skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Hey HN community!

We’re thrilled to officially bring Edition to everyone today. Here is why we’re building this:

Publishing content & structured pages are still cumbersome & hard for many people — there has been a lot of ongoing innovation in this areas but we strive to make it even simpler, faster, easier & powerful.

We want to:
* Empower anyone to publish pages effortlessly with our easy-to-use no-code editor.
* Help community builders scale their efforts in providing more value to their members by bringing content & community together.
* Deliver tools to customer success teams to nurture their customer communities.

We’ve a long road ahead of us and we’re excited for this day! Please share your feedback or questions for us.
I do not ask about side projects in interviews because they're expected. I ask because it that experience is not uncommon and it could be a reason that the candidate I am interviewing might be a good candidate.

> Do managers do managing on the side to learn new management skills?

Yes, many do. Plenty of managers list relevant community volunteering experience on their resume: organizing community events, coaching teams, participating in professional development groups, etc.
Fix: WiFi Keeps Disconnecting on Windows 10, 11 (5 Best Ways)
The four-color theorem had the preliminary challenge of creating a method to identify all the relevant cases. That also required a mathematical theory. (I don't actually understand how it was done!)

If you didn't have that, you would have an infinite search for possible maps that violate the conjecture, because you wouldn't be able to divide them into a finite number of equivalence classes, or enumerate a finite number of possible counterexamples, or whatever.

For Collatz, I don't think we have any lemma that gives a path to saying "a counterexample must be one of these 2¹⁰⁰ integers" or the like. So without such a thing, checking every possibility would mean checking every integer. (Well, there are definitely lemmas that make it unnecessary to check large numbers of integers, so I should say instead that checking every possibility would still mean checking an infinite number of cases.)
the column is a rainfall or a tornado (other way around)?
You need to re-read your history of the gold standard. Yes, it was ended temporarily during WWI...and brought back a few years later. This resulted in massive deflation, and caused the Great Depression (and the bank runs preceding and during the Great Depression).

Ironically, while the "Austrian School" blames credit for the Great Depression...Austria's banks were the first to fail, because Austria didn't move off the gold standard as quickly as its neighbors did, and Austria was one of the hardest-hit countries during the Great Depression.
Have you ever worked with a financial planner before? I ask, because you’re complaining about the process that every financial planner uses.

They’re all very heavy weight, especially when it comes to expenses and tax rates.
Very cool. Seems like a steam-powered Switch.
Wonder how the other console manufacturers will react.
I know not to obsess with 7, but I find it interesting my 2 year old is obsessed with 7.

Not even sure why, maybe the counting YouTube videos infected him.
I'd be interested to hear what you think of the experience on desktop -- it's definitely better there than on mobile. But point taken; I'd like to keep making improvements for mobile as well.
Fully Sharded Data Parallel: Faster AI Training with Fewer GPUs
I'm currently reading "Liftoff: Elon Musk and the Desperate Early Days that Launched SpaceX" and I've become convinced that SpaceX's biggest accomplishment is convincing their customers (mostly the US government) to go along with their lean/agile development process.

At a high level everyone was aware that the way the government micromanaging the design/build of rockets with cost plus contracts wasn't sustainable, but the government bureaucracy that awards contracts is heavily entrenched in that mode of operation.
There was a little while where we still had unencrypted digital cable (in the US at least). I'm sure it's still around in some places, but we lost the option years ago where I live.

Digital cable (QAM or ClearQAM) came across the same wire as the rest of the stuff...cable internet, encrypted digital cable, etc. and you could tune it with any compatible ATSC tuner like the one built into most TVs and loads of cheap capture cards.

I always hated the "digital cable boxes" required for encrypted content, but for a while, an old PC with a capture card and Windows Media Center let me have a much nicer interface and DVR without the extra rental costs. In fact, I once lived in a building that was split into three apartments and we found that as long as one of us had cable internet, we also had ClearQAM cable TV...

...which I imagine is why they got rid of it. Cable modems need to be provisioned. Cable boxes need to be rented if you want to decrypt the channels you'd paid to authorize decryption of. But QAM was just on the wire. So easy to use and so easy to mooch, so the cable company used the confusion around the switch from OTA analog/digital switch to also remove QAM and switch everyone over to those rented decoder boxes.

Incidentally, it's also when I stopped watching cable TV. The boxes were an additional cost for a worse experience than I had with the built-in tuner or my HTPC. I thought about getting a new capture card with CableCard support, but that standard was a huge pain in the ass and never really took off outside of Tivo and similar turnkey devices. Thankfully, it's also when streaming and other OTT services started to take off.
Being able to lend money cheaply and easily by printing new dollars every time a loan is approved is a mistake. It’s called malinvestment and it enables firms that would not normally receive funding in a truly free market to do so. In a hard money system the amount of loans would be far less, and the use of equity would be much more popular over debt. This is a matter of philosophy and I understand what I’m advocating for is a radical departure from the current system.

