skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The content on/recommended by TikTok has two main interesting characteristics as I observed:

- Being very "personally relevant": It doesn't only recommend generally popular stuff. It can be very quick at picking up some niche interests of yours.

- Feel very authentic. TikTok makes it easier for "ordinary people" to get millions of views "accidentally". And as a result, many popular video feels very authentic, which might be preferred compared to curated content like in Netflix or even YouTube.
Why Bitcoin Could Become a Legitimate Currency in the Future
One of the many problems with the abortion-crime hypothesis is that it is US-specific. For example, in Romania the government banned abortion in 1966 and instituted harsh punishments for illegal abortions. Yet no one has shown that this correlated with a crime wave in the late 1980s as one would expect if free abortions really decreases crime.
This is actually spot on. I was offered a promotion into this space which I sensibly declined as money is a poor motivator for me. This was a surprise to the company. The poor guy who did get promoted is stuck with exactly
This situation.
You can go to anywhere right now and buy a b&w only laser printer and it won't have the dots. The secret tracking dots thing only works if you have yellow ink on white paper- it's hard to see. If your printer attempts to "secretly" add black dots to white paper everyone will notice.
You are guaranteed that only code you call will be run. Sure you can call anything you want but the point is you have full control over what that is. If you yield execution with an await, you no opt out of that guarantee.

Its a fundamental concurrency pattern used in a lot of languages, often for UI threads and such. There's a lot of information on this topic and it certainly is about async/yielding.
That's a pretty narrow view of the purpose of an ID card...

If only there were other ways of knowing how to differentiate people when it's really necessary, you know, for medical or justified legal reasons.
If you find yourself assuming someone else is motivated by fear, first ask yourself if they might be motivated by truth-seeking.

I recommend applying Bayes Rule:

If someone says they were abducted by aliens, first think about how likely that is to have happened. Then account for the probability that someone who says that it happened is confused or lying about that situation. Then maybe ask a clarifying question.

If someone says they were frustrated and confused by python packaging, first think about how likely that is to have happened. Then account for the probability that someone who says that it happened is confused or lying about that situation. Then maybe ask a clarifying question.

——————————

Personally, I think it is much more common for people to be confused about configuring and packaging software than it is for people to be totally clear yet also confused about whether or not they are confused.
How about the American Medical Association make things better by increasing the number of doctors that can be licensed instead of this vacuous bullshit? They are one of the primary reasons that healthcare expenses are as high as they are and they want a fucking pat on the back for this?
you talked about mental suffering, what about people who are emotionally attached to the planet and don't want to destroy it?
“You're saying a productivity increase that amounted to around 20% across the entire workforce is mostly attributable to advances in HFT and logistics in the retail industry?”

No one ever suggested that. It’s the excess productivity growth of 1995-2005 that is largely attributable to retail and what improvements there were in the productivity of trading financial instruments.
We used to think that machines would be bad at arithmetic and pure logical reasoning, and good at the more primitive animalistic ones, but it turns out the latter is a much harder problem.

Also, self-driving cars were mostly hyped up by companies, FSD is quite obviously a hard problem, much closer to general intelligence than the average NN application.
UML done "right" is when you relegate it to simply being a shared vocabulary used when you have a need to communicate details, the same way "everyone" understands a basic flow chart.

Having a shared vocabulary is great.

Modelling everything out with it, on the other hand, is a nightmare.
I wish you the best luck finding a good proxy for the externalities of any purchase!
I will buy a paper copy of any books which I like and continue to read or use as reference. But until they have earned that status then it’s Kindle and PDF I’m afraid. Books have a storage burden which is not to be underestimated.

My current list of keepers is only three titles as a starting point and two are technical books.
This is talking about private libraries, which is just a fancy way of referring to one's personal book collection. If you have a "head librarian", then it's not a private library (unless you're obscenely rich).
It’s as much FSD as my robot vacuum not hitting the wall…

These are just overhyped drive assist tools that market themselves immorally as something they aren’t.
These low-level things are hardware dependent.

SPARC and Itanium are dead, and these two are the only platforms being benchmarked in the article.

This makes the article useless, we only care about AMD64 and ARM these days.
I knew someone more or less like him. My friend went through high school and later even got into university. He was able to read but very slowly and he read everyday. He had this very large (and complicated) romance with him and he would read one page per day pointing at each word painfully slowly. I have no idea if he managed to understand the story or if it was just an exercise. Just like the person in the article, he was very popular with girls and managed to pull a number of similar stunts to go through tests and exams.

