers one day, just because they decided they were tired of it? I don't.

Twitter is not an "essential service". It's useful. We're not utterly dependent on any one site; we're dependent on some site. If it went away, life would go on, and people would find alternatives. The only critical issue would be if all such sites went away simultaneously, rather than just one. "Widely used" is not "essential".
“You are a midwit” is not a critique. It’s just name-calling. I suppose I somehow agree that name calling is a common critique of pretty much anything.

More importantly, it also shuts down conversations. Behaving like you’re the only non-idiot in the room makes you an unpleasant interlocutor. Consider the possibility that the people you interact with and think are midwits are actually intelligent but are optimizing for “have as short an interaction with this unpleasant egomaniac as possible without being unpleasant myself”. Particularly irl.

I’m still interacting with you because I hope you realize that your dismissal of basically every accomplished person in society as a midwit might have more to do with your insecurities than the broad structure of society, and that your obsession with this insecurity is eroding your long-term relationships. I have old close friends who talk and think like you are in this thread, and their attitude toward others has turned them into lonely old men. It’s sad.
By what objective metric(s) do you determine that a particular website has become an internet "public square"?
It's a great way to clear your sinuses I hear.
This isn't necessarily that strict of a regulation. They could require the sensor be on board but not actually regulate any of its usage. It could be a scenario like the Model 3's rear view mirror camera, where it wasn't used at all for the first two or so years and then later got a software update that started interacting with it. The important part is that the LIDAR unit is physically wired in to the system so that they can start using it in software whenever they feel like it's necessary.
I was intrigued by this kind of stuff so I took LSD.

I enjoyed it and I felt it improved my mood temporarily but I don't believe it changed me permanently in any way. As far as I can tell (which may not be that far), reading Chomsky as a teenager, Plato in college and Kant after that were much more significant events in terms of my political views.
I am "only" 29 years old but I remember that. Using Outlook Express in Windows 98 to download the emails on the morning (only one or two), and then write one or two and wait for it to being sent at night when I connect again. Lovely memories, thanks for triggering them!
The warning should really be “beware listening to advice without doing your own research”.
0/1 for "Sugar" by Stanley Turrentine ;-)

I'd love for this to improve. I'm a jazz musician, and I know hundreds of tunes, but can't for the life of me remember their names when I'm on the spot. So it's hard for me to suggest a tune when I'm playing with a band.
Either we live in the same area (unlikely, given your employer in your profile), or our local Dickey's did the same thing as yours, rebranding locally.

Makes me glad I never went there.
How's my driving? Ring 555 5555 if I hit you.
Maybe you don't need to use the QR code to establish a connection? Instead you could just use the QR code to transmit whatever data the phone might need from the computer. If it's just a finance app, surely the data would be small enough to fit into a qr code, maybe show a series of codes if the data is really big?
Will America tear itself alart
Everyone who could vote in 2016 grew up in an age of ever increasing educational funding: https://images.app.goo.gl/ovrFXSUJaJ8tHBTBA
Right; case 3 needs to do the 5 processing, too.

See, this is what happens when, in a forum, I pretend that I comment. Don't worry, I don't, IRL.
Flimsy article? The Biden camp hasn’t claimed the emails are fake, which they certainly would if they were.
This sounds incredibly anti-democratic.
"International Journey of Hydrogen Energy"? Is this a real thing?
I don't understand how anybody cannot be shocked by Trump. He's unlike any previous president, he has aggressively pursued his radical agenda, has broken every norm that has gotten in his way, communicates in purposefully shocking ways. I could go on and on. His supporters are also shocked though in a good way. He's the most polarizing president of our lifetimes by far. Anybody who thinks he is normal is just not paying attention.
Hey how's it going? Thank you for checking it out.

> The model seems like it's a bit more digestible / open for reading than Twitter's infamous threading model.

Yes I agree! Twitter wasn't designed for realtime conversation, it was designed over 10 years ago when pagers were a thing. The idea is to take a slight twist on that model and build a new site that focuses on open conversation in a familiar but slightly new way.

> I have difficulty seeing the chat model scale well to many users.

I agree here too, and have some ideas for features that will help scale the conversations, such as chat modes, and side-channel ideas etc. For now it's "mvp" and I'm just focused on making it work with smaller groups of people. Certainly is a problem that will occur down the line though!