One major issue of our debt-based, easy-money society is that everyone understands the Fed explicitly backs the regulated banking system from default and implicitly backs the shadow banking system, as the collapse and subsequent bailout of less-regulated firms has repeatedly shown us. The profits are privatized and the losses are socialized. Another problem is that all firms eventually revert to being financial services firms - it is more profitable for Macy’s to provide 20% interest credit cards than it is to sell clothes (half their revenue pre-bankruptcy) with the clothes merely a means to get people signed up for credit cards. They accomplish this by being able to borrow from the capital markets at very cheap rates, then lend their cheap money to consumers at high rates, and then securitize and resell the debt.

What I advocate and want is impossible to achieve. Instead I make my own investments and plans based upon my knowledge of the world, the financial systems, and how things shake out. For example, the 30 year fixed rate mortgage is a both a huge subsidy to the well-off and one of the few ways you can build wealth to protect against inflation. The situation with housing is complex but the end result is what you see everywhere in developed countries - ever increasing prices and society-wide view of property as an investment - not only the US but especially in Canada. Buy as much property, for as much government subsidized debt, as you as an individual can afford.
I think they have a right to train in it, but not to present portions verbatim. Do you have a right to look at a bunch of open source code and come to conclusions about good programming practices? Are you prevented from knowing that a specific library in a language is good/common for a specific task because you see others using it?

That's analogous to training, where there are associations between things, in my mind. I don't think that means they can provide licensed code verbatim though, just as you should not copy GPL code directly out of a Github repo and paste into your own private commercial code base.
I built my company and have had wealth enough to retire for a decade. Work gives us meaning and purpose and sharpens our skills and minds. I plan to never retire.
Why do we accept that the courts are so slow? I don't understand why there isn't a drive to reform courts by accelerating outcomes by an order of magnitude, and by making outcomes not depend on wealth.
Because the developers are lazy. Why do we need 20 layers of libraries to draw a rectangle ? Give a developer a library and he will use it.
> However, any system that rewards only 10% of its participants, is essentially Hollywood. It’s not sustainable, and people will simply check out. The only way to prevent that is to either change the odds, or to sell propaganda.

Hollywood seems to reward a lot more than 10% of its participants. There are many thousands of people living middle-class lives as part of the movie business in Los Angeles and elsewhere. Much of their ability to do so is driven by the unions active in the entertainment industry and the protections they demand for non-superstar workers.
I wonder if this is a hardware limitation, or a software limitation?

Could the average human functionally extend this limitation with a bit of training or adaptation?
Java was able to ride the wave of the web's rise in popularity, particularly with their marketing of applets and the "network as the computer", with the idea of downloading Java code as needed to supplement the software you're using at the time. That and there was lots of talk about how the JVM was going to be the runtime of the future for all languages.

It's funny how Javascript and the web have turned out to be a more popular target. Nobody back in the late 90s/early 2000s would have thought that. JS was a toy and html was going away in favor of Flash or Java applets or .NET.

At any rate, timing is a really important part of gaining widespread adoption. Smalltalk was way ahead of its time in the 70s, but too early to really take advantage of networking, as their target was stand-alone personal computers.
Thanks. I am not sure how I missed that section in the manual that answers my exact question… I will give that a try!
Artificial Intelligence at EU Borders [pdf]
> With something like a Java interface, it doesn't really matter if those APIs change because all the code is built and released together at HEAD.

Right, this is the thing that winds up following from the monorepo - the monorepo problem goes away if we just release everything, the whole fuckin’ system, into production every time we make any update to master. If that’s your system, hats off to you, I’m not nearly that good of an engineer.
My concern is that the person who agrees to the CLA (generally the individual programmer) may not actually be authorized to assign ownership of the IP - since if they're subject to an IP assignment provision, they don't own the IP to begin with, their employer does.

CLAs generally (if not universally) include clauses addressing this. For example, Google's [0]:

> You represent that you are legally entitled to grant the above license. If your employer(s) has rights to intellectual property that you create that includes your Contributions, you represent that you have received permission to make Contributions on behalf of that employer, that your employer has waived such rights for your Contributions to Google, or that your employer has executed a separate Corporate CLA with Google.

But I'm not sure I trust engineers to read and adhere to the fine print. And "he told us he had the right to assign the IP" isn't a defense - if it were, you could get out of an IP assignment clause in general just by lying and saying you're not subject to one.

