skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What you want sounds similar to Rust's Mutex design pattern. In most languages, there's no link between a mutex and the resources it's protecting, but in the Rust standard library, a Mutex<T> contains the resources (the T), so that the only way to get access to these resources is to lock the mutex, and the borrow checker will not allow accessing them after the mutex is unlocked again.

In your case, you could implement something like an InterruptDisabler<T>, and use it to wrap an object which has the methods to access these registers. When you wanted to access these registers, you would do something like "my_interrupt_disabler.disable_interrupts()", which would disable interrupts and return an InterruptDisablerGuard<T>, which then would you to access the T. Once that InterruptDisablerGuard<T> gets out of scope, the compiler automatically calls the drop() method from the Drop trait on it, and that method could enable interrupts again. You cannot access the inner object without going through the guard, and you cannot get the guard without disabling interrupts.

And that's only one possible implementation. Another one would be to have something like an "interrupts disabled" token which is returned by a "disable interrupts" function, which is consumed (that is, destroyed) by an "enable interrupts" function, and which is !Send and !Sync (so it cannot be passed to another thread). The methods which access these registers would require you to give them a reference to the token, so they could only be called if you somehow obtained the token, which could only be done by disabling interrupts in the current thread. And for when you're within the interrupt handler itself, the low-level code which calls it could manufacture one of these tokens and pass a reference to it to the interrupt handler, so it would be able to access the registers without calling the "disable interrupts" function.

Of course, both of these ideas still require you to decide which registers are safe to call with interrupts enabled, and which registers are not, when creating the objects which represent the register blocks. Rust can help the developer, but it's not a panacea.
This is awesome. But isnit actually going to get built? Whats going to stop companies taking the money and then see nothing being built?

What's going to stop the California govt giving contract to companies like Verizon or Comcast?
> We wouldn't want providers not to be able to decide what content to distribute.

That is basically what some people want.

Hacker News is looking at the choice between the George Orwell future and Neal Stephenson future and finding neither to its liking.
We see ourselves as quite different to Scale really as we don't provide annotation services, mainly the software.

One of the main differences is that we've pretty exclusively focussed on language rather than vision which has quite a different tech stack.

We also view human-in-the-loop not just as a way to get better data but actually as a better deployment paradigm.

P.s You're right that David is awesome btw!
I agree with this to some extent, how direct should the harm be before you stop distributing it?

I don't think there is an easy, obvious line there—direct calls to harm (murder these people) shouldn't be accepted, and I believe even beyond that there should be limits, but find that line and enforcing that is very hard.
Cool, great to get that clarified but also good to see I didn’t invent the fact they claimed to have asked.
> I'm not imagining they won't see it

As my lawyer put it, if the communication goes like this:

Employer: "Okay great! Just sign these and you can start."

Candidate: *edits documents*

Candidate: *signs documents*

Candidate: "Okay great! Here I've signed 'em. Can't wait to start!"

That _might_ be fraud, regardless of your intent. Because there was no reasonable expectation that there was any negotiation even going on in the first place where any changes could have been expected to have been made. It sounded like different courts might have different opinions on the matter, but he strongly recommended against it.

As long as there was some version of negotiation going on "hey here's the changed document feel free to sign it and get it back to me" then you don't really need to tell them every little thing that changed, if they miss something it'll be much more likely to still bind in court.
Personally I think this is interesting, ethics be damned. It is obvious the direction we are going with these kind of technologies. We will be able to create entirely new content using the personalities of deceased people out of whole cloth.

Some day we may be reduced to nothing more than a pile of ashes and a USB stick with our personality reincarnated into it. That's far better than simply being a pile of ashes, and may be the closest we get to some kind of immortality, a way to keep our ego wandering the digital world long after we've died and gone to wherever you choose to believe.

Combined with advanced AR technology, all it may take is putting on some glasses to see the ghosts of your ancestors wandering the real world and interacting with it. Well, maybe not our ancestors. We will be the ancestors, and our descendants will be the ones watching us, tending to our digital souls.
The more interesting thing to me would be actual peripheral support. It's apparently a PC that can connect to an external display or mouse and keyboard.
You start with a faulty premise: google services are public, so you have no valid point.

Build your own data center and upload anything you want. Don't demand that a private company give you an unfettered soapbox.

Also "source a new iPhone"? Can we dispense with the meaningless buzzwords, please?
Government benefits are so good they're better than working for a living
You've seemingly distinguished DDoS attacks from legitimate traffic. If someone is "flooding the zone" with disinformation with the purpose of making it impossible to discern the truth (i.e. it's not legitimate, good faith discourse), is it not reasonable to draw a parallel with DDoSing?
It’s harder to exploit people with options, so it’s necessary to remove those options.
Your example is a bit facile. A cardboard car does not function as a car does. It sounds almost like you are saying something but you never explain exactly what’s wrong with performative virtue.

