skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This article is a waste of time at best and a deliberate misdirection at worst. Focusing on the (alleged) leaker and ignoring the content of the leak is a classic propaganda tactic. Right at the beginning we see this claim in defense of the CIA program:

This is not dragnet mass surveillance of the kind more often associated with the National Security Agency. These are hacks, or “exploits,” designed for individual targets.

Perhaps the most news-making program in that leak was something called "Marble Framework", and as I recall NSA whistleblower Bill Binney talked quite a bit about it in relation to Russiagate. I don't care about Russiagate, so let's search Google with 'verbatim' (under tools) on.

binney "marble framework" CIA -russiagate

So, here we get a lot of interesting results and a description of Marble Framework. Here's one source for example, not sure I agree with their characterization of Binney, who was at least trying to be responsible and follow the laws that banned mass domestic warrantless collection, and who seems like a decent person (plus B-tree tutorial) but at least this source discusses the central matter:

https://freethoughtblogs.com/stderr/2017/04/14/why-cia-and-n...

> "Description: The Marble Framework is designed to allow for flexible and easy-to-use obfuscation when developing tools. When signaturing tools, string obfuscation algorithms (especially those that are unique) are often used to link malware to a specific developer or development shop. This framework is intended to help us (AED) to improve upon our current process for string/data obfuscation in our tools. The framework utilizes pre and post-build execution steps to apply obfuscation to the tool. [CIA Marble Framework docs]"

This is a tool allowing for things like 'false flag' cyberattacks, such as planting malware that looks like it came from whoever - North Korea, Iran, etc. - but which reports back to CIA. Rather tellingly, this article doesn't even mention it. Nor does it dig into the issue of economic espionage, something the US government claims it never does. See the above source's discussion of something called 'Longhorn' for the counterexample.

The issue is this makes all the US government claims about 'detecting the signature of foreign hackers' in all manner of news reports completely suspect. How do we know they didn't put those signatures there themselves? Now they have a massive credibility problem (see also lies about WMDs in Iraq, etc.) - and that's something the New Yorker apparently doesn't want to dig into. Kind of pathetic really.
> He bought something that was damaged and its value went off a cliff.

Disingenuous.

He knew about the bots. Everyone knows about the bots.
Video deinterlacing is one of those topics that I always felt would be a good way to teach myself deep learning techniques. The idea that you have a previous frame and a next frame with information to help you fill in the gaps of the current frame is really intuitive and easy to visualize. I'm sure this has been solved really well by now, but it seems like a good problem to learn with.
Open in the sense that the standard literally states "will handle XYZ case as the case is handled in MS Office 2000. So to implement the standard one needs a copy of Office 2000 to see how it handles specific cases. That's black box testing, as Office source code is not available.
«50-80% of the oxygen production... comes from the ocean ... (Prochlorococcus... produces up to 20% of the oxygen in our entire biosphere) ... although... roughly the same amount is consumed by marine life» (from https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/ocean-oxygen.html )

At first appearance, «drastic effects on the entire ocean ecosystems», surely with massive consequences for humans, but a non clearly computed effect on the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere.
I want to note here that throughout the internet and HN there is this ongoing wisdom that although Rust is very useful, valuable etc writing code in it is very hard because it constantly feels like you're wrestling the compiler.

Well, maybe there is some truth to it, but I want to say that having started learning Rust in 2022, I found it's multi-threadedness model very refreshing. I thought it was such a delight to write code in, and personally loved it at least one order of magnitude than Go's goroutines. It's safe, embedded in type system (Send etc), has tons of standard tools (Arc, Mutex, mspci channel etc...) that are hard to shoot your foot with.

When people talk about Rust's complicated nature, I wish more emphasis is made on how it completely eliminates entire categories of bugs even within a multi-threaded context. As a corrolary, it really makes some parts of programming hard in other languages, nearly trivial in Rust.
My kids are in college now, so they went to high school recently. The school subscribed to Google Classroom, and students used Google Docs to work on assignments, often collaboratively. There was no systematic training, and no use of features beyond basic text editing.

Nobody uses Google Classroom after they finish school, and most people can quickly adapt to any text editor. They already use multiple text editors if they interact with any online software. There's no use for fancy page formatting of documents that will be read once and never printed.

If anything, Google and Microsoft tools have the advantage of being general purpose, even if they are closed source. This liberates students from "educational" software that is almost universally abysmal. Subjects like math were still being taught in relatively traditional ways, e.g., by pencil and paper.

