skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Windows decided to go the "always JIT and just cache frequent code blocks" method though. In the end whichever you choose it doesn't seem to make a big difference.

AOT (or, static binary translation before the application launch) vs JIT does make a big difference. JIT always carries a pressure of the «time spent JIT'ting vs performance» tradeoff, which AOT does not. The AOT translation layer has to be fast, but it is a one-off step, thus it invariably can afford spending more time analysing the incoming x86 binary and applying more heuristics and optimisaitons yielding a faster performing native binary product as opposed to a JIT engine that has to do the same, on the fly, under tight time constraints and under a constant threat of unnecessarily screwing up CPU cache lines and TLB lookups (the worst case scenario for a freshly JIT'd instruction sequence spilling over into a new memory page).

> "it knows basically none of the "tricks" available but the _emulation speed_ isn't much slower than the Rosetta 2 emulation ratio "

I still fail to comprehend which tricks you are referring to, and I also would be very much keen to see actual figures substantiating the AOT vs JIT emulation speed statement.
Sounds like a cult leader.
I think a lot of folks forget that Facebook wanted to come in and clean up some of the filth in social media. They felt that by attaching your _real_ name to your posts, instead of a handle as was the traditional practice, that you would have something to lose (social standing, esteem, etc) and so you would be more thoughtful about your actions. The contrasts at the time were reddit, SomethingAwful, and 4chan. There was _definitely_ extant toxicity on the internet and there were funny posts in the early days of GMail that you could stop them from displaying ads by inserting lots of expletives and bad words in your email (and so some would have GMail signatures that just lumped bad words in together and explained it as an ad circumvention thing).

But I think there are a few key innovations that make FB worse for human psychology than previous iterations. Chief among them is the algorithmic newsfeed designed to drive engagement. Outrage certainly provokes responses, but in a chronological feed situation, eventually threads would become so large that the original outrageous situation would be pushed far back and the outrage would go away. Algorithmic newsfeeds bubble these to the top and continue to show them as they get more comments/retweets/shares/etc. They reward engagement in a visceral way that offers perverse incentives.

Secondly is the filter bubble. By showing you content hyper-relevant to your search interests, you can easily fall into echo chambers of outrage and extremism. Internet communities, like IRC channels, had huge discoverability issues. Each community also usually had disparate ways to join them adding another layer of friction. Even if you were an extremist it took dedicated searching to find a community that would tolerate your extremism. Now mainstream platforms will lump you into filter bubbles with other people that are willing to engage and amplify your extremist posts.

Combine horribly narrow echo chambers with engagement-oriented metrics and you'll have a simple tool for radicalization. That way when you're thinking of committing a violent act because of the disenfranchisement you feel in your life and your community, you'll be funneled to communicate with others who feel similarly and enter a game of broad brinkmanship that can quickly drive a group to the extreme. Balkanization and radicalization.
Aside from cost-savings for the business I can’t really think of one.
Its easy to reconcile.

Just remember Rationality is Bounded, ie there are problems chimps with 6 inch brains cant solve. Its the classic Jurassic Park story, where man says he can control anything. And then realizes he cant. By which time its too late.

This is why the road to hell is paved by "good people who have kids" with their good intentions.

FBs issues did not appear yday.

Like the endless war the issues where there right from the start. So why are we talking about it today? Cuz lots of good people didnt do anything, not because they arent good or skilled, because the problem is too complex for them.

This is where Bounded Rationality helps resolve issues. If the problem is too complex, pick a simpler problem.

This is hard for some chimps to do for various reason. So entertaining them is a recipe for disaster. Their narrative will always be- "people are good. People experienced World War 1. They know whats at stake. They lost family, friends, body parts. Many are great Heroes. Trust them. They know what they are doing". And still we got World War 2.

Why? Cause rationality, skill and experince doesnt matter for some problems. All the "good germans" from politicians, to religious leaders, to military and intelligence leaders knew Hitler had to go long before any notion of war entered the minds. Every coup and assassination they ploted they second guessed themselves. All of them ended up dead.
That's right. It was a time when being called a nerd / geek was more of an insult.

I had to argue with my parents when purchasing a modem. They didn't understand it. Using their phone line to call other computers felt like a step not far from trouble.

Computers themselves were not discouraged. In my experience, the average adult in the early 90s saw computers as a glorified typewriter. A job would be advertised looking for 'typing skills'.

Not wanting to go outside and socialise was frowned upon.
Direct air is a red herring. Please let’s not put more money in that tech, it takes away talent and capital from what already works. That and large scale CCS. Both technologies have high risk, super expensive and require heavy subsidies, and only hypothetically work at huge scales (which requires large investments to find out of it even works). Don’t even start me on the pure insanity of geoengineering - we will literally kill our own race or a range of other species by effing that up so bad.