But you have to define what is virtuous before you can claim that performative virtue is “fake”. The young people of today are no less virtuous than their elders, despite the fact that their elders (like virtually every generation before them) complain that they are immoral.
What you listed are just ways we've learned to live with the forgeable nature of signatures. Now voice recordings (and even videos) will have a similar fate in the future.
>> I don’t want to live in a society where 2 million jobs are taken only on threat of starvation

What society would that be? It certainly isn't the US. Starvation is virtually unknown in the US.
Please, please do speak out! Otherwise, the only people speaking are the authoritarian leftists and their worst possible opponents, the Trump apologists. People speaking in favor of speech they do not agree with are the most compelling free-speech advocates of all.
The original source for the 1981 masterpiece “Defender” is now on GitHub
On which timescale does something become historical? Are the Beatles historical, to you maybe not but possibly to your children? Where is the line you’re drawing?

If I’m honest humans have never done the moral thinking, we largely just middle through and hope to get away with it.
It isn't converted into solid mass either. Study chemistry. Clueless.
I think we're making it a purely political issue about demands, and not being creative on the technical side.

For example, we could use remote work to reduce commute time. People can work remotely when transportation is slow, daily during rush hour, or when there is bad weather, construction, or otherwise. Combine that with four days at the office, and total annual commute time might be reduced 50% (as a wild guess: 20% less from 20% fewer days at the office, 30% from avoiding slow transportation).

Or, because we know people work effectively remotely, invest in public transit (or corporate transit for their employees) that facilitates working: Quality Internet service, quiet cars, private space for phone calls, etc.
I don't think the answer is alternatives, as you would just be trading one master for another.
What we need is 1) for clients to retain control of their data and 2) standardized formats and interfaces for handling data. If moving off of Facebook was as simple as creating an account somewhere else, then things would be different. If Google doesn't own your data you can tell them how they are allowed to use it.

As for Google, I've given up on anything revolutionary from them. They have a lot of smart people with good ideas but they've grown so big that they can't "move fast and break things" without breaking whole sectors of the economy--and given the number of anti-trust suits Google is embroiled in, I think the governments of the world know it. That said, Google generally seems to at least try to do the right thing, even if no one there seems to know exactly what that is.
> The US doesn’t need “one person” when there are clear signatures and traces

How clear are they really? How hard is it to pin an attack on another group or country?
An Amazon subsidiary used to, probably still does, require NDAs for every candidate they'd invite for an in-house interview.

I went though pretty much the same crap you described. They even went as far as to say the NDA is there to protect me. Good thing that conversation wasn't on the phone, because I let out a pretty good belly laugh over that one.
Commerce Unit Went ‘Rogue,’ Senate Report Says, Targeting Chinese Americans
Scientists? Sure. Journalists? No. Banning discussion but allowing the mass media free reign means people are being fed propaganda.
SDFs in Blender
I don't do business with either Google or Apple.

I don't need them to do anything at all.

There are competitors to Visa.

I can do anything I want without Apple, Visa, Google and even Amazon and Microsoft.
Opt Out of Ad Networks
What if that recording studio considered inside knowledge of the publishing industry gained from your employment with them as getting a leg up? That is more-or-less analogous to what a family member was told when asked to sign a non-compete for a job as a grocery store clerk. (To be specific, the company viewed knowing who their supplies were as reason for a non-compete.)
You can keep claiming bad faith and that they would have used any excuse all you want, but if you don't back that up with anything but gut feeling then I'm not going to be convinced.

Yes it would be bad faith if this thing you're claiming is true. It would help if you had some evidence.

"We agree to let users opt out." is a pretty simple proposition and the motives make sense. It helps those users and it significantly reduces the demand to regulate them, but doesn't cost much money. Removing the part where users do the opting is a very different situation. Balking at that does not require bad faith. It requires they not have the users' best interests at heart, but... yeah, we knew that. If they did then ads would be much rarer and much less invasive, if they existed at all.
I think Google (and the rest of FAANG) is wrestling with the uncomfortable possibilty that they are pawns in several nation-states' disinfo campaigns and they suspect their previous lack of intervention and professional having-no-opinion on questions of fact made everything worse.

It's possible that "Don't be evil" means "exercise control over the things you create." Frankenstein's monster wasn't created evil... It learned cruelty after its creator abdicated responsibility for it and it was exposed nakedly to a cruel world.
Amazon just got Fakespot booted off Apple's iOS App Store
Your situation sounds similar to mine! I used to smoke pot everyday from morning to evening and code throughout. When I first started it went alright, but after about a year I started to see negative side effects. I felt like I couldn't come up with 'smart' code anymore and often felt unmotivated. I tried to stop on my own but it was next to impossible. I've moved back home to live with family and have them keep an eye on me. I would still smoke a bit during the evenings but being sober now throughout the day and coding is such a blessing. I can actually think!
In New South Wales, a nurse at Westmead Hospital tested positive on Tuesday despite being fully vaccinated and wearing personal protective equipment while working in a Covid-19 ward.

