skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> So @chrisseaton was correct

No that’s not true. I did not edit my posts after reading their reply, and the false accusation was that I changed my comment after it was replied to.

I didn’t challenge whether the question was in good faith, but I’ll just note that the relevant discussion of copyright got dropped in favor of an ad-hominem attack.

My question of which “it” was being referred to is a legitimate question that I believe clarified the intent of my comment, and I added it to make clear I was talking about what @lacker said, not what @jcelerier wrote.

> Edit - I’m adding another point as an edit to show another way to communicate. Would any of your points been lost had you done something similar?

This doesn’t answer my question of why an edit should not be made before I see any replies, nor of why any edit is “poor form” and according to whom. I made my edit immediately. I’m well aware of the practice of calling out edits with a note, I’ve done it many times. I don’t feel the need to call out every typo or clarification with an explicit note, especially when edited very soon after the original comment.
I think it's not lag -- it's that on `keydown`, the value of `hidInput` doesn't yet reflect the new input from the pressed key. Seems like on `input` would do better for that event listener...
people forget that we tried this and it didn't really work out that well. gang of four is only mildly useful.
It should be noted that this kind of behavior is entirely expected from a GPT-style self-supervised sequence model. Rote memorization for this kind of model is indicative of correct training, not overfitting. The underlying training objective of these models ideally results in a representation of the training data which allows complete samples to be extracted by using partial samples as keys. Actual overfitting in this kind of model requires absurd parameter counts. See https://tilde.town/~fessus/reward_is_unnecessary.pdf
This is some absolutely amazing writing. Good heavens, your line about debating whether a hammer or a saw is the right tool for inserting a screw?? Beautiful!!

Do you blog? If so, I’d love to read more of you. If not, again, this is some seriously good writing. Big, end of a long drunken night “I really love you man, woman or whatever” ups!!!
I was thinking it meant WASM on the PlayStation haha. I seen that there's some project before but haven't been following it to use WASM for the binaries on Linux. So ARM or Intel programs could be compiled to WASM and only the host operating system would need to be compiled natively, which sounds like a very cool concept if it gained more support.
I wonder how a cyber insurance policy would respond to this.

It would be introduced into your code by your own developers it's like some kind of meta-supplychain attack.
Fast transportation, like fast computers, or fast appliances, aren't required. They just make life better.
Contrary, formal methods could (in theory!!) give as way to assess correctness of software regardless of programmer qualifications.
Not a factory expert but work in agriculture.

There are lots of issues with farming animals for meat and carbon output but most can be mitigated. The pathways are reduction of cattle in favour of sheep and goats, changing the gut biome of livestock and removing inefficient breeding stock so the farmers produce the same output with fewer animals. Genetic solutions are available now to address the last two.

Factory meat will augment our supply of protein but they won't scale. The farmland used for livestock is mostly useless for the plant matter needed by the meat factories and the factories themselves are hardly going to be carbon neutral when you add in fertiliser and fuel for all that extra harvesting.

I wouldn't be too keen on eating an extruded factory carrot, not sure I personally want to replace another natural product in my diet with some chemical mess. I am not alone on that.

Full disclosure: my company makes a product that can be used to reduce carbon output of livestock farming.
>The human brain isn't Turing-complete as that would require infinite memory

A human brain with an unlimited supply of pencils and paper, then.
Did you mean to respond to someone else? I never mentioned --no-commit, I'm talking about rebasing if needed - set up a fast-forward merge, which may or may not need a rebase.

This top-level comment shows what the commit history looks like doing what I said: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27723435

I also didn't just say rebase because that could also mean squashing commits manually and isn't what I'm talking about.
Drivers of greenhouse gas emissions by sector from 1990 to 2018
Details seem to be lacking on the Wikipedia pages for his parents. Did the bombings injure anyone? How were his parents involved, and how did he defend their actions?

It just says (on David Gilbert's page) "Most Weather members were not prosecuted and did not serve time in prison, despite having been sought by the police for years; police misconduct led to the dropping of many charges (see: COINTELPRO)"

Everybody's heard of COINTELPRO, right?

Every thread like this, the anti-Boudin stuff sounds like the sort of propaganda they did back in the day.

They didn't like MLK Jr. either.
Its more about determining what throttling means, 100% for conditions. In any case, the tools we are used to using have traditionally showed a percentage scale of usage - seems like a reasonable measure even if its hard to measure.
Surely it could be argued that there is a loss of audience to the author. At the moment some people will read the author's code directly in order to find out how to solve a problem. In the future at least some of those people will just ask copilot to solve the problem for them.
The European Court of Human Rights can take years to reach a decision. It has a case backlog of over 60,000 cases. It has only 47 judges. That's over 1000 pending cases per a judge.
I can see how they ended up with an attribute that did not duplicate a potentially private URL. Consider downloading from an Intranet and copying to a USB pen that is then handed over to a customer

It also freezes in place the network policy active at the time of download.

