skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"Bug fixes and improvements"
My primary home computer for several years was a docked laptop. Overall I was disappointed and went back to a full desktop.

> If power goes, I don’t lose anything, the laptop is still running.

What kind of monster doesn’t use a UPS!? =P

I mostly work in games and VR. Maybe someday there will be a laptop that doesn’t suck for game development. Sadly that day has not yet come.
For many applications, this one included, "the first place" is out of reach. What I've got is an awful lot of incoming JSON data. I'd like to keep a copy in case we need it later.

Is it possible for me to write and test a robust custom compressor that does better in both storage and compression costs than any of the modern compressors? Possibly.

Is that true even though one of FB's goals was specifically optimizing JSON compression? Maybe.

Can I build it for the few hundred bucks per month in S3 costs I might save? Definitely not.
If you leak all the secrets 1% of the time, that's not leaking 1% of the secrets. All of the secrets have been leaked, albeit over a short stretch of time.
> You've bumped into the exact same problem that exists with our democracy. Do you want our future determined by a few well-informed, rational people? Or do you want it determined by an ignorant, short-sighted mass?

Isn't this an argument for limiting the power we give to those in power? It's unrealistic to think that only people who are right will be in charge (I doubt I need to give examples). The realistic thing is strong controls on the power they wield, to that "short sighted masses" cannot take over. This idea underpins liberal democracy.
I'm not OP but...

I'm English. There hasn't been a single time I've gone to the super market and seen everyone wear a mask. I've been at least 100 times. Probably more. This is excluding anyone with an exception and any kids etc.

The same for taking the tube into London the few times I've been.

Multiple government ministers have been caught breaking the rules and kept their jobs. They've been caught ignoring scientific advice multiple times. They've gone out of their way to make it clear that breaking the rules is A-OK.
By saying "unnaturally genetically engineered" do you mean (a) selectively bred? Or do you mean (b) laboratory enhanced?

If it's (b) then you are very mistaken. There is nothing wrong with (a) in terms of nutrition or food safety. We would not be feeding the world without (a) and it's a dangerous and wilfully ignorant statement to associate selective breeding with something like CRISPR.
Really goes to show Apple's approach to security, "feebly containerize something after it's already been severely exploited."
"Roadside Picnic" IRL
Writer clearly haven't heard about MongoDB :P
As a non-contributor but past user of Godot, the different rewrites of the renderer is what turned me off from committing to the engine long term. I have no issue with Godot staying modern (I.E adopting Vulkan) but my perspective is that this decision was made to maximize graphic fidelity rather than to maximize usability of the engine for the users. For me the biggest appeal of Godot was it was approachable and usable. I don’t care if it can compete with unreal or unity on a visual level because there is more work needed in other areas of the engine first. Perhaps the devs felt that the rest of Godot was “good enough” and the renderer was a higher priority but I did not feel that was the case. In the end this was a decision I did not agree with but I am sincerely happy they are making good progress and I’m looking forward to trying out Godot 4.0 once it hits alpha!
1. Re: "needs additional work to become a fully fledged exploit": We have verified this attack in practice, see the paper.

2. We give an example application where it has some "bearing on the security of messages" at the end of https://mtpsym.github.io/ under the heading "Did we really break IND-CPA?" and in the paper.

3. Perhaps a better analogy is: the remaining door requires the date of birth but luckily they kept that secret. But analogies aside: "Luckily, it is almost impossible to carry out in practice. In particular, it is mostly mitigated by the coincidence that certain metadata in Telegram [a salt and an id] is chosen randomly and kept secret." https://mtpsym.github.io/

4. By cryptographic standards the strongest attack as it would imply full compromise if successful. It costs in the order of 2^32 noise-free queries within minutes where it is not clear how many noisy queries are needed to get "one noise-free query" since we didn't want to test it against Telegram's servers. This falls significantly short of "well established crypto protocols [...] where it's just infeasible to brute force" NB: these provide guarantees also against state resources. This does not mean it is a practical concern.

The key contribution of our paper, however, is that we prove that MTProto's symmetric cryptography (with some fixes and when implemented carefully) can give you something comparable to TLS (well, it's Record protocol) which is it's closest "competitor".

This proof comes with some caveats, though: MTProto is tricky to implement correctly (as highlighted by our attacks on the official clients). Secondly, MTProto relies on unstudied assumptions that you do not need to make if you use just TLS. See "A Somewhat Opinionated Discussion" at https://mtpsym.github.io/
Refreshing to see that the GPU stack might be converging on GLES3+ at a high level and Vulkan at the low-level. Of course Apple is left out of this, but getting some translation over to Metal is the best we can do.
Nearly All the Chinook Salmon in the Sacramento River Will Die
Nope. Got the 8gb too. I have xcode, firefox, safari, mail and a lot more. No issues, apart from xcode because it sucks, and has sucked for years.