Eventually he dropped out of university and got a job. This was the 90s and he started playing with computers and something just clicked inside. Sudenly he could read normally and became quite proficient with computers back then. I suppose it was some kind of learning disability that went away with time and persistence on his part.

It also shows that schools are not equiped to deal with learning disabilities and push those pupils forward in the hope the problem goes away. BTW, this was in Europe, so it is not a US specific problem.
> I think there are very few, if any, things in software development that have an analogue in that second category.

Sure, if you're positing that the average developer has a PhD in computer science, or software engineering.

But for the average software developer, gaining an understanding of the implementation details of their preferred programming language, or relational database, or browser HTML rendering engine, etc. (or any of a half dozen or so other systems or components they regularly use as black boxes), would in fact require a similar level of effort.

For any given X, an "X Developer" can mean a developer using X, or a developer of X. The latter is where the analogies lie.
The motivation in general is to appease the "tough on crime" voters. Cases like this are simply the inevitable consequence of laws and policies that flow from that.
Parole Board Members Blog – July 2021
Exactly. What is with this fascination of removing information from code?

My first thought when reading this was, ok, OP is "annoyed" at having to "run functions to see if they return a value or a Promise", then goes on to describe a world in which you have no idea whether anything returns a value or a Promise when reading the code.

That's 100x worse. At least when I'm writing it I'm probably running the function anyway. And it's worth pointing out that you shouldn't need to run anything to know what it returns, that's what docs are for. Or you could just look at the return statement. But even if for whatever reason you don't know what data you're working with, I'd rather figure it out once and then make it explicit, than have to figure it out every single time the code is read (which could be hundreds of times, or more).
> Few would have predicted the results we’re seeing today in 2010.

That's hardly accurate - didn't Musk and Co. promise self-driving cars by 2012? We're in 2020, and the SDC's are great for making youtube videos, but not any good at piloting a vehicle without human intervention.

Since the 90s it has been clear that the only thing holding back what we have today is limited processing power. While there may be some new insights and directions in AI, they are not "general" and they require 3 orders of magnitude more processing power for a lot smaller improvement in performance.

What has been clear since 2010 is that this field has passed the point of diminishing returns already. We throw vastly more computational power at problems that we ever did before, and then call the result an improvement.

Deep blue beat the best human at chess using 11.8 GFLOPS of computational power. Alphago beat the best human at go using 720000 GFLOPS of power. The complexity difference between Chess and Go are within a single order of magnitude - 10x to 99x difference in complexity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_complexity). The difference in AI processing power to beat the best human between Chess and Go is between 4 and 5 orders of magnitude (1000x and 100000x).

This does not look like a success to me - it looks like a brute-force approach. If you spend 10000x more resources for a 10x more benefit, you're at the point of diminishing returns.

Here's a great paper that should be written (but won't be) - plot the improvements in AI and the usage of computational power for AI on the same chart.

From the 90s (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_self-driving_cars#1...):
"The robot achieved speeds exceeding 109 miles per hour (175 km/h) on the German Autobahn, with a mean time between human interventions of 5.6 miles (9.0 km), or 95% autonomous driving."

Yup, 95% autonomous. Today we have 95.x% autonomous with roughly 10000x the resource power thrown at the problem.

So, yeah, your assertion that "Few would have predicted the results we’re seeing today in 2010." is wildly off mark, we predicted more than what we see today because we did not expect to hit a point of diminishing returns quite so quickly.

The people who did the 95% SDC in 1997 would have been disbelieving if anyone told them, in 1997, that even with 10000x more processing power thrown at the problem and new sensor hardware that was not available to them, it won't get much better than what they had.
There’s no connection between falling prices and depression. At least that’s what Milton Friedman concluded in A Monetary History of the United States, even though he initially assumed there would be.
Best Primitive Bamboo Fishing Technique
In its defence, this is just a guy posting some observations and a quick book review on his blog, which is awesome. I don't think it was intended as a TikTok analysis for the HN crowd.
A funny side note here is that ~2018 Facebook was crushing it in terms of minutes/day/user due to auto play videos with good next-video recommendations. Then they decided explicitly to disable auto play. They even switched to a different internal metric to explicitly discourage optimizing for this type of engagement.

