skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's only irrational if you think the government cares about maximizing hashing efficiency. It's perfectly rational if you recognize that in most (western) legal systems there is a difference in the ease and acceptability of stopping someone from taking a new action and the allowing them to continue taking that same action. This is due to various legal underpinnings, but also makes perfect sense in that allowing someone to invest millions and then pulling the rug out from under them is very different from telling them they were never allowed to invest those millions in the first place.

Building codes are an excellent example of this. It's perfectly legal to maintain, sell, lease, etc. a building that would be illegal to build today.
As someone who has studied East Asian history, it's commonly said that Mao's adversaries within the CCP were the "technocrats," and that the technocrats are the ones who took power after Mao's passing — and still hold power to this day.

Here's a couple articles on China's technocrats:

https://macropolo.org/analysis/return-technocrats-chinese-po...

https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/07/04/chinas-overrated-techno...
Definitely, as long as it's consistent - I personally like to go for 4 spaces everywhere, I would say it makes the code look easy and readable.
Discord has been hoarding data like Smaug for years.
Thanks for tip!
Looking at the blog (https://blog.searchmysite.net/posts/milestone-1000th-site-in...) I think very little of the internet is in this search engine.

Its difficult to gauge the quality of the engine itself at this point with so little content in it.

What I can say is that even remotely presenting the system as a general purpose internet search engine like the UI from https://searchmysite.net/ does is going to give people the wrong idea and make them think the system is bad. To start with I'd suggest adding the number of sites indexed to the main search page.

I also think that the https://searchmysite.net/ portal will likely never be a destination. I'd suggest trying to promote it differently, offer a service service for OG internet sites, they opt-in to the service because they want a search widget they can embed on their site that has filter to search just that site or all OG sites. Having website categories would also help so people could search across tech blogs, or aquarium, or bowling sites, etc. Basically the old web ring idea but powered by search instead of just browsing a list.

Since there is a chicken and egg scenario - What you really need are people that think Google sucks that are invested in a niche and want to build a search ring out. The "only sites submitted by verified site owners" restriction needs to go, you want good curation but this is just too restrictive. I also think "downranks results containing adverts" is too restrictive, switch that to "downranks results containing excessive adverts and SEO spam".
No, but I believe referenda should. Ukraine gained its independence that way after all.

The gallup polls simply confirmed that the referendum that was run by Russian troops was more or less free and fair.

I believe this is a good litmus test of peoples belief in democracy as a matter of principle. Belief in democracy means commitment to voting especially when you dont like the result.

It appears a lot of people do not like democracy.
My experience of this is generally:

“Physicists discover limits of simplifying assumptions, pretend to be surprised ignoring things leads to inaccurate results in extreme circumstances.”
Error codes. Open source that reports in mysterious error codes.

Used to be able to Google for those; now, not so much.
>“It’s not a 2001, in my opinion, or a 2008 scenario,” said former Cisco Systems Inc. CEO John Chambers, who is now a venture capitalist. “Marginal startups just will not get funded, but I actually think that’s a healthy phenomenon.”

Do folks here who experienced 2001 and 2008 agree with this?

I am not particularly concerned about layoffs at my company, but I do wonder how extensively this correction is going to affect the job market for devs.
I had an idea for a video streaming platform where people would add money to their account and be deducted a penny per minute and then publishers would get bulk payouts.

Couldn't get many people interested though.
Maybe, but I don't think so. The non-English articles that get submitted are usually current-affairs pieces. If we were seeing a lot of obscure, intellectually interesting content that really hit the HN sweet spot, that would be a stronger case—certainly such content exists in many languages. But it's not what people pick to post here.
Proposal a La Scrum
I have a potential client that has a list of features and changes he wants for an existing internal app. He would like me to make a proposal.

However, as:
- I haven't seen this internal app
- nor have I seen the code
- nor do I know if this guy is going to be nit-picky

making a proposal seems futile. A feature can take 4 hours, or 4 days, I don't know.

At my normal job I just work in sprints, which work great as every party involved knows what is expected from each other. So I would like to propose he takes on a couple of sprints from me, and we can discuss together what feature has priority.

Does anyone have experience doing it this way?
What would be the best way to approach this?

Thanks
This is comical. Your company needs 3,000 deploys a month? You deliver 3,000 features a month? Your BAs/PMs identify 3,000 useful features a month? This isn't trolling - this is a call out of the absurdity you are presenting as a positive.
The methodology is not perfect but I think it raises a serious concern. I'm curious what other methodologies for identifying fake/spam accounts might be used. What about likes and retweets?

Perhaps Mr. Musks' team did an analysis of their own and saw a high number of potential fakes/bots, and that made them question the authenticity of Twitter's numbers.