Right now this is centralized, it's just me building it so I'm trying to get the "mvp" out and test the idea. There are lots of potential ideas for how it can play out in the future.

Let me know if you have any other questions, I appreciate your feedback, feel free to mention me on there @guac, cheers.
k = thousands, m = millions, b = billions, t = trillions, a = quadrillions

Is more universally understood I think. Also, seems like more work to write out 4MMM rather than 4b.
A disturbing Twinkie that has, so far, defied science
“I’ve been intentionally getting parking tickets for 2 years”
Create your website using these tools
Cups has been forked after Apple supplied only one commit in all of 2020
What I am looking for is not "accessible" but "consistent".

What you describe above makes hardware design harder (one has to split unaligned access into two (unnecessary) microoperations which preclude or make harder to use techniques simpler than out-of-order execution engine with content-addressable memory). It also makes software handling harder.

One can designate unaligned access as "undefined behavior" and leave it to compiler writers to make things right.
>But the new generation of people, even here on HN and the internet hacker personalities I used to align with have turned so pro-censorship that I don't believe I'm in a proper reality/timeline anymore.

It turns out being able to lie at scale is a more credible and more immediate threat to society than nuanced restrictions on the flow of information.

If you play any Town of Salem style game, you know that being able to call out and dissuade low effort, poor quality information is a way to improve pro-social discourse. Are there issues with selecting what counts as anti social information? Yes. Which is why restrictions are typically exceedingly narrow.

However the ambit of what restrictions are justifiable runs along a spectrum; even amongst western democracies, there is a dramatic difference in what is acceptable and what is not. Germany, for instance, has exceedingly strong restrictions on pro-nazi speech. The US, by contrast, places a far higher immediate value on freedom of speech, to the point that it struck down campaign finance laws as being of lesser importance.

Times change and people are noticing that the result of the pendulum being so far swung in one direction on this issue has caused tremendously deleterious effects.
We are working on it with only so many resources dedicated to the effort (which, right up with/on-top-of climate-change, is one of the most impactful problems to ever be solved as far as I can fathom). This is secondary however.

My __main__ concern is that these efforts are vulnerable to being rendered null due to short-sighted, dogmatic, legislation, a la similar restrictions on things like CRISPR and stem-cell research. Gauging from responses I've seen in this thread here and in the past, if it was a matter of a simple, single democratic vote on "Should we eliminate/drastically decrease the negative physical effects of aging?", I have serious doubts that the end total would be in favor of that action; an overwhelming number of people seem to hold this stockholm-syndrome-y view of death/aging. __THAT__ is the part that concerns me, and that is the/a part that I think concerns Bostrom, and what I believe the story is trying to address.
I went through three phases of shoes.

Phase 1 was a moderate shoe on the “more stability” side of things. I would get injured with regularity.

So then I went to a running shoe store and had them analyze my gait. They “prescribed” a very expensive “high stability” shoe. After a week in those I thought I had permanently damaged my knees. Switched back to moderate shoes.

Then I tried minimal shoes. At first I thought I was hurting my feet, but then I realized that they were just getting a workout for the first time.

I’ve been running in minimal shoes and have been injury free for quite a while now. So that’s my personal anecdote. Not sure I would ever go toward a super minimal shoe, but definitely will stay on shoes with a small heel and minimal arch
I'm honestly quite sick of this argument. The issue with the phone company isn't the spam. It's the anonymity. All solutions to the spam issue don't deal with unwanted calls at all.
This day came and passed years ago. It's evident from their marketing that there is no attempt to discern fancy cruise control from "zomfg your car will drive you around in a year!!"

Whether this is false advertising or even just moral is up in the air, but Tesla is making no attempts at educating consumers about the limits of their autonomy other than the bare minimum (yeah you technically have to keep both hands on the wheel, but that mechanism is easily defeated and you can even buy clips on Amazon that do it for you). I'm pretty sure Elon even liked a tweet about a Pornhub video where someone banged a model on the highway with autopilot. Which is an excellent day for PR and a disastrous day for legal.