My main gripe was that you couldn't put Python on the school issued Chromebooks.
The part that makes that position extremist in my view is the "God-given" bit, not anything that comes after. Because anyone can say "I have a God-given right to X" for any X and there is no way to challenge that. It is the built-in immunity to challenge that makes such a position extremist.
Why make a good point and follow it with a bad joke which: both has a class of victim and does not work as a joke?

Nobody has ever heard of "the French" undertaking such a project. And if it had ever happened, it would most surely have been a particular Academy or the like. Not the 65M people under your careless swipe.
To be honest, haters and defenders seem to be pretty evenly matched up at the moment. Maybe even slight edge to the defenders if not by number of accounts then by zeal to make lots of replies.
Akamai already solved this https://developer.akamai.com/blog/2019/06/18/announcing-grap...

But looks like they will build more out of the box integrations.
Excited to see this and congrats to the team! I've been huge fan of GraphQL for a while and have checked out all of the major players. A big one I've used in the past is Hasura. It's refreshing to see Wundergraph's approach because it appears they've managed to couple the generated client and server in a way that assures your code is correct (beyond just having type-safe queries) while maintaining the flexibility of having multiple data sources configured with code. There's no wasted effort here.

Can't wait to see where they take this - if their blog (https://wundergraph.com/blog) is any indication, they will continue to add innovation in this space. You can tell Jens has put a massive amount of thought into what GraphQL is best used for and what the DX should be.
Kinda funny, when I first started using Twitter I thought of it as an elevated AIM away message.
Stellar team! Congrats Tim and Max!
This is an interesting take I hadn't heard before. Thank you. I wonder why this hasn't been getting communicated by Twitter to Elon though (he likely has not have realized that this change occurred).
> Mozilla hasn’t successfully implemented it all properly for example.

interesting. I didn't know that. I tried googling to find out what parts are not implemented but couldn't find anything (admittedly not a long search).

Do you have more information you can point me to?
> Why do you hate arrogant people?

At least in American English, the connotation of the word "arrogant" is so universally negative that it would only ever be used to express distaste for someone. Now whether he is arrogant or just (over)confident is another question but I think you acknowledge there is at least a good case for the former.

> We want this man to keep investing and running capital.

Why? If you ask the folks at the SEC, they probably wouldn't agree with you. From a public perspective, he hasn't exactly been great on regulatory compliance and market protection. From a shareholder/company perspective, he is a major liability. No company ever wants a CEO or any employee that picks fights with regulators, has a massively oversized media spotlight, and entangles the business in unrelated politics and personal fixations. That's textbook bad news for a business.
I just listened to an episode of The Darknet Diaries with an ex-CIA (I think) agent and he was talking about MICE. I'm pretty sure he said the C was for Coercion, but that does include blackmail as you said.
Doesn't yield increase with more CO2? It certainly did in my greenhouse when I put my large rabbit inside.
First off, it's "HIPAA", not "HIPPA."

Secondly, I'm specifically responding to GP's assertion that letting people access the databases on-prem would make any privacy concerns go away. I'm expressing no opinions on the matter of the first place of if those privacy concerns are warranted.

Thirdly, at this point, I would personally be highly skeptical that an NDA would actually provide any meaningful protection when Musk is the one signing it. His recent actions indicate to me a very high disregard for any contractual obligations he enters on, in the apparent belief that he will face zero material repercussions for anything he violates.
Just shipping keys to someone to hold on doesn't make the encryption not-end-to-end, though it does reduce the point quite a bit.
Or unionize. Only takes a majority to vote for it, and attempting to do so is protected by US labor law in the US. You then have the leverage to negotiate for remote work as a locked in benefit.

Workers have other options than simply accepting management shenanigans or leaving.
Not pedantic, I think people just didn't realize you were narrowly thinking of seawater freezing directly when you said "freezing wouldn't explain it".
The most likely reason is the one show in the simulation made in this paper, I recently posted here.

"Possible CETIs Within Our Galaxy and Communication Probability Among CETIs ":
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31449404"

"...human beings need to survive 50 (+250 -49) Myr to receive one signal from other CETIs. Our results may quantitatively explain why we have not detected any alien signals so far. The uncertainty of the results has been discussed in detail and would be alleviated with the further improvement of our astronomical observation ability in the future..."

The universe is a big, big place and civilizations come and go. We would need to be around for 50 million years, to have a good chance to catch a window that would match another civilization. We are barely around as a species for 2 million years and civilization is maybe 10,000 years old...
Used to entertain ideas that he was an intelligence limited hangout, but...he's just too relentless & genuine to be doing a "good job" as one!

He really does try to inform the People.
You can also simply have a pointer to the value, so a node is just three pointers (prev, val, next) in a fixed sized structure. This gets you 2 nodes / CL. Add a fixed sized hash of value (key) if you want to search the list without chasing the val pointer, and your node still fits in a 64b CL. Pad it with 24b (yes, sacrifice a bit of space for performance gain) and your nodes will cache align.