For those jumping in the climate train, welcome on this long slow painful journey. It appears there is some movement to fix it again, and I am hopeful that the balance of power swings towards climate and protecting the planet. We are a funny creature and I don’t trust us in large numbers to do the right thing.

Energy system transformation, reforestation/protecting against development, political power and policy change, are some of the great high impact areas that are already getting lots of momentum but need continual work and effort.

There’s lots in the agricultural arena as well.
Mark Zuckerberg has also been opposing regulation for years, which means you need to qualify your statement: Mark Zuckerberg has been pushing for his preferred regulation as the only regulation, for years. That's nice. Me too. Neither serves the country.
Ahh ok, maybe they just never seemed like genuine apologize to me so I overlooked them. I'll check 'em out, thanks for the heads up.

*edit: found some of them here! https://www.fastcompany.com/40547045/a-brief-history-of-mark...
>A small bit of economic orthodoxy is that for free markets to work, parties need to be informed

Free markets: my definition, almost complete lack of rules on how to trade, exchange information, barter etc. ( except bare minimum rules of protecting one's property, life etc. from direct harm)
It also means if the board was comprised by a diverse set of people (which it is) they could oust him if they wanted (they can't). The public could put pressure on those people much easier than putting sole pressure on him.
Minimum wage where I am is $13.69, and there isn't a property within 50 miles of me for less than $200,000. There's empty plots of land for that much, but nothing with a structure that's livable.

But I take it your retort will be "just move somewhere else."

Just because you managed it where you are, doesn't mean anyone can do it, anywhere.
Working Overtime: NASA’s Deep Space Atomic Clock Completes Mission
Yes, Rowy has no limits on rows as it is actually an Airtable-like experience on Firebase database and not a nocode product that doesn't scale. You can go form MVP to scale without any limitations.
Perhaps the right word is “system” - the combination of software (DNS protocol server software, health checker, BGP agent, and so forth) involved in making the DNS service available (or not, in this case). These could be running on the same computer, or separate ones if you are particularly imaginative.

Unfortunately, “DNS system” means something very different than if you said “load balancing system”, so “server” is simpler.

(Usual disclaimer: work at FB, even on this exact stuff, but not representing it.)
Those "matters of cryptocurrency" matter a lot. A lot of advocates hate inflation. That's a policy position. And it may be reasonable to want democratic control over those policies rather than miner control.
Your sentiment reflects what I see on teamblind.com. It's all TC and leveling up. A ton of people don't give much of a shit about the subject matter.
It halves your risk.
Where is James Damore? He became the celeb du jour. he was correct on most fronts and he was considered toxic.

Google did not want to deal with the mob. Both externally and internally. They came up with a lame reason to let him go.

We are currently seeing people okay with pulling social safety net benefits for choosing not to vaccinate. How can you guarantee that politicos will not buckle similarly.
Different groups get mad at Facebook for different reasons, so inevitably they get a lot of hate.

In the context of the whistleblower:

One of the popular methods of manipulation is to use "harmful to children" as a basis for making an argument. We have seen this countless times in the past on a variety of issues. This is no different. The "harms" that are being highlighted here are equally, if not more, applicable to adults. Children are at a stage in their lives where good parenting can easily offset any potential harm by consuming content on Instagram or Facebook.

One can recognize that this particular topic, like many contemporary topics, is a subset of the overarching libertarianism versus authoritarianism debate, and opinions often cleanly fall on political lines depending on the complaint. In this case the whistleblower has left-of-center politics, so they have a grievance with "disinformation" and "not enough control". There have been previous whistleblowers who have had right-of-center politics, who have cited "censorship" and "biased control" as their grievance. There is ample evidence for the company being guilty of both, with regard to specific instances.

As such there will always be complaints from opposing points of view as to whether the company is doing "enough" to police content, or whether the policing has become biased. Amusingly, you see the reverse of this debate when you look at actual policing in the USA, where the opposite side argues bias in policing and the other side argues for harsher control and punishment.

Those who fall on either side of the spectrum tend to paint with a broad brush some kind of systemic evil conspiratorial agenda at the company, as a consequence of voicing their respective frustrations.

Overall Facebook is a net positive for the world. There are likely activists within the company trying to push agendas, some of whom may be prevailing over others. This is evident by just taking a walk around campus and reading the political messaging that adorns the various shared spaces. These are also largely irrelevant in the long term because if and when it reaches any sort of extreme, eventually the pendulum will swing too far.
I hate how "conspiracy" has been turned into a way to dismiss inconvenient truths.

There is a long and well established history of interference and manipulation of foriegn elections (often by the US). It predates social media and can't be just be blamed on facebook. Pretending this isn't happening is just burying your head the sand.