So someone with very high exposure for whom no amount of being careful is likely to ever be enough. This sounds less concerning than the framing of the title.

I hope that we continue to promote self-checkout registers, low or no contact takeout at eateries and other best practices for germ control that are not an undue hardship. I hope the one takeaway we get from the pandemic is that we need to be generally more careful about germ control in a world with roughly 8 billion people.

But I think we sometimes focus our hand-wringing in the wrong places.
I don’t see what’s changed. Youtube doesn’t host pornographic content either. The Apple App store doesn’t allow adult content of any kind. If you’re saying maybe Youtube and the Apple store should grow up a little and allow adult content I’m sympathetic but the horse has long left the barn on that one.
Skunk Works is a great read. Highly recommend it for people interested in the defense technology.
There's little free market for the consumers in tech in general. The barriers to entry are extreme - between inherent complexity of the products, enormous capital investments required, and scale-related benefits (economies of scale, network effects), few can afford to start a real competitor. You can't just make a new Facebook or a new smartphone or even a new coffee machine - not without making a faustian bargain with investors, a deal which is usually the root problem behind why technology sucks.

Consumers only get to choose out of what's available, and in this market, it's hard for an entrepreneurial consumer to make some things available when the market isn't providing them.
I don't see the point. You still have the network effect: people aren't going to install 20 social media apps.

Take WhatsApp: the technology behind it is ridiculously simple.
if the property-salary ratio is small, then what's the point of selling to fund a startup? sounds like it wouldn't provide much runway.

anyway, i don't mean to be judgemental. i'm just thinking aloud i guess, i've known a lot of computer people over the years and some have been spectacularly successful in industry, but i'm pretty sure that no one had substantial equity in property by that age. (or even a mortgage or deed)

to answer OP's question: i don't really know. conventional wisdom is that you should always find investors (not that you shouldn't have skin in the game) but that it's a gamble and they'll be better (and more prepared to take a loss) at making an educated bet than you are. that said, the technology sector is well known for nontraditional and unusual paths to success, so i suppose an argument could be made either way.

i guess the big question is: do you think you can do it and do you have the right people to help guide you along the way?
It just looks nice. Once you downsample, you cannot accurately upsample again.
If the upsampled image looks real to you, and if you would downsample that again you get the same downsampled image, then you did the best you could.
I imagine you get an increase in trash, too. For many people, renting an airbnb solely to party extremely hard with your friends is a regular vacation for them. You end up getting drunken people stumbling back from the bars pissing and puking everywhere and throwing bottles because they don't live there. Leaving empty cases of Naturdays to clog the storm drains. Getting into fights with other groups of tourist out posturing. Booking rental exotic cars for instagram pictures and getting pulled over for driving drunk. Whats the saying go, you don't shit where you sleep? These people come to my city and proverbially shit everywhere, sometimes literally.
> Giving anyone the ability to arbitrate what is "good" speech vs "bad" speech is way too much power.

But that isn't at all what is happening here. Google has decided that they don't want to enable people to distribute certain data using their platform. They're not being crowned the omnipotent oracle of good and bad.

> you are talking about creating super powerful entities just because they agree with you.

This position is bizarre to me -- what do you think an elected government is? I vote to create "super powerful entities that agree with me" every 4 years. Those entities possess the power to destroy all life on earth. Google is not anywhere near as powerful as those entities, and while it is not (directly) democratically accountable, it does derive its power from its users.

No information will be permanently erased just because Google does not spend money and time making it available on Drive.
It’s not an M1 it’s a Challenger 2.
Less common but still underrated as a risk is asteroid strike or near miss. Jupiter, Saturn, our Moon all keep us safer than other Earth-like planets. But it seems like a risk that should concern us. besides maybe subterranean shelter, IMO the best hedge is interplanetary colonization. Ridiculously expensive but not when measured against the cost of losing all of humanity.

Maybe galactic risks like these are part of the Great Filter.
Cool. Now how do we scale this to everyone else?
Yeah, chords are interesting. Major triads are basically a 4:5:6 ratio, which is the 4th, 5th, and 6th harmonic of some low bass note. (Different inversions get you 2:3:5 or 3:4:5 or whatever.) A dominant 7th chord gets you one more step in the harmonic series: 4:5:6:7. That 7th harmonic is way out of tune in 12-tone equal temperament, though.