Would personally still prefer the URL!
It doesn't have to be this way though. Instead of having, say, quotas on how many speeders they need to catch in a given month, maybe they could use that time proactively helping people or something. I guess that is too utopian.
Oh, but it gets more fun. The same operation can take more clocks for various reasons... If I really undervolt my Zen 2 apu, power usage and benchmarks go way down, but clock frequency stays high; the CPU is clock stretching and it gets a lot less work done.

Anyway, current processors run a separate clock per core, and maximum clocks are only available when a small number of cores are active; if all cores are busy, that should really be 100%, even if each core is only doing 80% of max for a single core.

Mostly, I want to see % of time cpu is busy, and separately, stats on how throttled the cpu is, because it's hard to combine both into a coherent number. Maybe also some idea of how much of the core is being exercised, if it can be easily measured... I'd love to know when a program is keeping the cpu busy, but not making good use of it.
Critical theory and critical thinking in engineering education
To the extent Copilot is doing something illegal, or making its users inadvertently engage in illegal behavior, it is copyright infringement, as (most) license violations are copyright violations.

Copyright cuts both ways. Free Software and Open Software exist in context, and because of, copyright laws. This means that a person or a company using output from Copilot may be engaging in copyright infringement. In other words, Copilot is enabling software piracy.

I might be sympathetic to it, and even consider it mostly positive, but then if companies can use my code ignoring the license, I want to be able to Torrent their products in peace too.
The way "AI" works for now, Copilot never comes with its own ideas, as it is incapable of deductive reasoning. It basically just detects from the context then mixes variations of things it learned. If there is nothing to mix (that is if there is a single source), the risk of spitting verbatim is high. But if there are multiple sources and some mixing and some amount of tiny differences, said differences better not be not too trivial because I don't see why we would suddenly drop Abstraction-Filtration-Comparison approaches...

So their defense of the like "oh it's fine it very rarely emits verbatim things" is bullshit anyway. That's an answer to a wrong question, at least given the answer is in this direction (would there be ton of verbatim recitation, they obviously would not try to wave away the problem like that -- however we can not conclude anything from verbatim output being rare, despite them stating that as if it a quite central and strong argument)
In this case that might not help you at all. If your project is popular enough, somebody will mirror it on GitHub, where they are free (or believe they are) to incorporate your code in Copilot. Voting with your feet might be helpful long-term but will not protect you from this particular "feature".
Copilot Honeypot, create a ton of repositories with large amounts of auto-generated bad code.
What makes you think SJ would appreciate what the ultra-billionaire appreciates, though? :)
Maybe ditch relative (50%) for absolute (Hz)?

That's what we do for other things that have no fixed upper bound, e.g. disk/network i/o. We even do this for memory now given dynamic virtual memory, etc.
I think that's not what the GP means.

"git rebase" doesn't create a new hash if there's no change as a result of the rebase. But GitHub's PR rebase button always creates a new hash even if there is no reason to. (Its PR merge button does not do this; it will merge a one-commit PR without creating a new commit).

To add to the inconsistencies, GitHub doesn't sign the new commit when using the rebase button so it doesn't show up with the green "verified" icon - even if there was no need for a new commit anyway. Yet when using the merge button it does the opposite - if it doesn't need a new commit, your signed PR commit is merged to the main branch and shows as verified, and if it does need a new commit GitHub signs it (if the PR commit was signed) so it still says "verified" (even though it's really GitHub's key that was used, not the author's).

For this reason, when I merge PRs I avoid the GitHub UI, and use "git rebase -S" locally followed by "git push". This does what the PR rebase button should do.
It would be cool if we could pipe any 2 dimensional data to this in the shell and it would render it. Also how does one read 2 dimensional data from CSV for instance? I wanna say sed but I don't know.

It would be handy for quick ad-hoc days analysis of log files or access logs.
The implication there is that you may have other bugs (i.e. logic bugs, cache invalidation errors, off by one errors) but your program will not crash due to memory issues. It removes a class of errors.

It's not saying that it will provide wrong results in cases where it would crash otherwise due to memory errors.
> There was nothing to stop the smell of urine, and other volatiles, such as outgassing from plastics, from accumulating within the chamber.

The paper states that the substrate and changing schedule had been shown to keep ammonia to low levels.

> There's no reason to think the difference in noise was negligible...

Actually, there is. A good 80 mm fan can push more than 10 cubic feet per minute at less than 10 dBA. That's far quieter than a human whisper or rustling leaves. It's comparable to the sound of a pin dropping. If mice are adversely affected by that, I don't see how they could survive the wild.

> Plus, there may well have been other effects of the chamber, such as different light levels, which could also have unknown health effects.