That being said, most of the big winners in the auto play era were from professional studios or had some kind of financial backing. TikTok seems to have a lot more viral amateur content. Good for them
Not to get into the rest of the discussion, but I disagree with the classification of ML as a young field. AI is an established field and I would argue that nothing in modern ML is _fundamentally_ so different that it would justify classifying it as a new field.
I don't think discovery is what TikTok offers either but admittedly I have only seen it in action third hand. How often do you see things that are truly novel to your interests?

My impression was that it's no different to other feed based apps in that it hones in on a few topics and you end up in a pretty narrow content bubble.
If you continue to operate under the status quo without comment, then you are implicitly supporting the status quo.

For example, if you follow Chinese laws by banning anyone from your platform who criticise China in any fashion, you are upholding the Chinese status quo.

Now, you can say "that's the fault of the law, not of me". To which I would ask, do you actually expect laws to be the arbiter of morality? By that logic then anything immoral should be made illegal (libertarians reading this should be frothing at the mouth at this notion).

Of course, you could argue that it's not the law that ought to arbite morality, but the customer. In which case, why would you not understand why customers would expect game companies to have an opinion on politics, and pressure said companies when said opinion is unpalatable? You just (hypothetically) said you expect them to be the arbiters of morality.
Very smart!

One of my favourite pastimes with Hacker News is thinking about how commenters have been trained by playing games to follow incentives and game optimisation (gaming the system).
And yet grown men jumped at the chance to kidnap the governor and took steps to enact it. I don't feel one whit of sympathy for such individuals, especially the militant proud boy types that preach white supremacy and violence. What balanced adult would go along with a kidnapping of a governor?
You won the internet today IMO
> Erlang is compiled to bytecode, and the yield points are between each instruction sort of.

This is basically what I'm saying... at some point nothing is preemptive ie: at the instruction level.

> that's a huge part of my point about the beam not really being preemptive.

OK but I think that's really semantics, it doesn't really matter though. You are right that BEAM can't yield within an instruction or during FFI. If you think that means it isn't preemptive, ok, but as I said I think at some point you end up with "nothing is preemptive" and then "why do we have the word preemptive" and then "because it's useful to describe systems like BEAM".

> Yes, that's my point. In erlang the conceptual arrow goes (resiliency => not-really-but-kinda-like-actors). In these other systems, or at least the ones I've peeked at, like pony and bastion the logic goes (actors => underpants gnomes => something like erlang). It's completely backwards.

Sure, actors aren't "the point". They just satisfy important properties that are necessary for resiliency. Pony takes a very very different approach from Erlang. Bastion seems closer.

I don't think "distance from Erlang" is really important or interesting though. Inspiration from Erlang is present in many of these systems, whether they re-implement the exact concepts or not.
> If he had called on me I was going to get out of my chair and take two steps, grab my chest, drop to the floor and hope they called 911.

Used this tactic many times myself. You pull it once, they call 911. You pull it twice, they usually do it again. You pull it three times...an awkward silence fills the room...after the sixth time, my boss just carried on with the meeting, and I stopped getting invited. I think they call this life hacking.

I now do it everywhere...in the line at the DMV clutches heart, wife nagging clutches heart, kid wants new shoes clutches heart. People say you can't outrun your problems...in reality, all you need to do is stay calm, pretend to have a heart attack, and your problems just melt away. I think I am going to write a self-help book.
> code is easier to read when...

This is almost always a subjective opinion. I've worked on many projects where people reformat large portions of the codebase to make it "easier to read", and in the end they waste a bunch of time, make using `git blame` a pain, and subjectively either make no difference in code readability or make the code harder for half the team to read.

> I'd like the compiler to reformat code...

Why is this the compiler's job? Most people aren't reading code after it's been compiled. In most of the languages I've worked with, this is handled by a formatter + styleguide/config that either runs in the IDE on save or on a git hook, or both.
Correction: Vaporwave is more based.
While 13 years old and resulting from a robbery he was intimidated into. Life without possibility at parole is hardly proportional to that, not to mention the extended period of inhuman solitary confinement.
The word 'enterprise' alone is enough reason to walk away for me. Some companies have hundreds working with those titles. Beyond my understanding what they all do.
Presumably GC is talking about how modern economists frequently say that inflation is necessary for growth, but restaurant prices staying the same from 1840-1925 (which certainly could not be described as a period of stagnation) seems to be a counterpoint to that claim.

And then extending that, one could make the argument (and cryptocurrency maxis frequently do) that inflation is really only good for the existing upper class, who like it because it makes it easier to pay off their debt (of the "building a factory" variety, not credit cards) and because the wealthy own most real assets (e.g. property) that don't get devalued by inflation.

