skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Personally I see it as a moral imperative to be honest, and that includes not cheating on tests. This isn’t rational in the sense of being a logical consequence of some other, more fundamental principle. But it’s also not irrational. It’s just a different set of goals.

…On the other hand, a big part of the reason I ended up with that set of goals is that it worked well for me when I was young, for both practical and emotional reasons I won't waste your time with. So I won't claim to be holier-than-thou. And I don't feel entitled to judge people for having different principles.
As i was reading this, i kinda thought, the teacher could have jumped in sooner? As they waited longer and longer, more students would see the cheaters getting away with it, it would be harder not to join in.

They’re chastising the students for not reporting it, but then, it seemed to take a while for the teacher to do it as well
Awesome idea. Would love to see one for generating politically loaded scientific publications.
Awesome idea. Create some politically loaded science papers.
My QM knowledge is quite rusty, but given what I remember, I don't understand how certain claims in this article can be correct.

Hossenfelder seems to be referring to some well-known papers on Hyperion and decoherence. For a review, see:
https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0605249

There are lots of references there that you can follow, including a debate on whether decoherence theory is really necessary to explain what's going on.

But as far as I can tell, no party in this debate ever claims the Hyperion example implies that "the chaotic motion of Hyperion tells us that we need the measurement collapse to actually be a physical process." The decoherence arguments about Hyperion do not assume this (as far as I know).

Can someone please explain? Am I misunderstanding?
I've been looking at writing a code generator, which spits out vectorized code for multi-way joins (kind of like "dynamic programming" to not suffer from being locked in a specific order of binary joins), with the additional complications of being for the incremental/difference-based "Differential Dataflow"[0], the multi-temporal aspect DDFlow needs to handle it's iterative/fixpoint operator, and dynamically adjusting IO concurrency (the asymptotics of part of the "dynamic programming" index traversal suffer when squeezing concurrency out of it, as it's pretty much cache prefetching).

It's been about a year since I realized the impact of a JIT-like query compiler for these kinds of join-project queries, but needing to balance IOPS, vectorization, and likely even applying (vectorized) B-tree tactics within a 4k page, on top of the weirdness from multi-temporal (not just bi-temporal) delta-based records (~change-data-capture stream; needs to be integrated/materialized to get a point-in-time view)... sounds like a recipe for logic bugs/off-by-one errors.

They are already hard-to-impossible to notice if it'd be used in production, it being a code generator allows situations with only edge case queries having data-dependent edge case bugs, and the addition of dynamic/adaptive IO concurrency makes reproducing/debugging a detected error next to impossible.

I wouldn't dare to trust the code generator I'd write, if not formally verified. Not because I don't have faith in my skills, but because it's extremely complex code that has to be fast and fall out of a JIT and it's nature makes off-by-one errors in index access unusually likely. And debugging a known error might well be harder than formally verifying to find the bug.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25867693 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27512224

TL;DR: There is code that would be useful if written, but is so complex and neigh-impossible to debug that formally verifying it might be easier than debugging it to "production-grade". I hope this project makes that kind of approach practical for those engineers who could write the code and make it pass integration tests.
Curves are extremely common in STEM classes today at Berkeley. I think I've only had a handful of upper division classes that were not curved. A lot of the internal discussion on curving vs not curving is based on the fact that building an exam which generates a good distribution is really hard, especially for classes where the understanding is very stratified due to differing backgrounds in the area.
I dunno, I never cheated, but I would never report other people for doing it either. It’s not my job to detect and report other people cheating, and getting dinged for not reporting people that cheated would make me hate you very quickly.

That said, I just don’t see the point in cheating. University isn’t that hard if you have some basic level of skill. You go to the classes, you read the stuff the assign you, do the assignments, and you should mostly be able to pass the course.

Cheating always seemed like a complete waste to me. I’d be paying a lot of money to learn nothing (aside from how to cheat better). If I’m going to be there anyway to get my degree, I might as well put in the work.

And then later you have these instances where it turns out that because you actually paid attention in school, you know more than people from top universities that (apparently) cheated their way to a degree.

Of course, they’re also 2 levels above you earning twice what you make. Because that’s the way these things work :/
GP said uncorrelated. I don’t think that’s an effective counterpoint, although GP seems to be indicating anti-correlation. Either way, this is about undergraduate students, and I also don’t think you can claim superlative undergraduate performance for that particular founder. Maybe crypto is where motivated underperformers found a place at the table because the overperformers are settled in more civilized places. Also, these research papers in cryptocurrency are probably not comparable to serious contemporary work in mainstream journals of pure math and theoretical computer science, but I am personally fascinated by the way that old research is slowly finding it’s way into applications through the sometimes absurd financialization of these ideas, enough to get scammed and swindled a bit myself.
Going with the point re: cursor links, if your URLs look something like this then they would be shareable and more stable than page=11.

