skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Dare I say Google embracing and pushing Kotlin on the Android ecosystem was the last good thing I can remember Google doing. The language is such a joy to to work in without the pitfalls that come with Scala
This feels overly optimistic about a lot of points. Maybe even to the point of toxic positivity, in my opinion. The main question is a good one, but the rest of the article reads like celebration of the sayings found on motivational posters.

I want to be successful so that I can do the things I want to do in life without worrying about providing for my family. I don't need fancy things or an important title.
For what percentage of the population? Going with an easy example of 12$/year for a .org - I can tell you I can think of exactly 0 people in my circle of friends who would put down 1200$ for a domain.
> I'm not really seeing how regulation would really fix the scenario in the OP. What regulations that are likely to pass would prevent Apple and Google from removing apps arbitrarily?

Forcing them to allow alternative app stores for starters. The only reason they can get away with doing this stuff is because they each have 100% market share.
> unprincipled, easily-duped, low-information voters

The Iraq war was authorized by Congress including most of the Democrats and The NY Times and other left media backed the war, at least at first. It’s sad to say that it was a bipartisan war albeit with a vocal minority who opposed it.
I'm sure, but what I'm saying what proposals that are realistically going to pass do that? Look at the history of software regulation, it generally restricts things.
Some Snippets of Physics History from Magazines in 1987
Thanks for your reply. I can't speak for your past or how that affects
you now, but you'll not be the first or last to be surprised by the
course of their creations, I've built medical robotics for battlefield
surgery that, with a minor twist, became systems for killing.

Accepting that duality is part of a mature stance as a
technologist. Nobody's asking you to be a futurologist and take
responsibility for the sins of all your progeny.

Maybe you did the right thing to not talk about your creation whose
"potential downside seems to outweigh the benefits". At least you
thought about it. I chose to put mine out there, blind to the future,
but in good faith. Whether we are optimists or pessimists, guided by
hope or fear may be just aspects of personality and not something I'd
judge another for.

Regardless, the maxinm "Just because you can doesn't mean you should"
has never had a time to shine so brightly in.

But that's not what I'm talking about.

> I'm not saying that we should abdicate all responsibility

No, you don't get to abdicate _any_ responsibility, and that's nothing
to do with hubris. The second Kantian postulate, less well known than
the categorical imperative or golden rule is that we must always act
as if we are moral agents. You don't get to have the hubris of being a
creator without the commensurate hubris of bearing responsibility.
Hubris it may be (because some would argue that we create nothing that
isn't given to us by <deity>). But calling it that doesn't get you off
the hook.

> Thinking carefully about and being good stewards of our creations
presupposes that we can predict their effects

Not at all. That would indeed be hubris. Being a good parent does not
presuppose I know every future action of my child, Being a good/moral
parent merely requires that I take close interest, and act with proper
love/attention to their development.
There aren't a lot of good proxy development frameworks. There are decent lower level libraries, and proxy servers with limited scriptability.

I've spent the last 4 years at Fly.io wishing for a nice, full featured, proxy framework. This looks pretty darn good to me.
Of course. Wow, I never thought about management like that before. But particularly in software development it makes so much sense for people to jump toward this sort of mindset.

There really is an art to scaling problems to humans so the individual work (across management and engineering) falls within the sweet spot of cognitive saturation. TIL yet another dimension that can go sideways.

The signal to noise ratio is very appreciated.
You probably know it but you don't need to copy and paste in you terminal, you can use pipes.
ssh myuser@myip "cat > myfile" < myfile

and use tar to stdout, untar from stdin to transfer directories. It can even be compressed while archiving or at ssh level.

or rsync over ssh.
If the video's presentation style isn't for you the original site it's talking about is probably more your cup of tea: https://nvlabs.github.io/instant-ngp/
It's a reverse proxy so it's "pray", not exactly confidence inspiring! :-)
Thank you for the positive feedback. You made my day.

Your breakdown is a good window into the complexity of the systems involved here, and what's at stake. One looming fear I have, is that tools like VR headsets will make the coming tide rip through more people, more brutally. Our necks are so fragile and have such a huge impact on our breathing, eyesight, cognitive function, etc etc, that it's hard to overstate the importance of taking care of them.

One slight advantage programmers and knowledge workers have is that looking at the involved parts can become a fun game. What exercises have the highest benefit? What makes me feel better? What should I avoid on the basis of anecdotes, personal experience and physiological science?

I've found that making little discoveries around how these muscles work had an oversized positive effect on my wellbeing, with little cost. For example, just yesterday I discovered the muscle that runs from the edge of our lips up to the outside corners of our eyes. Kneading them a bit, getting them released, has made me feel like I just installed a brand new jaw on my head. It's a weird type of fun haha
I would have had no problem pointing the wrong thing out if she hadn't 'got it' herself, but I knew she would.

