skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> It contains some human-authored decisions and regenerating that section without care will drop information on the floor.

> Maybe the answer here is that even when you ask the tool to remove unneeded transitive dependencies, it won't roll back to an earlier version of bar? So it will keep it at 1.2?

I'm not aware of any package management system that will remember dependencies you no longer depend on, except by human error when you forget to remove that dependency but keep punishing yourself and others by making them build and install that unused dependency. No matter where the information lived before it was deleted, it's still up to the human to do the right thing in a convoluted scenario like you're describing.

> With other package management tools, this is obvious: Any hand-authored intent to pin versions—including for transitive dependencies—lives in one file, and all the state derived from that is in another.

That doesn't solve anything if you don't look go back to the commit that had that information. If you do go back to that commit, you have all the information you need right there anyways. You can add your own comments to the `go.mod` file, so if something changed for an important reason, you can keep track of that (and the why) just as easily as you can in any other format. Actually, easier than some... does package.json even support comments yet? But it only matters if you go back and look at the previously-deleted dependency information instead of just blindly re-adding it as I imagine most people would do, which is a huge assumption.

>> It seems like humans often want to assume that "things probably suck just as much everywhere else, just in different ways, and those people must simply be hiding it", but that's not always the case.

> This sounds like you more or less get the same results as you would in other package managers, but with extra steps.

> I don't know. I guess I just don't understand the system well enough.

I've done my best to explain it to you, literally multiple hours of my day writing these comments. Maybe I suck at explaining, or maybe you're not interested in what I have to say, or maybe I'm somehow completely wrong on everything (but no one has bothered to explain how). "More or less the same" is not the same. The nuances make a huge difference, and Go Modules has done things incredibly well on the whole. Package managers aren't a zero sum game where you shuffle a deck of pros and cons, and you end up with the same number of pros and cons at the end.
British roadster fans might have some other opinions about why something electrical and British might not have worked.
The Largest and Smallest Hard Drives Ever Made
And people miss the point when talking about GPT-3. That will not be 'the emergence'. It will be 'Siri'.

Children having conversations with their 'all knowing' Siri assistant, all the while daddy computer scientists tries to create an AGI 'algorithm'?

The power of the network makes the notion of 'automaton' style AI (i.e. discrete units of intelligence) a bit pedantic.

The 'AI Doctor' will not be a 'Computer Doctor'.

It will be a voice interface, with language filters, with interaction filters, with policy inputs, medical database, and other services.

Most of which will be reused for so many other things.

A 'confluence of machines and services' will outperform humans and 'general AI' on everything the point of 'AGI' will seem a bit misplaced as a concept in retrospect.

Siri will 'feel human by any means we have to measure it' many decades before we create an automaton that does the same thing,
Developers already pay to be on the App Store each year, and developers pay to be on the Play Store.
I don't feel that a grid of cells is the best visual representation for data. However, it is a natural representation for tabular data.

Tables are horrible for "visualizing". We didn't evolve looking at tables with hundreds of columns and millions of rows.

Once you learn some pivoting tools and charting, you can visualize things that you would never be able to find in a table of data. (Or if you did it would take a lot longer.)

(Sample size 1, but I teach Python, Pandas, and visualization (Jupyter w/ matplotlib/seaborn/bokeh). I've had clients tell me that one chart they came up with during a class on visualization more than paid for the training. They would have never seen that in the table of data. I've also found bugs in code by visualizing failure patterns.)
But it could be tofu-dreg construction and be more likely to fall over.
> AGI on the one hand seems to mean convincing even though the people who made it know otherwise

That's the rub, though, it's not possible to know otherwise! If you could "know otherwise" you'd be able to prove whether or not other people are philosophical zombies or not!
Parents would send their kids to schools that hide things from them only when the schools that don’t are at capacity and stop accepting further enrollments.

Schools that hide things from parents would likely be a magnet for incompetent and lazy educators.
ATMs do show transaction fees.
This? https://youtu.be/YDvbDiJZpy0 - TED: Meet the inventor of the electronic spreadsheet | Dan Bricklin
A lot of people seem to be telling similar stories in the comments about how their banks also act like scammers, which trains you to trust the actual scammers.

For this reason, I am extremely stubborn about inbound calls. When my bank/superannuation/etc. call me about something and ask for any personal details, I explain to them why it's really not okay for them to be doing this, request a way to call them back via some telephone number that is published on their official website, and then later follow up with a formal complaint.

Who knows whether it actually does any good. Probably not. :/ EDIT: I mean, it definitely protects me, but I don't know if any of these orgs have changed their practices.
Why would TikTok need to?
Social...security...what does it mean?
Dan Bricklin the inventor of the electronic spreadsheet
I think I would prefer to attempt to define it, than to simply assert that we don't have it (or some aspect of it).