If it can be shown with some accuracy that Twitter underreported the number of fake/spam accounts, how does this effect Musk's acquisition? Could he lower the price by saying you gave me incorrect data?
Yeah these though experiments all seem to depend on some kind of very tiny perfect subatomic process which has no energy input. Flip it around and the violation of conservation of energy should place a minimum requirement on the energy required to run a real Maxwell's Demon, or the mirror in this experiment (and real mirrors aren't infinitely thin mathematical abstractions).
Well there was the famous SCE->AUX comm failure, but that wasn't due to the construction of the modules.
Absolutely. It is my personal tragedy that many though I posted it as a factual statement :-))
> The question is: is it at least as fast in all situations? Was it always that way?

Yes and yes.
I should have been more clear. It’s not impossible because the physical act of migrating. It’s impossible because so many other platforms are missing tablestakes features (HA Postgres with auto backups as an example).
Fast prototype your own hardware synth interface
Does anyone actually use these as continuous variables and evaluate them. I’ve worked for 10 orgs for almost 30 years and while these existed, I’ve never even heard someone propose to use them to measure productivity.

#commits are useful as a binary metric that a developer is alive, but trying to say one is more productive than another because they had more commits is pure madness that permeates an org so that I would detect it during an interview and avoid.
That's also a good point, programming has evolved quite a lot. No code is something I believe in, I'm interested to see how this plays out in the coming years.
Musk is the largest beneficiary of all the fake accounts pumping his follower count.

He basically lives on twitter so he knows everything perfectly. He should pay the 54$/share as per the contract he signed.

The stock market crashed and it keeps going down so he wants to negotiate a different price, that's all there is to it. Buyer's remorse due to deterioration of macroeconomic enviornment.

And the credulity of people believing a billionaire would come to save them because he's "not caring about economics at all"...
By what metric are things oversold? Valuations are still crazy by most perspectives, price/earnings, debt/revenue, etc. etc. etc.

Expect more losses.
That makes sense, 2013 was when ASICs were getting popular and started dominating mining. The industry has slowed down significantly since. Presumably they've implemented most of the low hanging fruit optimizations. Antminers from 3+ years ago are still profitable in a lot of areas with <=$0.1/kWh electricity.
Even $6 is a lie: they're going to take "taxes" on top of that. One day we'll see a mandatory "tip" field with three choices: 15%, 20%, 25%.
(Timescale co-founder)

The Promscale team is at KubeCon right now, so I'll jump in to answer this question.

Yes, you can actually cross-analyze traces with prometheus metrics in Promscale. That in fact is one of the key reasons we built Promscale, and is something we can do because it is built on top of TimescaleDB.

If it's possible that'd be a game changer.

I hope it is! And if not, we're always open to product feedback.
> pay-to-play

What do you mean? You have to pay to run a meetup, but every event in the dozens of groups I'm a member of has been free.
No. There is still 1 BTC in this scenerio. When you choose to deposit your 1 BTC you've lost custody of it and somebody else has gained possession of it. All you have is a promise that you'll get it back - which is not === BTC.
Now we just have to integrate it with other countries.
A few days ago I saw a video where a Fin explained that in the last 1000 years, Russia tried to invade Finland 20 times (I didn't verify this data). He claimed that about every 2 to 3 generations, this happens.

This was a real eye-opener for me, and reminds me of a (probably Dutch) expression: A fox loses its hair but not its tricks.
You thow up a bunch of targets, I'll limit myself to one:

What was he trying to convey with this paragraph that closes the article?

My read is that Smil is addressing a lot of hand-wavy assertions, again from across the BAU to halt-fossil-fuels-now spectrum, that there are easy ways out. A hard analysis based on quantities, properties, and available viable options says that no, there aren't easy ways out. AI alone won't save us, aps won't save us, unsubstantiated claims of dematerialisation won't save us. You could look to sources such as David MacKay, Sustainable Energy --- Without the Hot Air, who made a similarly hardboiled analysis for the UK. Given rates of energy consumption, touted measures like "unplug your electronics" are not enough. This isn't a problem that's solved by a bunch of small measures, but by a bunch of big measures.

And the specific big measure here is get fossil fuels out of materials production. Most espeically of ammonia, plastics, steel, and concrete, though that itself is still just a start.

You've expressed yourself largely, if not entirely coherently, in what you're against.

What do you happen to be for? What goals and methods are you advocating, addressing what problems, specifically?