The thing to avoid here is being the know-it-all who tells everyone how things should be done when, given just a second, those people would figure it out anyway. Nobody likes that guy.
What are the odds that there's an AWS employee that will backronym this as part of their L7 promo doc for 2023?
I think that was among them now that you mention it.
Another one. How many stories like this never make it to the front page?
But you wouldn't be a midget. You'd be a 2 year old toddler body with an adult head.
https://web.archive.org/web/20201130103602/https://www.math....
I started to write a reply to this, but realised it was turning into a full blog post in its own right, so I've copied it out for later, and will give a skeleton reply here.

Some notes you can take while you're sitting at a machine. You can probably type as fast as you can write, possibly faster, so typed notes can go straight into whatever system[0] you use.

Other notes occur when you're walking, or eating, or meditating, or exercising. For those I have two processes. One is simply use the "Notepad" app on my Android phone, hit the microphone, and dictate directly. The other is to write it on paper and mark it as "unfiled". These are unrefined notes. Later I revisit them and convert them into the first type of note, and, as above, insert them into my system, then mark them as "filed" (or just delete them).

But how do you insert them into your system? For some people it's just a case of recording them in a searchable repository, and there they leave them until such a time as they perform the right search.

However ...

In my opinion, the value of a note-taking, note-preserving system is not in simply having lots of notes. For me, the value is in the "conversation" that I have with my repository. That conversation happens whenever I choose to interrogate the system, but it also happens as a part of the process of inserting notes.

Inserting notes is an active process. I don't just "write and forget-until-searched". Inserting a note means finding a place to insert it, devising and using hashtags, connecting this note to other notes, creating backlinks, adding annotations to other notes, and generally enriching the whole system.

It's working for me.

[0] This is entirely another kettle of fish.
The burden of proof is on the person claiming something is true.
No, no one cares generally, but people who are involved or heavily invested in an ecosystem may be interested in new libraries/tools in that ecosystem.
Here are two papers on this topic. In particular, the first is the shorter version (with a better/more journal friendly layout) and second is basically the technical report for the research. It does show some support for your hypothesis compiled languages are more energy efficient. C ranks in at #1 and Python is last at #15.

There is also a paper that I can’t find (I’m on my phone) that was done in conjunction with a Google researcher that reaches similar conclusions.

1 - https://greenlab.di.uminho.pt/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/sle...

2 - https://haslab.github.io/SAFER/scp21.pdf
Actually, it just needs to be context sensitive. If I have an English document and I have an index which has an entry for Zsigmond, it would be placed between Zebra and Zygote. But, if I have a Hungarian document, then the correct ordering would be to have Zsigmond after Zebra and Zygote. Any correctly-implemented program that deals with sorting should not be assuming it can just sort on code point¹ and Hungarian is one of the standard collations that is part of the Unicode reference implementations so it shouldn't be a problem. The fact that a lot of software is badly-implemented is not an excuse for software to continue to be so.

I did a quick check and saw that I can specify Hungarian in MySQL as a collation for a table and I also know that it's available in Java and even JavaScript.

⸻

1. This sorting is wrong not just for Hungarian but for every language including English which would expect, e.g., naïve to be sorted between nag and nanny and not after nay.
I ended up building mine with extremely standard html/css (no js but that was by accident). I didn't want to fall into the old trap of the writer who obsesses over his tools and never ends up writing anything.

Basically I just copy the previous blog entry, change the content and update the index page with a new link. The entire prep doesn't take more then two minutes.

I don't have features like tags/rss, although I guess I could do those manually too, but the way I see it, I'll worry about that when/if I have enough content.

I'm hosting it on GitHub pages because it's free but I could copy the folder onto any web server and be good to go. I was just checking out neocities which is pretty cool and works in a similar way.

https://neocities.org/
Having each rule be an example of what is ruled against is amusing, but it would be more instructive if each rule showed examples where the rule was not followed and yet the result was good.

Conceiving of that idea clarifies for me that there are probably only two of the rules that would never be disobeyed to good effect: to proofread, and to check for redundancy.

As I have not intentionally followed any of the rules in this post I expect it is very bad.
Attending to the World
I don't have anything to add except that for some reason, I viscerally remember the first time I heard of Tay-Sachs disease in a high school classroom through a video about genetics.

Something made me feel so disturbed about this one disease above all else because of the seeming hopelessness of the situation coupled with the rampant cruelty of how it kills kids from the inside and seemingly reverses developmental progress.