?startWith=<item_id>&sortBy=<alpha|datetimedesc|whatever>
I don’t think image, video, or audio support was a mistake. I think CSS and JavaScript and cookies and referers were.

The web had rich text even before it had images, in the form of emphasis and strong emphasis, as well as a variety of other forms of semantic markup to indicate document structure and relationships.

What I’m saying is that if a web page doesn’t work on NCSA Mosaic from 1994—modulo modern crypto and character sets—it is doing something very wrong.

I don’t care that this represents a large proportion of the web today, that doesn’t make it any less wrong.
Wow, that went quickly from what could have been an interesting discussion on ethics to accusations of amorality and labelings of psychological problems.

Is it ethical to wrangle students through inane, dull exercises that seem practically designed to kill their curiosity and desire to explore knowledge?

In that situation, would it not seem more ethical to get past the exercises in the quickest, least-damaging way possible to be able to do more fulfilling things in life?

Or is doing exercises a moral obligation, regardless of their ill effects on the student?

That's a discussion worth having. "You know, like a psychopath" short-circuits that.
Britain should scrap its online safety bill
Use it daily for collecting photos/art. It’s recommendation engine is surprisingly relevant sometimes.
It does centralize/ruin web search results.
The First Low Spec Processor: The MOS 6502
A better example would be: If your goal is to get food, are you really going to complain when one person offers to do everyone's shopping for them? Keep in mind, you'll lose out on the valuable lessons that grocery shopping has to teach!
Yes, there's a video by the author of this tool that explains it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sclZDCjUVvI
Reread a) and b) from another perspective because never did I say they were lying to themselves.
Yeah I think that's the one, but I believe it's roguelike and I really liked being able to collect chips. I'd like to see more games like that, though.
Even Waze isn't complex enough to compare with Uber. Waze has to process real time data but doesn't have to deal with processing payments and complying to regulations worldwide.
There's a big grey area between the life threatening stuff, and the stuff that will slowly mess you up for life. Simple example, but the drugs people take for pain increase your odds of a heart attack if taken habitually. It feels deeply unethical to have "take drugs that will ruin you once your career is over" be the minimum requirement for a career in sports.
> I have been a SWE at three other FAANGs

Good for you.

Now seriously I'm not sure what you're arguing for - you're saying FAANGS don't do Leetcode style questions?
I get it that YOU don't do it to candidates in those roles, but the reality is for SWE roles this is how it is. People who aren't very good in Leetcode will not succeed. There's hundreds, maybe thousands of candidates for these roles and some of them can do the Leetcode thing - they are the ones who get hired.
I'm not advocating for this method because I'm not particularly good at it or like solving these things on my spare time, nor do I think this method is particularly useful - but that's reality.
This is untrue in languages with proper optimizing compilers, designed for performance, e.g. C++, Rust, Zig. A functional iterator transformation chain is often just the same performance as a "traditional" for loop.

But try that in Java and you'll often see a 3x-10x difference, especially if you run into problems with boxing. Streams are known to be notoriously slower than for loops with index. I once have even doubled the speed of a for loop by unrolling it manually (Java 8). Not all compilers are equally strong at optimization.

Anyway, asking such questions in an interview for a junior/regular developer is just a distraction.
Well,

Just Duckduckgoing, I found a 2005 article by some Microsoft Research people reputing to explain the phenomena described without decoherence.

https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0503170
> Doesn't it make more sense to have that at the power source end (charger) rather than the power sink (device)?

I would prefer having a separate meter, so that I can place it first at the power source, then at the cable end, to know if a malfunctioning device could be the result of a flimsy cable producing a significant voltage drop. This is a very common scenario when using dubious quality cables.
> it screws up the class curve

This is your problem right here. There is no rational argument for grading people on a class curve. That just makes the class a lottery and incentivises sabotaging for others to get an upper hand yourself.
Ask HN: How do you design experiments on yourself? (health, energy, learning)
How do you design, track, and measure experiments you decide to do on yourself?

Examples of experiments:
- Reduce my workouts from three 1h workouts to two 1.5h workouts.
- Start taking magnesium supplements for better sleep.
- Try intermittent fasting.
- Start writing tests first (TDD).

I wonder whether there is a good resource or your anecdote about how to try the "scientific method" on yourself. It seems that some people are better at applying it than others. I think Tim Ferris has been the main person I would think about in this context.
Availability of their existing dev kits is at best spotty. The AGX Orin [0] dev kit is at least available for backorder at $2k USD - but I haven't seen any of the Xavier kits available for many many months...

[0] - https://www.arrow.com/en/products/945-13730-0000-000/nvidia
Given your cynical take, it’s in the school interest to prevent cheating; if everyone cheats and the word gets around, nobody will take that school seriously anymore.
You somewhat seem to miss the wood for all the trees. The problem is the curve - grading on a curve is inherently unfair and irrelevant. Why should it affect your grade if others in the class cheat/struggle/..?