[0] https://cla.developers.google.com/about/google-individual
It's not a UI pattern as such but the way authentication can be done when the site in question does not know or manage the user's login credentials. It also serves the purpose of "single sign on" in enterprise environments. In other words, the site you're logging into may not have your authentication credentials for that account and would first need to know who you are in order to decide how to challenge you for your credentials or even who should challenge you for your credentials and authenticate you.

Note that I have used the words "authentication" and "credentials" and purposefully omitted "passwords". That's because passwords are just one way of authenticating users. You could also authenticate users by sending a code by email or SMS or using a client certificate, among other ways.

An example: your company subscribes to Office365 but wants to manage your credentials to provide you a single sign on experience across systems. When you visit outlook.office.com to check your email, Microsoft has no idea who you are or that you need to be authenticated by your company. So it asks you to enter your email address, and on getting that, it knows (based on prior configuration) that your company's domain requires you to be sent to a specific page managed by your company for authentication (of course, your company may have outsourced that function to another provider, in which case you get redirected there). In this setup, Microsoft does not know or care how you get authenticated. It just needs a secure and valid authentication token back from the system that's going to authenticate you.

Depending on the systems and providers in question, the most common underlying technologies would either be OAuth or SAML.
Google Books is a great parallel to make with Microsoft's Copilot. The key differences between the two is

A) Google Books produces verbatim results 100% of the time, while Microsoft's Copilot produces verbatim results some N > 0% of the time (with some % of results greater than N that would be considered a derivative if a human wrote it), and

B) Google Books doesn't make the claim that you own the copyright to any greater than 0% of the search results, while Microsoft's Copilot makes the claim that you own the copyright to 100% of the results.
It's honestly getting creepy at this point.

Throughout this entire comment tree starting from its base you have multiple long term HN users all consciously going out of their way to constructs lies in the pursuit of defaming this man.

joshuamorton is supposedly a google employee according to his profile and yet was perfectly happy to throw the antisemitism bs around.

There's several accounts down the bottom, each a number of years old and ostensibly regular otherwise; all of which have made efforts to come to this discussion and make up slander. And then of course run when pressed to provide evidence.

And they do all this despite the counter evidence being available to all.

Honestly, what is happening there? Is it some sort of collective insanity? Is it something they all agree needs to be done for some greater good? And if that's the case do they agree to it subconsciously/consciously? Is it all just people who are incredibly susceptible to group pressure and who will go along with any absurdity so long as it's ordered from the right authority.

How do you go about justifying deliberately attempting to hurt a person like this?

Just the sight of it astounds me.
I think what's missing is the consideration of how the other person is feeling. I use a three-step process 1) how I'' feeling 2) how I imagine they might be feeling and 3) say one thing to connect with love.

In this example above, if after saying "I need us to work as a team," the person were to say "and I imagine maybe you're leaving because you're worried about something at home or afraid you're gonna burnout or who knows what" and then ask "would you willing to work late (this time) until we get through them?"

I think what the NVC process lacks (or maybe I just don't know it well enough) is a way to show the other person we are considering how they feel. I have found it works absolute wonders at times, not only to show the other person I'm thinking of them, but also to actually get me to more consciously think of them, which can alter how I proceed. Maybe I even realize that the tickets aren't that important when I imagine they may be stressed to pick up their kids from school because their marriage might already be on the rocks and they don't want to push it overboard.
How could it not? What you click on, what you look at, what you read and for how long, what you write, where you go, what you buy, how you feel, what you like and dislike, who you know, who you talk to, what sites you visit... Facebook knows many of its users (and non-users) better than they know themselves.
Thank you so much for that clear explanation!
There's a piece by Cory Doctorow about this [1], which I found interesting for its expansion into highighting FB's apparent beef with Ad Observer [2]. I also like Doctorow's piece because he used the word "flensed", which I don't think I've seen for years but which, for some reason, I like.

[1] https://pluralistic.net/2021/07/15/three-wise-zucks-in-a-tre...

[2] https://adobserver.org/
Let's be serious.
Retargeting typically has very favorable CPC (cost per click) and other "ROI" metrics that marketing managers use to determine the success of their advertising campaigns.

This may conceivably be because having previously visited a website is a stronger indicator of interest than say, male 18-30 making $XYZ/yr.

It may also be purely coincidental and garbage. You were going to buy anyway/you already bought it.

The truth most often lies somewhere in-between.

The statistic rigor of the people purchasing these ads is not always the highest. The companies offering these solutions typically have very little reason to not sell as many ads as possible, as long as the metrics look good.

In the end consumers are blasted with stalking ads that they don't want and the entire industry is shooting itself in the foot
It can be valuable, but it's not as valuable as covering all cases.

If I could prove collatz for 99% of numbers it would be great.