I don't know why I just remember the moment I learned about this, but this is great news. Hopefully this is the first in many such therapies.
This one is tough because it doesn't feel like any one person or group is pushing this meme so there is no interface to push back on.

I've always felt bad for the Karens since this has been going on.
P2P can't work once you have more than a few participants.
In Zig you can return error unions (either a value or an error) from functions. Values can be null unions (either a value or null).

For example !?u64 is a type that's either an error, a null or a 64-bit unsigned integer.
Tokyo actually isn’t growing that fast in population. They just construct a lot of homes there because the Japanese don’t like to buy second hand ones (so tear down the 30-40 year old house and build a new one).
> Who needs to know the detailed hardware structure? Compiler writers maybe, but they experience and order of magnitude more conflicts then.

I think this Usenet posting was written in the early 1990s, when a large number of people were probably still using macro assemblers to write large programs, and may have also been writing binary patches for those programs back when that was easier (no relocations to worry about!). It's definitely more of a "cool fact" than something you'd immediately apply, but it's the kind of thing I could see being useful to an assembly programmer of the period.

For my N=1 experience: I've written compact x86 decoders in HDLs before, and this octal mapping of the opcode structure was extremely useful in helping me determine an optimal (in terms of minimal gate counts) decoder structure. But that is indeed a very niche use case.
It’s a bit like Schneier’s Law. You can put in place protections that you personally cannot workaround, but that doesn’t mean someone with sufficient means and motivation would also be blocked.
It is possible to define an upper boundary for "this is not conscious" and a lower boundary for "this is conscious" with grey area in between them.

Thus, even if we cannot clearly state for any given animal whether it is or is not conscious, we can still clearly state that, say, a coffee maker is not conscious, even if it has rudimentary processing capability, or that a person is.

As I implied in another comment[0], I believe it would be both possible and valuable to construct a set of conditions that we collectively feel are necessary, if not sufficient, to define consciousness. That way, we could at least rule it out as long as no AI meets those minimum standards.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30409569
You're giving the article more credit than it's earned.

Indeed, a developer should understand the risks and benefits associated with using an email address on domains they control vs. domains someone else controls.

Too bad the article doesn't make that point.

(Seems obvious to me that a domain you control is less risky since the mitigations are relatively straight-forward and reliable, while for a domain you don't control, you really don't have any reliable mitigations if the domain owner decides to shut you down. Not to mention that a third-party domain also has the risk of expiring or being highjacked. A third-party domain only makes sense if you want to trade risk for dollars: a cheaper or free email address for a greater risk of losing control of the email address.)
lmao this is great.

one thing ive always felt about moments of impossible to understand chaos and vertigo is that if want to find some sense of understanding, then look to the kids.

for young people, all of the chaos is normalized. theyre not having to deal with foundation-shattering down-is-now-up redefinitions, "once in generation economic recession" every 10 years, etc etc. i mean they see all of the same noise, but i think theyre still very able to identify the signal and make sense of what is actually nonsense and what is meaningful. like, think back to when you were a kid when everyone was screaming that the sky was disintegrating in an ozone hole.

and so if i look at the kids today, im reassured. theyre dealing with all of it much more amusingly than when millennials were kids (haha! anxiety is a tik tok dance! lo-fi mix to dissociate to), and theyre still doing stuff like unionizing their local starbucks, and actually reading bakunin and kropotkin.
You're arguing semantics, I think. I would simply say that Lisp's AST is S-expressions (those nested token lists), and that the parser is Lisp's read function. Then your example is just something that's allowed by Lisp's syntax, while something like ')postfix 1 2 +(' would be something that's not allowed by the syntax.

What you say about Lisp code being generated without being read or printed is of course true, and while Lisp takes that idea and runs with it, it's not exactly unique to Lisp either; Rust's macro can do the same thing, without S-expressions. In other languages you usually generate source code, for example Java has a lot of source code generators (e.g., JAXB's XJC that used to come with the JDK).
I was talking about generating 3D worlds from photographs just two years ago when working on my metaverse for outdoor sports app Ayvri.com - everyone said I was crazy. Amazing to see how far the state of the art has come.
it sounds like you put yourself in a class of people who are perfectly rational, and therefore anything that you can't think of doesn't exist, and anybody who thinks about those things is a mystic.

you are making a mistake like physicists who believed "God does not play dice with the world" at the dawn of quantum mechanics or "time is a constant, not the speed of light" at the dawn of relativity.

You have no idea where consciousness comes from, stop assuming you do, it's poor science.