Minor chords are a 10:12:15 ratio, which kind of looks like a bunch of arbitrary chosen numbers, but we could rewrite that as 60/6 : 60/5 : 60/4 and then it sort of make sense that minor would be a sort of mathematical reciprocal of the major. Minor chords can be interpreted either as the 10th, 12th, and 15th harmonics of some bass note or as the first three prime subharmonics that are integer divisions of the fundamental note. Subharmonics don't really occur in nature, though.
Whenever I think like that, it usually turns out that it wasn't so obvious because I am the one missing something.
This is why stealth recording is the best way - don't put the phone/camera/recorder in their face. Pretend it's a conversation not being recorded in any way (but actually is).

Police are putting their guard up because the recording is in their face. This is human psych 101. Don't play into the situation to cause the escalation in the first place.

Is it ethical or moral what they are doing? Absolutely NOT.

But it's more important to remember the long term goal.

Intimidating the officer is a bad idea and not how you make this work. Honey vs. Vinegar.

You want them to be at ease and if they are doing wrong, you want them to pull the noose themselves. They always have the option to "do the right thing". If they choose not to, that IS on them but better to be non-confrontational about how the situation plays out.

There are audio and video recorders that can be pretty stealthy (I own several). Don't just pull your phone out and push it into their faces. Plan for it. Wear a stealth recording device.

Think "Dash Cam" - it's always running when you drive because that way you and others don't get distracted by it. Same here.
See also: The Navajo Nation, which laments environmental destruction and climate change on its reservations, but is buying up mines in Wyoming to export coal to China.
The most fabulous part of this service is that I tried to opt out of nearly everything and many of the results were "Opt out temporarily unavailable". Of course it is!
Very well put. :)

// I work at EdgeDB
California is really great in a lot of ways, but the issue that really drives people away from it is cost.
> Even if you are talking only about people prosecuted, "98% shitty people" is ridiculously hyperbolic.

Good people don't rob their neighbors because they're "having a bad day." They're shitty people. And no, poverty doesn't excuse it. People in Bangladesh, where I'm from, are vastly poorer. If poverty caused crime, they'd go around stealing, joining gangs, etc. But mostly they don't. In Bangladeshi villages, crime is lower than in U.S. cities. And when they do those things, nobody hesitates to call them shitty people!

I'm extremely sympathetic to police reform, because I think even shitty people don't deserve to be abused by the state. But let's not mince words here.

> It also, as you note, precludes the majority of police work which was more my point

That may be your point, but I wasn't talking about pulling people over for speeding. My point was in the context of this article, which is about someone who was prosecuted for brutally raping and murdering a woman.
Any codecs or anything like that seem like a screamingly good target.

Right now they're one of our most egregious sources of security vulnerabilities (mostly due to a lot of hands-on bit-twiddling that results in a lot of possibilities for overflow). It's gotten bad enough that a number of system developers (browsers, OSes) have been shifting to a model where codecs are strictly sandboxed, and just get a single binary input blob, and a single output blob, and don't get any other kind of access to the system they're on - it's a scorched earth problem, but it really is that bad.

The thing about trying to write one with Rust is, if you actually 'went with the flow of the language' and didn't just immediately pop into `unsafe`, you'd be able to write a really safe codec.

-but-

The real payoff is that the performance would be surprisingly good - usually a suggestion like the one I just made would absolutely wreck performance, but one of the big things about Rust is that because it lets you describe what your intent is as a programmer in such higher-level terms (despite being a machine-level language), it gives the compiler a lot more information about the scope of your intent, which opens the floodgates to potential optimizations.

For a really easy example - Rust does all variables as "immutable by default". When you're programming in C, and something is compiling your code, there are tons of opportunities where you'd go "oh, well we already calculated this, why don't we just cache it?" But the compiler can't, because it doesn't actually know what you, the human, know - that that thing won't change. Because that knowledge is available to the compiler through Rust, the compiler actually DOES know, so tons of things can get inlined, cached, and otherwise optimized for you which you'd otherwise have to do by hand.

Usually when people do these sorts of things by hand, they'll ace a couple key optimizations (usually things that show up in profiling hotspots) and completely overlook hundreds, even thousands of other potential optimizations.

There are tons of other "high level intent" things that give the compiler more info it can use to optimize, but the "immutability by default" one is a really easy one to explain.
Every 'serious' C/C++ is seriously considering incorporating or switching to Rust.

So all serious shops are going through this self discovery process but none have decided yet they are weighing the pros and cons daily. Unable to reach that conclusion but moving closer to Rust everyday.

That sounds like someone is hopeful they bet on the right horse.
Thanks for the info. That correlates with what I have read. CBD on its own doesn't help, need a balance between CBD and THC.

I haven't heard about using mushrooms for migraine, sounds interesting. How much do you actually take? Does it effect your ability to be productive?