It's demonstrably true that our species' intellectual capabilities extend to solving problems far beyond those faced by our evolutionarily-equivalent ancestors who out-competed the other hominids. They only needed to be somewhat better at tool making, communicating and forming co-operative groups, to win that scenario, but it turns out that we can also derive a lot of abstract mathematics, predict the existence of cosmological phenomena before we find them, build machines that can leave the planet, etc, etc.

We may not fully qualify as general intelligence if we define that to mean "can solve any solvable problem", and for sure we have specialisations, but to simply throw up an assertion that we are not general at all, seems odd?
Right, but the person in the room isn’t the computer program. He’s not even the whole computer. He’s just a component of the system. It’s the system that we should consider as understanding Chinese, not just a piece of it. He’s following a set of instructions so he doesn’t even have all of those in mind at once either.

By abstracting the system as a man in a room were distracted to think we’re considering the system when we’re not. If the man in the room is one of billions of men, at massive scale which is a more realistic model, that becomes obvious.
I'd say Amazon is the most "serious" of them, but only the import/export side of the business.

Apple basically just sells boutique whitegoods.

If any of these companies ceased to exist, it wouldn't inconvenience anyone other the shareholders.
> This Dyson device does not have source control, and yes, it is a super-spreader device.

By this standard, my unmasked mouth is a super-spreader device. (Of course it is! Most super spreader events occurred without the assistance of any particular technology except perhaps walls and a ceiling. Sometimes technology is involved. For example, COVID pretty clearly spreads through inadequately filtered HVAC systems, but that seems to be just because it moves air to people that otherwise wouldn’t have gotten there.)

> There is proof that such devices are super spreading tools: hospital administrators wore a blow up costume in to a Kaiser Hospital ER and caused a huge COVID-19 outbreak.

What proof? I see no evidence whatsoever that exactly the same superspreader event wouldn’t have occurred with the same infected person without the suit.
There is no absolute way, hence solipsism, but in practical terms, I expect that you are instantiating consciousness because we share a common ancestor.

My consciousness is a direct result of my parent's teaching + the 2 languages spoken. It isn't spontaneous. Also, the structure of our brains are largely similar so I would assume you are conscious in a similar way, occupying a subset of valid qualia space. My brain is nothing like silicon. The expectation that a very complicated piece of metal is somehow exploiting a physical phenomenon that is present in a human brain is non sensical imo.

The reason why I posted is because at some point I was also misled about singularity discussions. That computers have existential value because of complexity. They do not. They are not observers of the universe.

I believe that conciousness operates at a quantum level and is an electro magnetic field. Effectively it is a field created by the deterministic structure of the brain, as constructed by genes. Like water running through a cave.

Calculations (logic, emotions) are particular paths through the quantum vector field space. Essentially the performance of 1+1=2 in a human brain, is a an electron or a set of bounded electrons or whatever sub-deterministic molecules, going through an established arithmetic cave structure. Not understanding that 1+1=2 occurs when the cave structure that is required sends the electron into a non-valid (as per the definition of the universe) path in the quantum field vector space. The universe does not recognize this quantum field vector space as valid knowing, and there is no instance of conciousness that is equivalent to the knowledge that 1+1=2. This may occur in a brain that is not familiar with arithmetic or the brain structure that is required to construct a conforming electron path is destroyed.

Free will is exercised, in the sense that it is performed at the non-determinstic level (quantum size) by the choice of calculations to perform (and act on).

The field must also alter the deterministic structure.
> most people will say "wow, that's an incredibly arbitrary and abstract way of quantifying impact that feels suspect."

As someone who's said that, you've given me reason to ruminate on whether I was being too cynical and not empathetic enough.
Ask HN: How can you know if VPNs (e.g. Mullvad) are legitimate or gov honeypots?
I think AGI is usually equated with “superhuman” intelligence, though obviously not a requirement.

If superhuman intelligence were easy, why aren’t we already more intelligent? Being smart has already demonstrated considerable fitness benefits for the human race. It seems like we haven’t gotten much smarter in the last few thousand years though, at least from a raw horsepower point of view.

My intuition is that past a certain level of complexity intelligent systems become inherently unstable. This is all just a handwave, but there’s some circumstantial evidence in the confluence of genius and mental disorder in our species.

If that were true, the question then becomes: is biology an inferior substrate for general intelligence compared to silicon. Obviously a cpu can add two integers more efficiently than a meat brain, but it’s not self evident that this will hold true for more complex computation. Put another way, if you try to make an AGI agent “smarter” than a person, you might just end up with an irrational system that spits out nonsense.

So it may be that for complexity reasons you can’t beat human-level GI. At which point the question becomes whether AGI is cheaper to produce and operate than feeding and sheltering a human. If the answer is “no”, then AGI may be both possible and irrelevant.
I think AGI is possible in theory, but may not be possible in practice. I also think that "intelligence" is a vague concept, which makes defining what AGI even is tricky.