I haven't done enough analysis myself to say whether I think this argument holds water, but that is the argument I assume GC would make and I've done my best to steelman.
Hi, thanks for the comment! You're absolutely right, people will save time/cost in AI model dev (assuming that's what you're referring to:)

I'm not sure I agree with there being a sacrifice in quality. In the AI marketplace space, models are usually curated in-house by their own team of AI experts. The implicit assumption is that they are "experts" (which, they usually are). The models you'll see will be curated by hand, but with us, we'll automate this curation by displaying the performance of the model (Think click on a model, and see how it performs on a dataset). It's arguably the most important aspect of the model.

Also, who's to limit where the expertise come from? The online community of data scientists is large and a Kaggle GM (who's day job isn't even DS/AI!) could have more relevant model building experience than any in-house data scientist. As is the case with any large group of technical expertise, there's a spectrum of skill but our marketplace should self-sort for the best anyway. Hope this clears your question up!
That's the classic Chomsky model.

What I've seen the last few years is actually way stripped down and optimized for quick consumption. Basically:

1. Pick a contemporary topic.

2. Pick the 2 major opinions on said topic. If only 1 exists currently create the 2nd one.

3. Start forming 2 distinct audiences.

4. Hypnotize first one with quick proved methods of social engineering.

5. Hypnotize second one with quick proved methods of social engineering.

6. Let them fight it out and make the big bucks off the war you just created.

It's basically virtual gladiator fights with often real life consequences.
This has also been my experience.

Clients will always try to push as much as possible. Ie. if a task is now faster to do, the client will ask for that productivity improvement. It makes sense, if you continue to charge the old price and "keep" the productivity improvement for yourself, the client will eventually go elsewhere, where the productivity improvement is passed to him.

You can somewhat mitigate the problem if you do creative work.
The time spent trying to set it up is worth requiring a label on the box. I sort of assume it is already required. You need to agree to conditions to create an account anywhere, surely a product needs to tell you about it's data vacuum before you spend hundreds of dollars on it.
I hate seeing articles about Benadryl. Almost none of them talk about any of the side effects that I had when I was a recreational user. Akathisia. Inner restlessness. It is the worst feeling ever. Plus all of these articles always talk about how it's "like acid". What in the holy fuck? No! It's the feeling of staying up for 5 days in a row condensed into 4 to 6 hours. You'll be manually breathing and unable to sleep.
Those probably lead to a few percent of efficiency increases. In agriculture already you see orders of magnitude increases if you look in how many people used to work in it and how many people work in it today. In Industry the efficiency increases can be even higher.
The important thing is that I can't buy them where I live, and neither can anyone I know. No - people cannot use bitcoin as a real-world currency to perform daily tasks. Can you right now stop all transactions in dollars or other currency and do everything in bitcoin? My guess is that no you cannot.
Millions of vaccines are about to expire
Maybe not async as I think the await keyword is probably enough on its own. As for why it exists...

Await/explicit yielding enables cooperative multitasking where the programmer has exclusive control of some execution context, be it a thread or fiber or whatever, until they decide to yield.

Without that you only have implicit scheduling and execution could be yielded at unpredictable times. The programmer then needs to add other things like semaphores to specify the critical sections and you run the risk of deadlocks.

There might be a new language that comes along but right now await exists for a reason.
I’m not sure what this role even does. As far as I see them they just appear in meetings once in a while to mess up our (the actual dev team) carefully balanced schedule by suddenly requiring us to do something completely different.

Like suggesting it would be better to stick with Javascript over Typescript since it would be more stable.
Clusterboard A64 Insidious Reset Problem: Solved
You can't kill what already is dead. That's Vaporwave [0]. Maybe I'm a bit biased since I'm an avid fan of Vaporwave. There's subgenres for everything, Mallsoft, Future Funk, Broken Transmission/Signalwave...

From sunsetcorp's "angel" [1] to 猫 シ Corp.'s "Palm Mall Mars" [2] there's a decade of really high quality releases.

Also, Bandcamp and YouTube provide endless days worth of Vaporwave. Thanks to them I discovered obscure artists like Kanal Vier (German), Canal+ (French) [3] or Jesse Cassettes.

References:

[0] Phoenix #2772 - You Are Already Dead: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AO6CaqAH_K4

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dN0czUMRMU8

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cc5Yz1TnOVY

[3] https://canalplus.bandcamp.com/track/doute