Chrome is your problem.
Boxing? Used to be much more popular, to participate in, particularly in childhood.

Also consistent with "men had a greater reduction (24%) than women (8%)."
But timescales actually matter. Without any expectation of a specific time scale, you can claim that anything is actually working perfectly and just hasn’t worked yet.
I'll second this. In the military (or at least in the Marine Corps, from my experience), the person to your left and right is not only there to help you, but to hold you accountable too. It's started early in training that you don't "let your buddy off the hook", you f** them up if they do something stupid. The goal is to uncover all the dirt and get it cleaned up, not to hide it. And your buddy will testify against you, because they know it's the right thing to do, and you'll spend years in the brigg. It's a hard culture, but it's built to be self-filtering, self-cleaning. That's where the idea of honor comes from.

From everything that I've witnessed and heard, police culture is the polar opposite. You "do favors", "hook each other up", and "overlook mistakes". All of this breeds the bacteria, rather than killing it off.
> So nothing is memory safe by your definition then.

No. I will now apply maximum charity and explain the distinction once again: Let's take Java. It runs on a VM. The VM has a memory model. There is no way to write memory-unsafe code while staying within that model. Not only can you write non-trivial programs against that model, the vast majority of Java code is written against it and is thus memory safe. That's a fair definition of memory safety.

Of course, in practice, you will likely use an implementation of that language that uses unsafe memory access. You will likely use an implementation that has escape hatches to call into native code - unsafely. That's a reasonable boundary to have while still calling the language memory-safe. Unsafe in C# was a late addition that can usually be disabled without much peril.
So you’re comparing what sounds like a hand rolled custom build with a no brainer laptop that’s a third of an inch though.
30 tabs is like 30 apps. Once might be a word processor, texting, image editor, etc...
On the other side, our facebook data will never be deleted.
Housing is the crux of this problem and is an issue so intractable, I genuinely don't see a solution. The way the housing market across much of the western world is the way that now is, is because rich people made it that way, and they have all the influence, power and control now, so nothing us small folk can do will likely change things in any meaningful way.

Housing has become a commodity, an investment, and so the rich, with their sloshing, frothing waves of cash, are buying it up at an ever accelerating pace. Not buying it up so they can live in these homes mind you, but buying it up so they can extract rent, extract PROFIT from homes that are meant for people and families to live in. So now, rather than serving as a place for people to live, housing is serving as investment for the rich to get ever richer from.

The real problem is that when it comes to housing, the marginal buyer is now some hyper-leveraged corporation with near limitless access to cheap capital, or some billionaire investor, who'll happily bid 50% over asking as they're planning on renting the house out for the maximum amount possible and bundling their "Assets" into a REIT, and so they'll gladly pay over asking as its just a cost of doing business.

So now you've got the rich through their companies and trusts buying up entire neighborhoods, out-bidding regular folks for homes, raising rents to increase profits, and turning homes that people could once have lived in, into vacation properties and short-term rentals or worst of all letting them sit empty just so they can sell them when the value goes up.

Increasing wages is one absolutely necessary step towards fixing the economy, but real wages would have to rise 100%, 500%, a even f*king 1000% in a lot of places for regular folks to actually be able to afford the kinds of homes that a family could once have afforded on a single middle class income.

So literally the only thing that can fix things is to make housing worth a lot less. But that will never happen because that would cause some already fantastically wealthy people to be a little less wealthy, and the rich would rather people die and go homeless than ever be less rich.
And I am asking you to provide the actual implementation of your hypothetical function equal().

I don't need to know the implementation of the real function == from any programming language because, without looking at any source code I can tell you that it has implicit arguments: a tautology.

If you disagree, then please explain how equality functions.
Concur. My all-time favorite sci-fi novel. And that's reading it in the English translation. It must be sublime in Russian.
Or because they’re working multiple jobs/overtime and do all the chores themselves. Wealthier people have stay at home parents and pay other people to do the housekeeping.
It didn’t get smothered though. Since the early days of the pandemic I haven’t seen any discussion of the pandemic of any appreciable length that doesn’t contain mentions of that hypothesis.
I believe it was also coupled with survey data about how many times the parents experienced financial stress.

If being more terse at the end-of-the-month can be reliably reproduced, what other causitive factor would you propose? And why would it apply to some families but not others? What hints do you have that lead you to the conclusion that poverty and terseness probably share a common cause?
Subsidizing the cost of current production of stuff (whether hardware or immaterial) is an actual concern. The easiest solution of course is to abolish money and private property and to abundantly redistribute power and wealth, but that's not happening anytime soon as privileges cannot be abolished through wishful thinking or self-criticism from the elites.