(For the record, I'm sure the integral of my history of atheism is strictly greater than yours, mentioning since that seems to be the subtext of your argument.)
AWS and Azure opening data centres here should help.
That's brutal. On my first attempt I've matched only 2 shapes. The naive approach is to match each pair, and with 15 pairs total, that's gonna take time, even though you need to check only 7.5 pairs on average. A better approach is to "hash" each shape and find the duplicate hash in linear time, which is 3 comparisons on average. The hash can be computed logically, by counting turns the shape takes, or, after looking at hundreds of such shapes, one should be able to "hash" shapes subconsciously, and that will be a dramatic speed up.

I suggest you make a similar problem: matching small isomorphic graphs. I think that's what a lot of software engineeting is really about.
A more accurate title would be "Ubuntu configuration files change the kernel console log level even on servers." The console kernel log level isn't limited. It can be set to whatever level you would like by changing the configuration files.
As someone who learned his Spanish before 1994 (and whose dictionary also predates that time), I was unaware of this until now.
Housing prices have little to do with property taxes, just in how the amount levied is paid by homeowners, not in the amount levied. The reason property taxes are high in Texas is for the same reason they are high in Washington state: no state income tax. That doesn’t really keep our housing prices low, however.
I would say that if you're caught and ... somehow manage to delete all the evidence linking you ( you have device explosives or, idk, 2048 bit encryption ), you may be able to escape, but come on, who are we kidding: the FBI has like a 99.96% conviction rate and that's without even going to into the "parallel construction" or other conspiratorial lines of attack.
Absolutely.

When I'm evaluating a product, the language it's written in gives me some insight into what areas I need to investigate further, what questions to ask the vendor, etc.

So, if something's written with, say PERL, I'm going to be concerned about maintenance and reliability. If it's written in Python, I'm going to drill into the runtime performance and reliability more. If it's in C++, I might be looking at their development velocity.

Everything's a tradeoff, and so long as those tradeoffs are addressed then it's fine. The language just gives me a better idea about where to delve more attentively.
I don't get the (perennial) dichotomy.

It seems to me the question of whether a submarine can swim is well-formed and relevant.

I feel confident that no advanced propeller driven craft will ever develop flippers and fish-like swimming as an emergent phenomenon.

I also feel confident that an artificial device that does swim like a fish is entirely within the realm of engineering, let alone science.

It has never made any sense to me that, by analogy, there is a conflict between those two beliefs.

Economic forces may preclude fish-machines, but it might just mean they will be delayed for a long time because they are difficult.
They will shoot you to defend themselves and others if necessary. But not to prevent you from escaping. They will overpower you if they get the chance.

Bottom line: If you are not a danger to anyone, they will let you escape rather than kill anyone (including you), even if it means you are never brought to justice.

It makes a lot of sense, if you don't have a revenge based justice system.
i once thought of purchasing an android based handheld console like the ayn odin, i'm now more convinced the Steam Deck is the perfect choice, linux to the rescue, as always
Why would someone need an in-process reverse proxy? I don't see what an in-process proxy would add that a request routing engine couldn't do. Or is the point that you can now add your reverse proxy configuration as just another project within the same solution?
It's true that "conscious" may be difficult to define, but it's almost impossible to come up with a definition for which there aren't exisitng experts.
After the era of Trump and now this current era of book banning and preventing race-based topics in schools (among other things), I’m not sure how you can say the Authoritarianism comes from the left… unless you’re talking about temporary measures that were taken due to a global pandemic.
The IRS didn't collude, congress did. They're the ones who cutting their budget, year after year.

>Intuit revved its new lobbying machine. Even before the OMB report was publicly released, a group of Republican lawmakers, led by TurboTax’s hometown congressman, wrote to the agency arguing that there was no reason for the government to “compete” with the “well-established” private tax prep companies. Intuit’s lobbyists also went above the OMB and pressed their case directly to the White House, Forman recalled.

>At the IRS, “all hell broke loose,” remembered Terry Lutes, who was then the head of electronic filing at the agency. Intuit’s clout on the Hill meant that lawmakers were soon accusing the IRS of making “secret plans to undercut the industry,” Lutes said. The agency ran the risk of seeing its funding cut if it were to pursue the Bush plan.

>The IRS commissioner at the time, Charles Rossotti, also opposed the idea. The IRS’ customer service staff, already too thin to respond adequately to Americans’ questions about the tax code, would have to grow substantially to handle millions of software queries. Congress “will never give you sufficient funding,” Rossotti told ProPublica.

https://www.propublica.org/article/inside-turbotax-20-year-f...
The flip side is that because we treat cheap things as disposable, we are accelerating the collapse of the biosphere.
AFAIK there are no restrictions on who can use the IRS's Free Fillable Forms, though there are a few fairly obscure forms it doesn't support.

https://www.irs.gov/e-file-providers/free-file-fillable-form...