Reaching it assumes that the ceiling for our technology is sufficiently low and that the runway for us to continue making progress is sufficiently long. Neither of those assumptions may end up being valid.
No conspiracy needed. Russia said something, Reuters reports, correctly, that they said it.

The mistake would be believing it because of that. Just such a mistake put Trump in office.
This isn't 2001. Fox News -- which ironically only became relevant at all because the Bush admin gave them exclusive access during the Iraq war -- has effectively destroyed America's unity in the two decades since.
> Ok that is totally made up.

https://guardian.ng/features/health/bioweapons-designed-to-k...

"A new report from Cambridge University’s Centre for the Study of Existential Risk says that world governments have failed when it comes to preparing against threats like futuristic bioweapons powered by Artificial Intelligence (AI) and genetic manipulation. Such weapons would have to power to target specific DNA, and kill certain races of people leaving other swaths of the population unharmed."

Additional information from a biochemist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjfvHOcfEUQ

> There are plenty of reasons that researchers make dangerous pathogens that have nothing to do with ethnic cleansing.

Such as? The article you posted merely states that it is possible and that they "wish" it will lead to more vaccine research, without saying how.
You laugh, but the 1980 Alfa Romeo Spider (with the Arese DOHC 4) was the first regular-production car with variable valve timing. This might actually be what the grandparent post is referring to-it had a mechanical variator attached to the intake camshaft to adjust the phase of valve opening....
My decade of experience with lawyers is that most of them aren't great with technology. If I had a dollar for every lawyer I knew with an AOL email address I would be writing this sat on the beach.

I've known a lot of people who were amazing at their job, but shitty at running a business. I guess I would have tried to help these lawyers and explain their wrongheaded tech decisions to see what their next move would be. That would give me a better understanding of whether they were an outfit worthy of my time.
Do read carefully, sir.
I am deeply interested in this problem space. If someone else reading this is as equally interested and would like to collaborate, let me know!
> The trick is that we can reassign the colors using a palette. And in fact you always need to do this; you have to somehow decide which color each byte should represent.

Hmm. I don't know that I agree. There are certainly more objective choices here than just picking any old palette, and in fact there are choices where it's not obvious the result should be considered a "palette" at all.

For example, the obvious choice to me is to treat the π bitstream as 8 bit RGB data like you would see in the PPM image format. In other words, one pixel at a time, each 8 bits represents a number from 0-255 for the red, green, and blue channel in that pixel respectively.

Of course that's a much harder ask since the colors are in this case not arbitrary, but you could (and should!!) still cheat at this by arbitrarily selecting the width of the resulting rows of pixels.

I'm not mad at seeing this palette based solution to the problem though, it's a very fun hack! Probably doing it for real would take an impossible amount of CPU time. Maybe if you did 4-bit RGB values it would be possible?
My Uncle uses hives like these, they aren't great for a commercial setup, but they are very nice to work with and manage the bees in.

https://horizontalhive.com/how-to-build/layens-beehive-desig...
It sounds like there are a lot of simple options out there and you just don’t want to use them because “God, no”.
I get vanced-manager(com) and apkpure in the top 3 along with the official site.

There is no download link on the official site, and the type of end user that would usually use this does not know what a hash or signature is.
[citation required]

Canadian truckers were > 90% vaccinated at the time of the "Trucker" Tantrum. There were very few Southeast Asians in evidence among the tantrum throwers.

They were majority white (mostly because the Southeast Asian truckers in Canada are mostly vaccinated and were quite busy because the people throwing the tantrum weren’t actually working because they refused to get vaccinated).
That a lot of words without saying anything at all. What are you afraid they will do?
Related. Finding real locksmiths has become so difficult that I have resorted to calling a business across the street and asking them to tell me if there is, in fact, a locksmith at the purported location.

Maybe there is a business in physically verifying a given business is the actually the real thing.
Latency highly depends on interference and attenuation. If you’re sitting right next to a 5 GHz AP that’s used exclusively by you, then your latency should be minimal. If you’re trying to connect to a router behind a couple of brick walls, or your roommate is using a leaky microwave, or you’re in a convention where everyone’s trying to connect to the same WiFi, then you’ll notice it in a video call, multiplayer shooter, slow-loading webpage, or anywhere else where double-digit-% dropped packets matter.
There is a definite possibility that it may eventually happen, but IMO to make claims like "xyz will definitely happen within 20 years" there needs to be a direct line showing how advances happening today will lead to the desired outcome of tomorrow. All such predictions being made today have a big box in the middle titled "magic!" which no one wants to fill in.

Sentences like "AI will make AGI" get a lot of upvotes and shares, but ultimately don't really mean anything.
> intersections where the traffic crosses over to the other side and left turns are uncontested(?).