It isn't a "conspiracy" to think that the most influential elections in the world draws more attention and are more heavily influenced.
I like that you're using spatial analogies because it helps drive the point home. I visualized 50B tCO2 here:
https://twitter.com/ikirigin/status/1425879839886626826

While it seems enormous, it's a very small fraction of the world.
Seems like there’s numerous conflicting studies regarding intermittent fasting especially when different fasting periods are taken into account. Is there any conclusive research regarding just having 2 meals a day? That seems to be the easiest to integrate in day to day life.
Because that's not as profitable.
My wife and I were always able to wait out Family Video. If we had a late fee on one account we'd use the other's account until we got a call to come back, get the late fee forgiven, and get a free rental or something.

They didn't survive the pandemic, but I doubt that was the tipping point.
16 is like the money hall problem. I understand the answer, the answer makes sense to me. And yet but when I think of it how I think of it initially ... it still makes no sense.
Grounded Language
Fundamentally I think it has to do with cultural values.

In the US, we see the ambitious, driven person as the one who wants to work (at least) 5 days a week. We want to believe that outcomes are related to the amount, and not quality, of work put in. This value runs deep to cultural values where idleness is related to sin and “wasted” time[1]. Time spent in economically fruitful endeavors is viewed as important, while other time spent seen as frivolous. Today we see it manifested in startup culture where founders humblebrag about intense number of hours worked, like they’re the true believers in this value system. Larger company execs want to emulate them, hoping their employees show the same “hustle”. Many Americans often don’t even know what to do with their free time!

So in the US there’s a lot of cultural baggage to overcome.

(Of course, this value isn’t held in all cultures, where enjoying the finer things in life has cultural significance.)

1 - https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/idle_hands_are_the_devil%27...
I'll be honest they lost me at "client side, offline first, JavaScript database".

And then they lost me again when they didn't format hrefs different to normal text so I couldn't copy the text.
I wonder if they meant longest idle accounts. It would make sense to throttle them if they're just running tmux with an idle shell or ten. Like a bigger renice that shuts off when the process stops being idle.
Would you suggest just reading reports along with a dictionary or are any prerequisites?
Apple Pay Can Be Abused to Make Contactless Payments from Locked iPhones
This is very interesting but I think it relies heavily on interpretation.

For example there exists models of ZFC where all "real numbers" are definable, but said model does not include all the actual real numbers, it excludes any number that is not definable in ZFC. The issue is that the term "real number" is overloaded. In the formal sense it may refer only to numbers that are members of a model in which undefinable numbers are excluded. In another sense the term "real number" refers to actual real numbers as we humans intend for them to exist but do not have a precise formal definition.

This actual set of real numbers does indeed contain members that are not definable in ZFC or any formal system, the issue is that there is no way to formalize this actual definition.

This is similar to what another poster mentioned about Skolem's paradox:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28767108
1. Just. Fucking. Unload. The. Tab. Already. I keep tabs around for context and reference. Lots of them. [1]

2. Preserve. User. State. I don't want the page to reload. I want what had been there to be restored. Page position, content, any inputs or adjustments I'd made. Not updated data, but previous state.

3. Do. Not. Lose. My. Shit. I can accomplish this far better myself than you will ever have need to do.

4. Any tab last viewed > 10--15 minutes ago is all but certainly fair game. Just peel it off disk quickly when resumed, that's all I ask.

All that said, this is progress, thank you, I don't want to sound ungrateful.[2] But there is so much futher to go.

________________________________

Notes:

1. 1,530+ at last count. Don't judge me, unless you're a sphynx of black quartz, and then only my vow.

2. A bit late for that, I'm aware.
There are different challenges with moving on from an abusive work environment too. I felt gaslit in my experience, and encountered people who won't sympathize and dismiss the negative effects (while abusive romantic relationships are more understood).

In my experience, I realized I could spend a lifetime processing it and feeling bitter, or do my best to forget and let it go. It was helpful for me to change my environment and social circle, disconnect from past colleagues on social media, and change industries for a bit.

Things haven't been perfect for me, but I'm most back to where I used to be with effort and belief in myself (like 90% there, though I'm still more fragile if I make mistakes; though my current boss is particularly kind). It took a year to get mostly over it, though still unmotivated, and about a year and a half to feel recovered. To prevent it in the future, I also balance multiple projects, so my performance at work isn't as big of a deal to my identity anymore (which counterintuitively makes me better at my job).
> I use very few bookmarks now [...] if I need it I can find it again.

I have thousands of Org files that include hundreds of thousands of references to sources of information, and I'm confused by your workflow. How do you quickly relocate sources of the highest quality information that aren't among the top search results for relevant queries (which is the result of search engine rankings mostly being popularity contests whose participants are dummies)?