The point being, sure, academically they are a far way away, but they are trying to convince consumers Level 5 is just around the corner.
What about to use DISQUS? I rarely see spammed DISQUS comments.
Best Mathematics Blogs Directory
CUPS was almost entirely[1] made by Michael R Sweet who left Apple close to a year ago[2] and now works for his own company.

Completely understandable to move the upstream repo away from Apple, I don't think there's much else to it.
He's been very active in the fork AFAICT.

His Sponsors page: https://github.com/sponsors/michaelrsweet

[1] https://github.com/apple/cups/graphs/contributors

[2] https://www.msweet.org/blog/2019-12-20-left-apple.html
>obviously deep throat was inside the FBI

Which is still a huge moral difference. I would have hoped that HN would be one community that would understand the difference between a whistleblower leaking data to journalists to expose a crime versus an outsider committing a crime in order to acquire data to leak for their own political gain. But I guess I shouldn't expect that considering many people here think Snowden, Manning, and Assange are all of equal moral standing.
Oracle has never been “innovative” they just know how to generate revenue. That’s demonstrably more important to stay alive in tech.
His analysis: https://twitter.com/lanpaje/status/1316760349744357377
Thanks for the upvote. To your point about companies censoring speech as they own the platform, I'd agree they claim to be a platform but I don't think they're acting like platform. Based on their actions they’re acting as a Publisher because they’re editing and curving speech like a newspaper does with opinion pieces.

Platform has a legal definition, which was litigated in the early 90s. The result was if you’re a platform you’re not legally liable for the content of your website. The legislation calls out that’s speech must be user generated and flow of ideas cannot be restricted unless they are already illegal (eg. how to make a bomb).

Publisher also has a legal definition, which social media companies certainly don’t want because then they’re liable for all content and can be regulated further. Actually these companies don’t want any regulation The business models will eventually come under attack due to overreaching privacy policies and general CEO autonomy.

I’d also like to point out there’s some incestuous situations going on between the staff of Facebook, Twitter and Democratic campaigns including Biden’s. If we’re honest with ourselves we know it’s highly likely collusion and back channels exist between the two. I can provide more information if you’d like.
In the distant past of 2007, the National Enquirer broke a sex scandal involving democratic politician John Edwards which often is thought to have played a major role in the 2008 dem primaries.

Should factually accurate information that matters to people be rejected or hidden because of style? Who gets to decide the correct style? Would you apply the same standards to alternately aligned publications of questionable style, like WaPo/HuffPo?
You need internet access to use creative cloud.

Cracked creative cloud is a great product, but the creative cloud they sell in stores is really bad. There's nothing worse than being 2,000 miles out to sea with a bunch of footage to edit and no internet to check in with the copyright parole officer.
Chrome uses 1GB of ram with a couple of plugins and Gmail open.
It's a container and can be as thin or fat as you want with it's contents. You don't need to include linux inside if you don't want to. I've built containers with nothing more than a few native executables. It's just a packaging format, but easier to build and deploy than other formats like tarballs.

If you don't need K8S then don't use it. What's the problem? Run your app on your server and ignore everything else.

But most of these features have nothing to do with scale and are more about usability, reliability and consistency. Sure you can do it yourself but that's less efficient than just letting K8S do it all in one standardized way and interface.

> "I want my application to reliably and quickly serve my customers and be easy to maintain and debug."

That's what K8S helps with. I've spent 10 years running large distributed applications handling billions of requests per day in multiple regions. I don't care about the ABI and don't see why that's relevant, but I do know that K8S has made many things easier in actually running these apps.
ex-Cruise here. Cruise has an incident response team that trains for this. For a team that hasn't had any real-world accidents yet, they seemed pretty competent. They'll show up ASAP and take care of things.
Thank you for confirming that.
Cameras lack depth perception, which the brain very cunningly provides for humans at no additional cost.

Humans do get very clunky and slow when that depth perception is taken away. One example is night vision goggles which basically just project a flat screen onto your eyeballs. Many people report that they become susceptible to tripping, falling, hitting objects, or just straight up walking into trees with NVGs, in part because the loss of depth perception takes such a toll on their brain that they can't adapt in time. It takes hours if not days to fully adapt to NVGs, and even then you can't operate as quickly as you can in daylight unless you practice consistently (think SWAT or Navy Seals type training).
From hearsay Azure has better customer support because they know that in cloud and server environments they are a relative newcomer, traditionally many data center people would run away when they hear Microsoft.