Diverging diamond interchange[1]?

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diverging_diamond_interchange
Or do we just believe we share a common ancestor? Also, if a machine is trained on data generated by humans, couldn't you argue that the humans are the machine's ancestors?
> Your car is running a real-time simulation of your engine to keep itself operational, and it's a much serious business than running Android or iOS.

Well, it takes some parameters, goes into a lookup table and decides how much timing to retard, or fuel to give, and probably has a o2 sensor, checks knocking, etc. All done on pretty barebones 80's tech.
They have a whole lot more in common with each other than not. You haven't dismantled anything.
Well, it's very likely that the 1977 "russian flu" pandemic was caused by a Chinese lab leak during vaccine research [1].

https://theprint.in/science/lab-leak-is-the-biggest-suspect-...
Show HN: MVP for an Event Planner App
A lot of houses still have mechanical mercury thermostats.

yeah, the houses that have heat. ask an HVAC guy about the new digital thermostats. I'm not even talking about the Nest etc. smart home ones, just the basic new digital ones that croak after three years. Keep the mercury-switch ones as long as you can.
Modelator-py: Utilities for the TLA+ ecoystem
Yeah, TIL that HN literally doesn't allow the word "very" in headlines! Kinda cool, I guess they're trying to fight against sensationalism.
First imagine a spherical cow...
Is Romero a Turing-complete system that can run Doom?
God I wish walmart’s site was better, it is like punishment shopping there, why does home depot outclass them in every way?
Can you list off the top of your head five laws, programs, or benefits that your American buddies making six figures told you don't count as part of a safety net?

Apart from anything mentioned in this thread.
> If you're not communicating the state of the thing you're working on with the people who need to know then you have a problem.

You're acting like it matters that you're communicating that there has been a setback or delay. Your estimate is a deadline and failing to make the deadline will be a disappointment.

> Your job is to effectively communicate what is and is not possible, and at what cost.

No one cares about any of this. All the people who actually run the company care about is fulfilling what they are now contractually obligated to do -- an obligation they made without consulting you, so everyone can move on to the next round of customer commits.

> Sometimes things are complex and you know why they are complex and how they got that way and how to avoid those mistakes in the future.

That sounds like everyone working on any large project. That doesn't make anyone unfireable.
>Email is a notoriously fickle protocol,

LOLOLOL OP
I think it's good to do the following. Assume that jobs are taken over by AGI, one by one. Which job will be left last? Which job would I want, given this change?
Ah, yeah that's been updated since I've worked with GPS
> On the shows they would sometimes hang up the phone, then somebody else picked up a receiver and the call continued?? Phones don't work like that!

Well, a few decades ago (80s-90s), at least, landlines sure did work like that in Australia, if you were the one who received the call. I played around with that a lot as a kid. Maybe you just tried it on calls you initiated?
Ask HN: Patterns or anti-patterns for driving technical change within an org?
I'm currently a senior software engineer at my company, and my medium-term career goal is to be promoted to staff engineer (and eventually, principal). I'm aware that one marker of staff-plus engineers is the ability to drive technical change within the organization, and part of doing this is building organizational alignment around such a change.

There is a specific, major technical change that I'd love to see implemented in our org. The details of the change aren't relevant here, but I am interested in hearing about specific patterns or anti-patterns around proposing such a change and building alignment around it. I look at this process as very sales-like in nature, so things like:

-how to identify the key decision-makers (people who need to say yes, as well as people who get to say no).

-where in the org to start building support for the idea (i.e. top-down vs. bottom-up).

-how to frame the value proposition in order to maximize its appeal to my audience.

Side note- as I'm writing this, I'm realizing that this process is quite similar to enterprise sales, but from within the org as opposed to outside of it. So anyone with enterprise sales experience, please share your hard-won lessons here.
GameStop to Implement a Stock Split
it's really fantastic though, for parts availability and reliability. People don't remember how absolute shit any pre-80's vehicle is. Like, shit tier reliability from carbs, tune ups, constant work. 100k? that car is dead and done! Now the average vehicle age has been climbing and climbing. The best part is that 2005 brake caliper is probably just a slightly more refined version from the 90's
I'm not assuming she's of above-average intelligence because of where she works. The quality of her blog post speaks for itself.
I recently worked with an architect who was incredulous when I specified structured cabling be added to the plans for the building (a 16,000 sq. ft. building housing 3 separate office suites). The architect assured me it's very uncommon today, in their firm, to see "outdated" technology like wired networking used.

The building is getting structured cabling.
Samsung Expands Customer-First Care Experience with New Self-Repair Program
Exactly, you said it. The trillions of dollars will have to come from somewhere and don't equate to unlimited free energy to run AI in a capitalist system.
It does not matter what the truth is in this case. Both sides will claim whatever is best for them.