For example, I recently bought a new toilet after reading in-depth discussions about toilets at a small web forum for plumbers who were far more knowledgeable than people at related subreddits, etc. I don't remember the name of that forum, but it's in my toilets.org file, along with 452 other toilet-related links. Why would I want to relocate that web forum and the other 452 sources of information in toilets.org the next time I buy a toilet?
Usenet isn’t social media and doesn’t have a feedback/reward system.
I don't get why Twitter always gets a free pass on the harms from misinformation. I have seen so much fake news around vaccines, election integrity on there not to mention that it's the nexus of woke cancellation mobs. I think it's because Twitter is seen as doing more (banning Trump, putting notifications on posts), but is that actually the case relative to what FB is doing?
This happened at a company I was at. Hyper-growth startup, huge aura around it.

A few high-level folks arrived whose perfection in smooth talking was rivaled only by their enjoyment of wreaking havoc on teams & relationships. They brought in their friends, paranoia and rumors spread, culture went off a cliff, CEO was confused what happened. Mass exodus followed.
Everyone should pay very little in tax (or in fact nothing, if at all possible).

That's common sense.
The GP asked if Facebook database, accounting, etc are complicit. Yes.

You're asking if capital flows between 2 unrelated entities sharing ownership matter? No.

You're asking if diffuse responsibility via elected representation matters? Yes, even if you didn't vote for the representative, it does because they act on your behalf.

Obviously, one should focus on what one can change directly where possible.

There's no dichotomy--disgusting cowardice can be pragmatic. After all, FB has to pay someone to run its databases and to close its books and therefore someone is going to get paid. But it doesn't have to be you. You have a choice.

An increasingly interlinked system makes one increasingly responsible, not less. Unless you want to throw up your hands and to declare utter powerlessness. I can't live that way.
Value of data owned by FB is precious today and this still growing in value. The problem is as a user you are taken for granted. You have no information as a user on what research studies your data is used or will be used in the future. I do not think FB realizes the ethical responsibility of holding such valuable data.
It's a distinction without a difference.

A regular US person gets a US tax credit for taxes paid to foreign governments. But if that's less than they would've paid to Uncle Sam, they still have to pay the difference here.

That's not true for these overseas subsidiaries. That, as you said, is a major reason these subsidiaries even exist (I'm sure local laws also require them in many cases, but still).
NASA selects GE Aviation and MagniX to develop electric aircraft engines
If every whole positive number is a fraction, but not every fraction is a whole positive number, then colloquially, I wouldn't define them as having "as many" elements as each other. Now, if you want to say they have the same cardinality (and you define cardinality as existing a bijection), then I would agree fully.
I'm curious if you think HN needs to have such a warning banner.
Agreed. Any moderately complex system can have emergent behavior. This is a fundamental feature of complexity. You can sometimes take advantage of it, by finding unexpectedly profitable features that only exist at scale or in conditions you happened into.

When that emergent behavior both increases profits and takes advantage of your customers in negative ways, the relationship moves from something symbiotic to something parasitic. This is where it begins to cross the line and people start throwing "evil" around when describing you.

I don't think most companies are out to create a worse world, but many do it until they are forced to reset.
Hmmm, it does not work for me as it redirects to /setup and then it goest to https://rowy.app/404 and that's it!
Anyone who uses SMS two factor auth is insane. I'm thinking of TDAmeritrade, which requires it for their login reset procedure.
My sister and I used to figure out who had more candy at halloween by lining up the pieces next to each other. The concept of bijection might be more intuitive than counting itself.
Does it? What exactly do you think it reveals? I’m not a Republican, and haven’t voted for a Republican for any office for decades. So what does that tell you?

It might reveal that I am not happy with the political party that once upon a time were liberal and good but are now just filled with power hungry intolerant authoritarians. At least the republicans don’t pretend that they are good people.
'Deserve to be rich' is the wrong frame. What is a sensible procedure to decide who deserves to be rich and who doesn't? The say so of powerful politicians? 'Raised to the top via a combination of skill, luck and shrewdness' is more accurate. The fundamental problem is that the world is governed by power laws. As the size of the ecosystem grows (hello globalization) at some point it becomes obvious that no humans can effectively control the largest of the emergent entities. We need to break up Facebook, we need to break up the Internet, we need to break up the global economic system. We need to add friction back into the world. A lot of friction.
In theory perhaps, but in practice it turns out that casting a clear distinction from the other party drives turnout.
>>> 18. A one-in-billion event will happen 8 times a month: https://gwern.net/Littlewood

This is certainly counterintuitive, given that one-in-a-billion and 8 per month have different units of measure.