On the other hand, subsidizing the cost of production of information that's already been produced and account for? That makes no sense from an economic perspective. If you're talking about reaping benefits for past work (not accounting for a "cost" because past production costs nothing in the present by definition), it raises ethical questions: why would the newspaper/editor get paid and not the actual author, now that the logistical work of publishing the article has been accounted for (and even profited upon) by the editor?

There is nothing inherently natural or fair about copyright laws. We need broader perspectives if we want to develop a knowledge economy based on sharing information and resources for social progress, if you'd like to call it like that.
The future is memory safety, but to get there, they would need to rewrite and audit millions of lines of code. Targeted attacks against VIP users don't cause significant PR damage, so why go to all that effort?
If you use a SAFE your investors won't become shareholders until the next round as there will be no valuation now but (likely) with the next round. So, why a cap table now?
This is a joke, right? I've had my M1 for almost a month, and I have zero complaints about the LACK of sound from the fans.
Fortunately, by law of large numbers, if there are about 2.5e7 developers globally, that means there might be 2.5e5 who fit that bill.
From the synopsis, looks like it's based on the Asimov novel.
>"as @AmnestyTech observed and we @citizenlab can confirm, NSO Group's Pegasus spyware delivered via 0-click exploits is no longer "persistent" in the strict sense of the word (i.e., doesn't come back when you reboot). Persistence is achieved via firing the 0-click again. Because the 0-clicks they're using appear to be quite reliable, the lack of traditional "persistence" is a feature, not a drawback of the spyware. It makes the spyware more nimble, and prevents recovery of the "good stuff" (i.e., the spyware and exploits) from forensic analysis."

Oh that's bad.
What are you talking about :D This isn't about who's basket you'd dump your eggs into. The point is, Telegram isn't deploying end-to-end encryption, therefore there is a basket in the first place. Had they used E2EE, it wouldn't matter where the server is located, because the server never ever built a massive trove of messages, regardless of where the server is physically located.

I'm equally against everyone reading my private messages. I don't want to have to choose a country who has my messages, I choose my computer, and the computer of my peer, where ever they are.
> the problems need to be so clear, obvious and powerful that customers would be willing to pay to solve them.

The problems are clear but the solutions need to be clear too. So far many of the alternatives tend to focus more on the tech (decentralized protocols, this or that programming language, etc) than solving the problem. Even worse, sometimes the nature of the tech makes solving the problem more difficult or impossible (decentralized protocols brings a lot of challenges by themselves for example).

I made a comment back in the day about my thoughts on Mastodon and similar alternatives: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20317513
If the system actually worked tobacco would actually be banned and not almost.

Despite being only able to smoke outdoors I still see many young people in Spain taking up the habit.
Consulente SEO SEM Specialist Bari Su Pullipassion
Oops, yep. I mentally dropped a few words there from the quoted part, even though I re-read multiple times. Thanks for bearing with me.
>For something like redis,

Redis is in pretty much the same category. Testing is sort of a valid case, if you are committed to write pure SQL with minimal use of any dialect specifics (but even 'create table' syntax might be different). Running on the real thing is close to no replacement when it comes to databases.

Many databases have docker images nowadays, so it aint hard to run them locally. Likely at a point you'd want to optimize the SQL, itself, rendering the tests incompatible.
The benefits of the units system in the HP 48/49/50 series really cannot be overstated. You don't just get free conversions between compatible unit types, you also get realtime type checking to prevent invalid operations on quantities with incompatible units. This eliminates a very common source of errors, and also encourages more rigorous labeling of quantities with units when you're working on paper.

The TI-89 technically can also compute using quantities tagged with unit information, but the UI for it is too convoluted to be useful.
Lol 30 tabs is a lot? I'm running 32 gb ram on windows i7-6700 3.4 ghz on mini ATX and currently have 883 tabs open, using marvelous suspender and few other tweaks, but still have 95 windows opens (1 tab typically alive in each window minimum excluding my suspension blacklist...). Also have photoshop, notion, and a few other apps going and am running smoothly at 40-70% cpu utilization and 85% memory...
First of all, Pi is not an example of such a number, since it can be defined constructively without requiring physical measurements.

Second, even your proposed mechanism of picking out points would be capable of identification (albeit not computation) in a Turing-complete language. Quite simply, to be able to pick out two points you'd need to create some kind of stable structure that identifies those two points - this could be a metal bar as with the old meter bar, or some other kind of structure / apparatus which has two points in space (at a stable distance) locked in. Crucially though, atomic / quantum configuration of this stabilized apparatus would be encodable in theory, once again providing us with a way to count numbers.

There are of course numbers which are specific to our universe, such as the fine structure constant, that don't have any objective definition without reference to the world. But there are finitely many of these, and they're nameable, just not computable.
It's on wikipedia. It's circumstantial not a smoking gun, but it seems very clear Gislane Maxwell's dad was connected to Mossad.