Any teacher (and school system) worth their salt has by now dropped grading on a curve.
If you get away with cheating it’s not cheating. The real problem is whether it’s worth the risk of getting caught and/or losing an opportunity to learn something which will help you later.
I know Google has some tech support engineering roles where they ask such simple questions to candidates. They aren't software engineers and generally don' get to contribute to the main codebase, but they help customers fix problems with how they use Google API's etc so they need to know a bit about how to code.
Why would they? Linus changes version numbers on a whim, he stated that multiple times. Partly to make it obvious that all kernel releases are equal, partly for no reason at all.
Fascinating comparisons, thanks for sharing it.
AGI will have its own lacks of integrity, or it's not AGI.
After Uber and Lyft will fall, I can see a better model coming up.

An open source base for a riding/taxi app for which local companies can add their own modules for billing to comply with local regulations.

It would be the WordPress of ride sharing / taxi apps.
No big deal. External payloads seem strange, but 747s have carried much larger ones, such as the Space Shuttle.

Worse things have been carried under wings.[1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_United_States_Air_Force_n...
Are SATA port multipliers safe? (2013)
> They want to pay me a ton of money for this? I'd do it for free!

Happy to see that other's found this too :) This was my experience with CS—I always loved it and I am, to this day, still surprised that they pay me so much because I used to do this exact same stuff at home for fun. I feel like I got exceptionally lucky that my passion just so happens to be something exceptionally profitable because I have no idea what I'd do otherwise.
Without pipelines being planned and built, there will not be new wells. As you said, pipelines are being cancelled.
I was taking an upper level marine biology course - the tests were VERY difficult, but they were take-home, do them at your leisure. I was cool with it. But walked into a coffee shop one day and found 75% of the class sharing answers and cheating anyway.
So you're hoping we'll be able to effectively align an AGI with ethics we ourselves don't even possess?

I recommend Robert Miles on YouTube for a few lessons on the challenges of creating friendly/aligned AIs. (And why your hope here is somewhat ludicrous).
Here in India, its increasingly starting to feel that both Ola and Uber are slowly abandoning the market. Service quality has gone down drastically and Ola seems more interested in making (unsafe) electric scooters

In their heyday, you’d drive around and find that 30-40% of cars on the road were Uber/Ola taxis (cabs here have different colored number plates). Now, its around 5-10%
> People cheat at sports all the time and people just sort of accept it.

In pro bodybuilding, steroids are nominally illegal, but essentially every pro bodybuilder uses them, the physique necessary to be competitive in pro contests is not achievable without them, and the people running bodybuilding shows deliberately make no effort to enforce this rule.

In that kind of context it's hard for me to say the "cheaters" are doing anything wrong in any practical sense. Nobody involved actually believes in the rule they're breaking.

I think cheaters in other arenas can rationalize away to themselves that their context is equivalent to the bodybuilding context I described above.
You don't need to know or trust any underlying technology though. The only thing you need is a basic grasp of Darwinian natural selection.

The "shittier" those "shitcoins" are, the quicker they'll die out. The ones that heavily incentivize early adopters might hang around longer, but they too will inevitably fizzle out if they don't offer any practical innovation.

But if something has a steadily growing user base year after year, maybe it's worth some attention after all?

Or you can just keep screeching "Shitcoins! Shitcoins!". I guess we can all settle for ourselves what form of discourse we consider more constructive and worthwhile.
If you say to a child 'I'll kill you if you do that', and he does it, you must kill him, or he will never trust you.

-- Bertrand Russell (from my memory, so probably not quite verbatim)
> If you get away with cheating it’s not cheating.

Yes it is? Cheating is cheating. You can get caught cheating, but you're still cheating if you're aren't.
Whether communication is “instant” doesn’t matter because it takes the speed of light to observe.

Say A and B are entangled, both observers of A and B know they are entangled, A and B don’t have a value yet, there’s only A != B.

When A gets measured, it takes the speed of light for A’s measurement to reach B. If B gets measured before then it’s still a 50/50 (and then when A is revealed it will 100% be the opposite of B).

It’s true that if B gets measured B’s observer will instantly know A. But this doesn’t break the speed of light because B’s observer already knew that A != B, so they don’t need any more information from A to determine it when they measure B. Like how, if B and A were predetermined (not quantum) and then separated and B was revealed, B’s observer will instantly know A.
UN Warns of ‘Total Societal Collapse’ Due to Breaching of Planetary Boundaries
Wireguard is probably the part of the kernel I trust _the most_ since it's < 5,000 lines of code and easily audited. I don't think the alphabet boys are involved in this one.
Taken over? That was their whole business from the start.
It strikes me as odd that the very qualities that we value in engineers (efficiency, outside the box thinking, finding solutions that make the most of the constraints of existing systems) are the ones we detest in engineering students. This is even more true for jobs that are meant to exploit inefficiencies in existing systems, such as entrepreneurs.
> that is a profitable business with a solid business case

I reaaaaly wouldn’t assume its a profitable business unless you get some data from a few “normal” (i.e., not pandemic impacted) quarters.