You admitted above to not even reading the article. If you're going to discuss it at length, I'd hope you might fix that. And read closely, because his arguments really are nuanced.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31396935
I wonder why. Maybe they have plans to train a neural network on it or something.
They list unpredictability as a factor. They obviously believe Saudi Arabia is a stable place to conduct business.
If you can already subset the logs by date and component, scanning the few thousands entries of interest is probably cheaper than maintaining indexes on many fields for all kind of imagined queries. The average-case algorithmic complexity doesn't matter if you can keep N low, even if you run the algorithm a lot.
I think that Twitter actively does not want spambots on their site and therefore would invest into metrics so they know how they're performing on that.
It is correct if `A` is of type `Array` as normal Array in julia has 1-based indexing. It is incorrect if `A` is of some other type which subtypes `AbstractArray` as these may not follow 1-based indexing. But this case errors normally due to bounds checking. The OP talks about the case where even bounds checking is turned off using `@inbounds` for speed and thus silently gives wrong answers without giving an error.

An issue was created sometime ago in StaticLint.jl to fix this: https://github.com/julia-vscode/StaticLint.jl/issues/337
> Why are you using the last one?

The last one is definitely in a different bucket for me than the first four. For starters, all of these are there primarily to encourage conversation. That said, the first four can make a lot more sense to try to graph and track and optimize. The last one tends to be more purely about driving a conversation.

At the top level, if you're genuinely doing a ton of learning along the way to shipping the right feature to the customer, then arguably that value is ultimately reaching the customer. If on the other hand you can't decide what the goal is and you keep changing your mind (as is often the case), then you tend to end up with a lot of dev investment made in things that simply never ship.

It's also worth differentiating technical "spikes" from feature "experiments." In my vocabulary, spikes are things where you're internally assessing a question like "could we do this" and experiments are things where you're externally assessing "do customers want this/does this have the impact we want." If you have a lot of experiments that don't reach customers, you're burning a lot of dev time on things that aren't actually experiments (because by this definition experiments need to reach the customer surface to deliver data). That's a signal you should probably be looking at. Spikes generally only reach the customer indirectly (through an eventual shipping feature), but if you have a lot of spikes that don't ever reach the customer in any way that's also a signal you should probably be looking at.
Autoscaling Nodes and Pods in Kubernetes
Yup. Performance measurement is like planning: the outcome (metrics, a plan) is useless. The process you take to getting there (discovering, questioning, measuring, imagining, simulating) is everything.
"winding roads" is a peculiar limitation. That would exclude a good chunk of the United States. Older roads that aren't high in traffic today often just follow whatever random path the wagons used to take.
Elon claims that if humans can only use 2 eyes his FSD can do it as well.

Has anyone seen the recent video of the guy thinking there is a giant sink hole in a tunnel (and it really looks like it) until he drives more closely and it turns out to be a puddle[1]? If humans can't always get it right how is FSD going to get it right better than humans because it needs to be better otherwise what's the point?

[1] https://youtu.be/zSEABlXjB5o
Why allow iterating with 1:length(A) if it's not the good way ?
I never worried about milliseconds of delay in spreadsheets, but in a DAW I do. Things are not all the same.
HN is a moderated/curated site and I'm one of the moderators. It's literally my job to do this and I would not be doing it otherwise.

You might be under a misimpression of what Hacker News is for. It's for thoughtful conversation about topics that gratify intellectual curiosity. Ideological flamewar is the opposite of that, so we don't want it here and we ban accounts that keep doing it. If you read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html, you will hopefully get the idea.*

You can call that 'censorship' if you want to—people use that word in many different ways—but you should understand why we moderate HN the way we do. It's because we're trying to have a specific sort of forum. If we just let the default forces of the internet have their way with this place, it would quickly cease to be that sort of forum. Therefore our only choices are either (a) to moderate HN or (b) to abandon the site's mandate (of intellectual curiosity) - and we're not going to abandon the mandate.

Look at it this way: games need rules. If you're trying to play one game (say, chess) rather than another (say, football), you need to follow the rules of chess. Is it censorship that you're not allowed to tackle the opponent's bishop? or that you can't capture a piece by jumping over it, like you can in checkers? I wouldn't say so. In a similar way, we're trying to play a specific type of game on HN. It's not as well-defined as chess or checkers or football, but I think the analogy is still useful.

* There are also lots of past explanations at these links:

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
Idk why but this visual made me giggle. I totally agree though, and have a hard time conversing with people who don't believe Discord is accumulating one of those most valuable, granular, personalized datasets in existence.
Hi Keno,

Thanks for the honest assessment. Do you have any thoughts about correctness/ composability of compiler transforms like AD, reliability of GPU acceleration and predictability of optimizations? (basically what you've discussed in some of your compiler talks).

How is that going to be possible in an imperative language? Right now we have lux.jl, which is a pure by convention DL framework, but that ends up being jax without the TPUs, kernel fusion, branching (Lux relies on generated functions) and copy elision (though this last part is being worked on IIUC).

A bunch of folks in the ML, Probprog and fancy array space have been grappling with things like generated functions, type level programming and such, and were wondering about future directions in this space: https://julialang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/256674-compil... there among other discussions

Edit: re : bandwidth issue Jan Vitek's group is thinking a lot about the verification vs flexibility tradeoff and some people are working on a trait/ static typing system. Maybe something can be done to help them along?
> Nothing different would happen. People want to see Do Kwon have more reasons to have charges against him
There isn't a problem.