My personal view is that Epstein was essentially a blackmailer, that was occasionally useful in passing information to intelligence agencies as a result of his activities.
To me, this seems totally backwards.

The corporate presence on the (web|internet) isn't really taking advantage of IP (or TCP or any other internet transport-ish layer protocol). It's taken over the web, loosely defined as a protocol with HTTP at its core.

Switching away from "the internet" buys you only one thing: for now, most corporate online presence will not follow you. But most of the problems that the author and most other people have with this corporate presence relies only on the HTTP+above aspects of the current web. If we switched the web to run on, I dunno, DECnet, and corporations followed, not a single problem (ok, maybe 2 :) would be solved.

All the chit chat in the article about IPv4 vs IPV6, about NAT, about cable ownership: this is just noise. What's wrong with the web, if indeed there is actually wrong with the web at all does not originate in the internet. How many ways does the author think there will ever be of getting a packet across an ocean? The answer is destined to remain in the low single digits (i.e. a very small number of cables, controlled by something, plus perhaps a couple of satellite routings).

The author identifies NAT as the primary cause of some computers not being "first class citizens" online, but a much more fundamental issue is asymmetrical connections. Your computer can pull data at 100MB/sec, but can only push 5MB/sec ... ergo, it can't sensibly act as a server to any widely popular material. You can consume, you cannot publish (widely popular material), without using someone else's network connection. (This asymmetry is not universal, but is still typical).

The "content-centric" alternative proposed by the author is a nice distributed caching scheme. It's fundamentally a technical detail that is of little actual consequence to anyone, other than any impact it has on apparent performance when accessing information. When I want to read an article that a friend just told me about, I do not care where my computer gets it from, as long as it gets it. We already have this in a totally implicit way, via CDNs. The scheme proposed just makes this explicit, and in so doing adds an entirely new layer to content addressing. Anybody familiar with cache architectures is going to see the kinds of problems this can cause, and the potentially insane levels of complexity required to avoid them.

How about we stop trying to "save the web" at all? How about we recognize that "the old web" continues to exist for those who care (and most do not). How about we recognize that the technical aspects of a distributed, hyperlinked content system are probably not likely to be the best substrate for other kinds of networked communication, and that therefore it doesn't matter if the web cannot "do it all".
i've looked into cognitive models before.
they have failed so so badly , because they didn't take stock of the lack of progress.

this is how fields evolve in a competitive landscape. they really gave it their all to cognitive modeling to the exclusion of statistical machine learning, and now the fruits of their work, will, at best, be able to be applied in conjunction with statistical modelling.

frankly, i think this work is going to the graveyard.
one day, someone will create a set of statistical model neural nets, and discover they are seeing the machine create output that resembles analogy making in the manner a cognitive model would hope to achieve.

analogies are more likely an emergent property of learning.
we don't know what learning really IS in the human brain.
our analogies of the brain's own physical learning unit, the neuron's impulse firing.----have led to computational analogies in digital programming, as well as in analog and new hardware.

the hardware has not yet paid off, but brain's in silicon and memristors are on their way in the distant future.
in the present, graph based math---'deep learning' is so effective , that a whole new generation of purpose built GPU units for graph mathematics is expected on the market within a few short years. think GPU's for neural networking at home with super powerful home setups.

right now, the software learning model is so powerful that even if it is as highly opaque as myself and others think it is---meaning it is extremely hard to have a real theory of learning developed off the results------it doesn't matter.

we are unleashing the demon of computational learning that is perhaps not 'intelligent' but can learn well enough to fake a type of intelligence that will overturn industry after industry.
a permanent economic revolution.
software ate the world.
now data will for 20-30 years.

the scary part is that data gathering itself might now be the true competitive advantage at the national scale.
china might have a huge advantage to the u.s. in 'learning' even if it has inferior software models. and europe, the most balkanized is at a permanent disadvantage.

the future of technology means, social concepts of privacy may be inversely related to economic competitiveness. and that means , ultimately, military competitiveness.
I admit to not caring too much about these things. Then Google removed my app without any warning last week (it is now back in the Store)

This has convinced me to move my model to a web-based one

Development is already underway. The scare I got last week fuels my efforts. And WASM is great (and fast!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjeBhXcJ0JQ
Seeing how others have organized their systems helps me with doing my own thing. Thanks a lot for sharing!
It’s a Stanisław Lem novel.
....then show your 'like' 5 seconds of results?
* like - apart from grammatical comparisons, and 'to enjoy,', does it like mean anything anymore, er....innit?
Hopefully not just collection size, but also based on storage medium. You might want to sort stuff which is stored on disk or tape. Why should a standard library only offer solutions for objects stored in memory?