That seems like pure speculation.
I think there's an argument to be made that neural nets are in some sense a form of compression. The model is a lossy compressed representation of the data. So training a model on copyrighted data is quite direct copyright infringement - you're compressing, then redistributing.

Has this ever been used as an argument in a legal case?
Military supersonic flight over land in the US is supposed to only happen over unpopulated areas. Having lived near a coastline (~1 mile from the shoreline) along a military flight path, I know they occasionally went a little early.
Well, Snowden actually IS borderline agent of Russia since he was¹ perfectly fine with seeking KGB asylum, so right after exposing the evils of mass surveillance he relocated to... Surveillistan.

¹ Or maybe still is, presumed he's still alive and can move freely, which is highly unlikely.
> In the thirteen years since the software has become so bad, that you need a processor that's anywhere from 3 to 15 times more powerful to barely, just barely, do the same thing [6].

That is not "the software" unless you count EFI, the sleep process is mostly a hardware thing and controlled by Intel.
Yes. It was mostly to stop ISP throttling.

Bram's case against was based on the idea ISPs couldn't cache data if you did.

Now we know encryption good, combined with things like peerblock it has a ok use. And the caching never happened.

Also at the time Skype was the spies messager because encryption was turned on by default, back then people looked suspicious if they encrypted, the extra encrypted data flowing around would have been good.
Screen Message
It exists. It's called Open Simulator.[1] Both server and clients are open source, and you can run your own simulator. It has more users than most of the federated chat systems. It's compatible with Second Life, but the server side is a completely new implementation. It has the usual problems of federated open-source systems - it's not well known, it's too complicated, and it's not well maintained. It does have respectable user counts. The biggest Open Simulator grid is run by a nonprofit. [2]

Second Life itself is rather open. Why this is so is interesting. Second Life isn't really run by Linden Labs. Linden Lab management is rather passive. They see themselves as a municipal government.
Most things are run by land owners. You can buy virtual land, for which Linden Lab charges a fee for having it hosted. That's their main revenue stream. You can build things, and set up businesses. You can sublease. A few companies own large amounts of land and operate like real estate developers.

On your own land, you have considerable power over visitors. You can eject or ban them at will. Because of this, Second Life doesn't have in-world "moderators". There's a tiny "governance" team, and it deals more with land issues than user issues. There are some annoying people, but they get banned from popular spots and usually give up.

Advertising isn't a big thing. There are shops with signs, occasional billboards, and a web-based store. All the ads are for things useful within the virtual world, not real-world products.

So, while it's sort of a walled garden, it's not very. The client is open source, and more people run third-party clients than run the Linden Lab one.

[1] http://opensimulator.org

[2] https://www.osgrid.org/
They might be smaller, but the boom is quite startling; I certainly wouldn't want to endure them regularly. I know because booms from fighters were common during my trip to West Germany in 1970. (I'm relying on what locals told my parents as to the source of the booms: I never saw a plane.) I've never heard a sonic boom in my 60 years of living in the US.
> then you'd want to forbid contributors from using CoPilot

I mean, if you used CoPilot on one computer, stared at it intensely for 1 hour, closed that computer, and then typed out code in the other computer that you were contributing from, you technically didn't use it for the contribution, you just used CoPilot for your education only.

Intellectual property is itself a flawed concept in many ways. It's like asking someone to do physics research but forbidding them from using anything that Einstein wrote.
What a rhetoric device.

Is your preferred solution to let people die in droves to a mass extinction ?
If this is not GitHub's point I don't see what we're "missing".
At this point it seems Copilot is a hilarious failure, which we can learn from. I hope it’s doesn’t taint the profession further though as a bunch of amateurish cut and pasters.
That depends on passenger volume. Trains require massive initial investments, but the marginal cost per passenger is very low. Air travel is mostly about marginal costs, and it requires massive infrastructure at endpoints. For example, an aiport serving 50 million passengers/year is two orders of magnitude larger than a railway station with a similar passenger volume. And while the airport would be one of the 30-40 busiest in the world, the railway station would not be particularly noteworthy.
I agree with this take. If anything, I think the father should be applauded for helping him access the opportunities that have helped him reach his potential, because it's clear the kid has the discipline and drive to be great.
I wonder if GPL would actually price to be that infectious.
> regurgitating licensed code without attribution

The article being discussed at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27723710 indicates that they may be adding attribution soon.
Us 'hobbyist' or 'amateur' programmers are very likely self-taught, and have another day-to-day profession. In my own case, I was a pharmacist and discovered computers in the 1970s via my radio/electronics hobby.

Consequently, all of my early computing was as a hobbyist in my learning-phase. Later on, when working at a hospital, I did actually do some 'professional computing' in COBOL, such as stock-control programs for the pharmacy itself as well as a smaller stock-control system for the hospital's main store.