Google has the ego of a market leader. They don't care for their customers, that's nothing new.
> The same educational establishment that produced the current populace?

Yes, them, but with adequate funding and a return of Civics and Home Ec required for all students.
Okay so maybe we need to start regulating AI, or machine-curated content, or recommendation systems, but not stamping out one of the cornerstones of western intellectual culture. Free speech is certainly more important than YouTube’s engagement metrics.
I totally agree. Maybe YouTube isn't the best place for a researcher to have their work peer reviewed.
Here’s the text:

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai issued the following statement today on Section 230 of the Communications Act:

“Members of all three branches of the federal government have expressed serious concerns about the prevailing interpretation of the immunity set forth in Section 230 of the Communications Act. There is bipartisan support in Congress to reform the law. The U.S. Department of Commerce has petitioned the Commission to ‘clarify ambiguities in section 230.’ And earlier this week, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas pointed out that courts have relied upon ‘policy and purpose arguments to grant sweeping protections to Internet platforms’ that appear to go far beyond the actual text of the provision.

“As elected officials consider whether to change the law, the question remains: What does Section 230 currently mean? Many advance an overly broad interpretation that in some cases shields social media companies from consumer protection laws in a way that has no basis in the text of Section 230. The Commission’s General Counsel has informed me that the FCC has the legal authority to interpret Section 230. Consistent with this advice, I intend to move forward with a rulemaking to clarify its meaning.

“Throughout my tenure at the Federal Communications Commission, I have favored regulatory parity, transparency, and free expression. Social media companies have a First Amendment right to free speech. But they do not have a First Amendment right to a special immunity denied to other media outlets, such as newspapers and broadcasters.”
Since the alternative is leading us toward actual violent war, I say “make HN choose between moderation and immunity too, if we must” without hesitation.

“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” - Sam Adams
I am reminded of the time South Carolinian Stephen Colbert served torn up cardboard dressed in vinegar as an example of North Carolina BBQ.
That’s a bug worth reporting - it shouldn’t crash, and it’s trivial to accidentally duplicate an app!
I've read the first example and the following explanation, and now I'm conflicted between idle desire to know more about programming-related curiosities, and the foreboding of having this atrocity in my head afterwards. It's like seeing gore on Reddit.
Not following the details of the story, but has anyone suggested that Hunter dropped off the laptop himself?

Stealing a laptop and causing a bit of damage to initiate a costly repair, then leaving it with a shop under an assumed name seems like a solid Mitnick-level hack to me.
The Steele Dossier was widely spread on Twitter and was debunked.
Do these investment banks take out historically low rate loans to back these options that they send out.
Twitter would've never picked up on it because the database I'm thinking of that they leaked was basically just a list of donors (i.e. leaking democrat data fits their priors https://theintercept.com/2018/02/14/julian-assange-wikileaks...)
Doerr's Law on Product Teams
>EX: if a user doesn't want to see NSFW stuff, or trolling, or "misinformation", or any other offensive content, then there could be general categories, that describe those things, and the user can have that as a setting to not see that stuff.

Let me go out on a limb here and say that no-one is going onto Facebook looking to find misinformation. They may be looking for stories that appeal to their prejudices and be willing to suspend disbelief for those stories.

But no-one is going to tick the box saying "please show me stuff that is actually definitively false, and potentially dangerous to my person".

So the problem will simply move along to how the "misinformation" tag is being applied and the biases at play there.
The phrase "for their own political gain" describes one of those people much better than the other two
> No objections, but isn't it a bit weird to argue that we should do that just in case it might be useful someday?

That is not an argument that we should do that just in case it might be useful someday, it is just a response to the quoted statement. As you know, I am not in favor of the current usage of "intelligence" in AI, and the only thing we differ on in that regard is whether it matters much.

> I'm sorry, I'm pretty sure there's an argument but I just don't get it.

It is an argument that ontologies are not privileged, canonical or fixed ways of representing the world; they have to conform to current knowledge as it evolves, or be replaced, and they are only interesting if they can "earn their keep" by being useful. Consequently, I do not think your argument from ontology, that this abusage of "intelligence" is a big deal, is definitive.