Delivery is the first thing people will cut down on if we get a recession as well
Author here. I don't know if the provider just changed the CPU type or if someone else ran into the same problem on that VM and complained to them.

The file system error is probably unrelated, I've seen a couple of those on other VMs from the same provider, but this time it probably caused it to fail to boot properly. More mysterious, but mostly out of my hands.
I didn't get theory of "worms come to the surface to escape predators", shouldn't they stay put instead?
Cheating is related to human problems, and engineers aren’t psychologists. It’s human problems when there is a mismatch between teachers and students, between schools and expectations, and students are at the bottom of the ladder and aren’t in a position to discuss what is demanded.
AWS Graviton3 Hits GA with 3 Sockets per Motherboard Designs
> I'm firmly of the opinion that the negatives of group study out weight the positives and generally should be banned in college

That's a... strong opinion.

I'm genuinely at a loss of how you can think that. If studying in groups was harmful enough to be banned by colleges, then shouldn't online classes have been tremendous boons to learning? On a personal level, I can barely straighten out two thoughts in my head unless I have someone I can talk it over with, I couldn't imagine collaborative study being outright banned.

Am I missing something here?
> What I want you to understand, more than anything else, is that telling a fat person “Eat less and exercise” is like telling a boxer “Don’t get hit.”

Actually, that's most of what my coach would tell me. In fact, 75% of my training was for not getting hit.

I was the worst performing boxer in the place for almost a year, known as "the bleeder" for the number of times I'd finish a match with a river of blood running down my shirt (which was about 90% of the time). At one point the coach threatened to ban me if I didn't shape up, because I was scaring away his clients. I remember many an hour balancing on a tire, trying to defend while he whacked me with a stick from all sides, berating me every fucking time he got a blow in.

But at some point SOMETHING starts to sink in; some kind of ... instinct maybe? I stopped bleeding. I got hit a LOT less. I even started winning. Lesser skilled opponents looked like they were punching in slow motion.

I have no idea how this would help someone fighting obesity. My experience living in the USA for a few years was being shocked at how SWEET everything is. American bread was like eating cake. Balsamic vinegar was like eating soft drink syrup. I always look at the label to see what's in the food, but something's really wrong in America because there's no way the food can be so sweet with what they say is in it.
So do I. But ... at home for my own projects I use language and tools I like (Common Lisp, Clojure...) At work I use whatever I get paid for. I recently left Java job in favour of a Python one because they paid me more. You know, Python hackers hacked together something then left and they realized they need software engineers, not hackers.

Python is not a bad language (compared to JavaScript). Python interpreter is a piece of shite and the culture and common practicies is what sucks the most. People praise NumPy, Pandas, Flask etc. because they don't know anything else. Anything better. At least they don't have to pay for this.
They're not just talking about prerequisite courses. If someone is willing to cheat in a Comp Sci course, they're probably willing to cheat on a Literature class.
Heads up: this is not The Lockpicking Lawyer.

> We have looked through the videos that the LockPickingLawyer has produced and put together a list that we think he would agree with are the LockPickingLawyer best locks.
Speaking from experience using similar software on students assignments, it is often blatantly obvious when cheating is occurring.

To start with, at an undergrad level, most students had fairly distinct coding styles - usually with quirks of not "proper" coding. Some cheaters had the exact same quirks in multiple students assignments.

Also, some cheaters had the exact same mistakes in their code, on top of the same code style.

Yes the software picks up people that write correct solutions with perfect syntax, but those are the ones that you just toss out because there isn't any proof there.

The people that get caught cheating generally don't know what correct solutions and good code look like, so they don't understand how obvious it is when they copy paste their friends mediocre code.
Code coverage is not a very useful metric. It’s very easy to have 100% coverage without really testing anything. It works as a vague measure of test quality as long as none of the developers care about the value. As soon as they start making the coverage stat a goal itself, it becomes useless.
As a non-UK person who enjoys BBC programming, how can I pay the license fee and get access to all BBC programming?
> The UX redesign was hugely successful in attracting new users

Is there evidence for that?
Someone should type this up and submit a summary as a PR since it answers just about all the obvious questions that come to mind (and thread) from the README.
I don't think people are defending cheating. People are saying that what in the normal world goes under "desirable cooperation" is called "cheating" in school, and for as long as that is the case, students who exhibit normally desirable cooperative behaviour will be called "cheaters" and that's not a reasonable thing to do to them.