The initially apparent problem is that the demon appears to be generating a temperature gradient "for free" by just swinging a gate open (for fast molecules) or closed (for slow ones) (because there's no fundamental physical cost for gate-swinging).

It is resolved by taking into account the fact that the demon must use at least a bit of memory, while acquiring the 'status' of the molecule (let through or don't). So, we can at least say that the demon, no matter how slow and lazy (efficient) it wants to be, must pay the information-theory based cost of erasing that bit.
You're also missing the other side of that coin: that's not my problem. I don't care how you're coping with getting things configured or set up correctly, I sure as shit don't care if people aren't getting it working on their box, and I definitely don't care about how "other people" view Linux. Why should I be afraid of anecdotal desktop Linux failures if it works fine for me?

Linux is not a desktop operating system. By default, it has no audio configuration. Distros package whatever software is considered "current" at the date of their LTS cutoff; Ubuntu is one of them. Ubuntu is using outdated software, and will be stuck that way for a couple years. Currently, Linux audio is fine. You're the one using broken software and blaming others.
As a vocal critic of "web3" and in particular NFTs and other crypto grifting,

I will speak up in defense of its point of origin (as next-generation P2P), the concept of the "decentralized internet,"

which prior to and if stripped of its monetization schemes back to its original precepts,

is as current and urgent as it ever was;

even more so in light of its potential complex interactions with the concepts of free speech and the like, much in the news.

An interesting critique offered ITT his that P2P "externalizes" the cost of e.g. storage to the user...

...my counter-critique to this is that TANSTAAFL, we are all already paying for storage (most of it for surveillance analytics and its products), c.f. industry chatter about revenue per user e.g. at Twitter.

One of the interesting precepts of building a decentralized web is how it changes the premises of "teh algorithm" and the avenues for weaponized (amplified, precisely-targeted, bad faith) speech. Those with the money to game the system to pervert it to their ends (selling you things being the most benevolent end of a spectrum that goes very far into worse uses) will of course always have the most elaborate and pervasive tooling; but its efficacy and that of defenses against it in a decentralized concept are much more murky. Which is what we want; indeed it's kind of the point.

Many things benefit from the efficiencies of centralization. Democracy and its constituent discourse do not seem to be among them.
You're really upset about a joke, maybe take some time to cool off after this thread.

Sure, those are rich people too. In fact, so are the handful of Oil tycoons down in Texas. Since we're in super-serious mode, I don't "worry" about rich people. I tolerate their privilege just like everyone else.

When rich EV owners were given the entire first level of my companies parking garage and I had to park my cheap hybrid on the roof because it didn't have a Tesla charger I was a bit annoyed but I tolerated the fact that they were getting free energy (fuel) and a clean car while my car collected pollen.

When rich EV owners were given preferential access to highways despite having better fuel efficiency than ICE cars I was a bit annoyed but I tolerated the fact that they get to work faster and cheaper while sitting in a nicer car than mine.

When rich EV owners were given subsidies on their cars with no salary cap I tolerated the fact that my $20k hybrid had no subsidies and that I paid every cent on my own despite the car not being as fancy.

So yeah, forgive me that I take a mildly humorous approach to giving any more free stuff to EV owners when it almost exclusively benefits the rich.

For the record, I'd love to be an EV owner - I own a hybrid afterall. I can't though, market forces keep rent really high and I can't buy a house when the sale price of the house is actually $100-$300k above the listing price. If I can't afford a simple house to charge a car at, then I certainly won't look at a $60k+ car as an investment.

Edit:

Just to address your "total cost of ownership of a Toyota Camry" line: https://www.caranddriver.com/features/g36278968/best-selling...

These were the top sellers of 2021. Not a single car in the $20k range. Many cars that are affordable to the every day person have limited mileage or are slow, and with rent and home prices climbing it makes it difficult for the people who could fit into those cars financially to do so when they're being pushed farther and farther out of the city.
No, that's the whole point. The lawsuit started in California, but Vizio tried to move it to federal court claiming that since it was a copyright claim it belonged in Federal court and not in state court.

The federal court said that because this was a contract issue, not just a copyright concern, that copyright law could not be used to bypass the contract law to move the case to federal court.

>The May 13 ruling by the Honorable Josephine L. Staton stated that the claim from Software Freedom Conservancy succeeded in the “extra element test” and was not preempted by copyright claims, and the court finds “that the enforcement of ‘an additional contractual promise separate and distinct from any rights provided by the copyright laws’ amounts to an ‘extra element,’ and therefore, SFC's claims are not preempted.“

This isn't California specific at all.