Since retiring from pharmacy, I have reverted back to 'hobbyist' programming, although I also have some 'sorta professional' aspects in doing a couple of accounting packages for both our personal and a family-partnership's tax preparations over the years, originally in BASIC, then COBOL, and now using C and mysql.
Haha. Thank you. Well, I just hope Copilot starts caring about people’s concerns.

It’s kind of strange that no one from Copilot has said anything on HN. I wonder who has the authority to discuss it, if anyone. Usually bad PR is accompanied by “So-and-so from X here! We hear you…”

They’re probably going to have a much harder time launching this feature than they imply in the article. It’s hard even for database companies that specialize in full text search.
Who says you have to be belittled and yelled at to know where you stand and what you could do to perform better?
There is a ton of memory-safe languages out there.
Strap a 22 year old into a machine worth hundreds of millions, WCGW?
> The earliest implementations of HT worked by statically partitioning

Do you mean SMT in general? I don't think hyperthreading specifically has ever done that, but if I'm wrong I'd love to know more. (And AMD's version falls under "newer desktop-class processors")
Right. As I realized later, I have a bias: to me, Rust is solving the wrong problem.

Crashing is a useful tool when using the right language.
if I feed the entirety of github (sans licenses) into a java HashMap and provided an interface to query that I very much doubt that its output would qualify as "fair use"

why is it different if a slightly more complicated data structure is used?
> I filed

First potential hitch. How do you file legal paperwork in the name of someone who is dead? Do you have ID to prove who you are? While you can probably file a court case without photo ID, you can't file anonymously in most jurisdictions. And you can't use a fraudulent identity like the name of some dead person...
A Woman-Machine
Why say 'topolect', and not just 'language'?

I realize topolect is a translation of an official chinese term, but as far as I'm aware we're not Chinese officials. We're speaking English, and we can be brave enough to call mutually unintelligible languages what they are - languages.

And before anyone gives me the 'language is a dialect with an army and a navy' - yes it's pithy but there's so many counter examples.
Knowing which license applies is not sufficient if that license requires attribution. Or would you list the authors of every single input?
I'm having a difficulty fathoming (or believing) how this anecdote would be possible. When Steve Jobs' secretary picked up the phone, was it working hours? Brushing that aside, how could the secretary have called Nomura headquarters, reach the person who can grant access to the site, then have that person call the chauffeur within 10 minutes?
Sorry, I just added a link to https://ebpf.io. Although I suspect that will also annoy people as it doesn't explain the BPF acronym: The reason is that we're now treating BPF as a technology name (like LLVM) and not an acronym, as the historical acronym (Berkeley Packet Filter) is plain confusing.

I think the real problem is that BPF was built by engineers without professional marketing help, who would have come up with a better name!
Say bye to stupid last minute changes ...

Bridges stay the same, software changes all the time and _needs_ to change all the time because the business (or whatever) domain that the software is in is also constantly changing. The reason the 'waterfall' method of "gather requirements, design, build, test" fails so often is that the requirements gathered at the start are often out of date by the time you get to the test stage. Or, the users that gave the requirements actually meant something slightly different and that only becomes apparent once the software is infront of them for usertesting.
The Woman-Machine:
Seriously…

Elizabeth Alker describes how women composers from Pauline Oliveros to Anna Meredith have grasped the chance offered by electronic music to create a sound of their own.
I’ve been programming for ~15 years, including the last 5 years professionally in JavaScript, and I’ve yet to use a `finally`. Am I alone in this, or is it really meant for niche use cases?
I've seen a few other links on these last weeks talking specifically about the 'metaverse', it doesn't seem implausible.
Well, yes. Taiwan is the true China, and the mainland is controlled by an illegitimate communist government.
I don't know, it depends on the person. Some people have heard of COINTELPRO, and also have eyes and ears and see how political the definition of "terrorist" always is.

If you are a patriotic person, you likely have noticed and disagreed that for political reasons people who work on national defense are sometimes equated with terrorists.

The point of calling someone a terrorist is generally to imply a lot of associated things without specifically lying. If it were worse than accurate specifics, people wouldn't substitute it.
I think the this article is an indication that github is taking this seriously
As far as I know, "CPU usage" of a process has always been "percentage of time spent in it" so I think anything else is overthinking/overcomplicating things. It makes perfect sense for CPU usage to go up if the frequency starts falling due to throttling. That's why a separate indication of current CPU frequency is necessary.
> I'm only interested in the commits made when the current branch was master

When I'm working none of the commits are made when the current branch was master. They are made on branches, where commits are finalised, tested and signed, and then master is fast-forwarded to match the branch tip commit (or something intermediate if I'm satisfied with that). Conflicts are detected by the fast-forward and reconciled locally in the branch, re-tested and signed off again.

It's rare that the current branch is master, and no commits are created while on master.

So what would you like to see?
The American National Anthem is a British Drinking Song