If i could additionally prove which 99% converge, let's say all numbers not divisible by 100, it would be enormous because even showing this much is likely to be a stepping stone to a full proof (what property is it about the number 100 that excludes all non-divisors from diverging?)

> I suppose what bugs me about math is, physicists are proved wrong all the time. Mathematicians are rarely proved mistaken, because they construct assumptions that you can't disagree with. There's no chance for empirical data to falsify one's assertions.

Right, and that's the whole point and beauty of it.
Nope, it did not work. Will try again at home through.
If you can write down the natural number n, you can write down n+1.

Of course, you can't write down the entire set of natural numbers but that is not a natural number.
Something that I've always thought would be fun is a groupchat that makes text bubbles bigger based on how much that individual has contributed.

This could be extended to meeting software, the more a person talks the bigger their avatar becomes. An easy downside is distraction but it's an interesting concept.

Slightly inspired by a peer of mine during graduate school https://www.riesmurphy.com/eclipse-shortform.
A while back I saw an interview with a NASA engineer they loaned to SpaceX for six months. He described a meeting in which two engineering proposals were being debated, and at the end Musk said "ok we'll do it this way" and that was the end of it. The guy was kinda blown away, and said at NASA they'd have had a dozen more meetings first.

Given that SpaceX lives or dies by how well their rockets work, I don't think there's really anything more important for Musk to be doing.
or all of a sudden, the local telcos will realize they can actually provide better services by flipping a switch
I wonder what this will mean for Linux support on the Steam store in general? Since this is SteamOS[0], then manufacturers will have to support Linux / Proton in order to have their games on this machine.

[0] https://www.steamdeck.com/en/software
> You don't really need deep-learning or an AI to do a lot of these graph operations.

That is right, but we're probably not hunting for absolutely optimal solutions every time.

It usually boils down to heuristics - everytime there's a graph reorganization problem where a sub-optimal, but better solution is viable, the solutions always involve short-cuts derived from the domain knowledge in there.

This is usually very similar to the AI training operations where there's a guess from an engineer, experiments to validate and modify the heuristic guess to improve the results - finally to give up when the results look acceptable.

AIs would do well at parameter tuning, at the very least.

My register allocation work would have near infinite loops reordering priorities, until I started forcing invariants into the system which didn't exist in the original design.

And the usual arguments about "code is compiled once, executed millions of times" doesn't quite apply to a JIT.
Facebook recommendation algorithms have been shown over and over to lead users toward further and further into violent right wing content and user groups.

I use Twitter a lot and my opinion is that it is a complete free for all. Misinformation yes, reinforcing your bubble if you choose to, but also getting things outside your bubble if you choose to. Blasts of information from all over the spectrum, and you kind of get to chose your own adventure, as opposed to Facebook and YouTube where the only way to go is pretty much "more right-wing, more hateful, and more violent"
I remember a job I had back in the 90's that had a
"written drug test." It was basically an intelligence test - the questions were literally "Have you smoked crack in last 30 days?"
Right, most central banks have some insulation from politics. BoE's independence is granted by Parliament, and can be taken away at any time.
Does the fair use exemption (or an equivalent) exist in all countries?
Yup this. I've interviewed a bunch of people and been on a bunch of post-interview discussions of candidates. I've never looked at or asked about side projects, and nobody else has ever mentioned anything about the candidates' side projects either.

From an interviewer's standpoint, it's much better to have a standard set of questions that you give every candidate, so you can judge candidates against each other relatively fairly and objectively. Assuming a candidate has any side projects that demonstrate any expertise at all, it's a ton of work to dig into one of them enough to get an idea of how that person works. It's almost never worth the time, just ask your standard questions instead.
This is a good point. I am currently consulting for a F100 healthcare company, and everything they do is driven by compliance. It's the first and last thing that gets talked about in almost every meeting.
You can get some free coverage through automated fuzzing tools that use OpenAPI to generate tests

https://github.com/microsoft/rest-api-fuzz-testing
> The winner of Blue Origin’s auction, who has asked to remain anonymous at this time, has chosen to fly on a future New Shepard mission due to scheduling conflicts.

What scheduling conflict could you possibly have that’s more important than your planned spaceflight?

It’s also a bit odd they make no mention of how this young man was selected as the buyer’s alternate.
They technically don’t distribute any code. They show it to you in a hosted environment. It’s the user that causes a distribution. They “provide it as part of the service.”
I saw the article with the user who had the system in question, it didn't make it to the front page. I believe they were using some memory compression that made virtual memory far faster.
Further, what if I branched the code from something hosted outside of Github -- and failed to follow proper attribution?

This is a huge legal mess and its not being used to IMPROVE Github products and ops, it IS the Github product.