Resize point is fair but we still options here. A segmented approach for very large collections may also help, with tuning knobs of array size / segment. The smallish top level ds maintaining segment ptrs will be super hot and very likely ever present in L2.

It really all depends on how many items are involved and how the data needs to be accessed and used.
>Or when it prevents a new fossil fuel power plant to open.

That's not a benefit, that's a loss averted. These claims are usually over egged as well for "net zero" calculations. Net zero against some hypothetical averted future, but in physical reality the emissions are still there heating the atmosphere.

As an analogy, I can "prevent spending" by buying a coffee machine, bulk buying some products, etc. However, there are more ways to spend money than I can even notice, and I can pile up the "savings" but still find I have no money left at the end of a month to... actually deposit into my savings. I think it's a common experience.

If production of fossil fuels is not decreased by regulation, then a drop in domestic demand means more is available to export. The export price goes down, encouraging the continued use of fossil fuels abroad. Another power plant is built over there and emits GHGs.
>Honestly I think it's comical that people are complaining that he's not paying up for twitter when valuations went off a cliff and twitter hasn't divulged bot data

We aren't complaining, we're mostly confused how the world's smartest man would make a bid on a product not based on actual valuation, but instead on the inflated current public market price.

He's free to back out of the deal, but some people aren't falling for the victimization. His bid was a mistake, and he should own it.

>twitter hasn't divulged bot data

Once again, this should have been part of a due diligence process that the Musk team deemed unnecessary.
Russian-speakers, mostly ex-USSR citizens, hundreds of thousands of them from Ukraine.

Israeli policy can be traced to Russia's presence in Syria, not to internal politics.
Rather than guess, do some research ;)

Vertical is simply a thing, because phones are generally used in portrait mode.

The traditional aspect ratios were created to suit human vision.
Yeah, I was that guy. We used Mercurial for way too long.

I thought I'd learned my lesson, switched to Git, etc. Then I started rolling out SaltStack and turned myself back into that guy. I finally gave up when I realized I was the bottleneck on so many people's work. Went back to plain old written deployment guidance about three years ago. Now I'm looking at containerization and orchestration tooling and worrying if I'm making the same freaking mistake yet again.

It's such a difficult balancing act, especially as one moves into management. I could, by fiat, mandate tooling (and do). But will I regret my possibly poor choice in 5 years? I don't know—let's find out!
The only reason you think cars are a good thing and give you freedom and not say, busses and trains, is because cars are available to you and the infrastructure is available to you. Others who have fantastic public transport feel cars are restricting and expensive way to move around.

You are simply a product of an environment you had no say in creating.
I just want the door open/door close sounds back to know when my contacts are on or off line ;)
There was an interesting startup from a few years back that would basically issue everybody in your company a dedicated android tablet on a stand that shipped with a customized collaboration software.

I'm not sure I'd like to use it myself, but it had some interesting UX ideas around always on video (but blurred out and audio muted) so you and your team were more "present".

I can't find it now, but a part of it was a better away message setup for the same reasons.
Have you used public transit outside of NYC in the US? It's a laughable token service. It takes me ~ 15m to drive to work. Taking public transit would extend that to 93m. It would legitimately be faster to bike there. I do not live in a small town. This is in one of the top 10 cities in the US.
Morrowind is all about cheesing the system. It's one of the few games that allow you to go full singularity.

How it works: You make a potion of intelligence. Drink it. Now you're more intelligent and would you look at that, the potency of said potion depends on your intelligence. So you make another one that boosts it even higher. Rinse and repeat until you have astronomical intelligence and then you brew a potion of strength that will last essentially forever and allows you to one punch a god.

Or you can make a potion of paralysis, drink it, and be stuck for years.

It's hilarious and I love it.
It's true that total emission and reuptake is quite large compared to human-caused emissions: about 29GT from humans, 750GT total in the carbon cycle annually. However, the systems that reuptake the CO2 are fairly sensitive and don't have a lot of slack in them, so adding that additional 29GT turns out to have an impact.

The Earth's atmosphere weighs about 5.5 quadrillion tons. Ignoring the differences in weights of different air molecules, adding 5.5 billion tons of CO2 would increase the CO2 concentration by ~1PPM.

So if all 29 billion tons of human emissions were not reabsorbed into the biosphere, we would expect to see global CO2 concentrations increase by between 5 and 6 ppm. In reality we see an increase of just over 2ppm per year, meaning that while much of human emissions are indeed reabsorbed into the biosphere, ~40% is not.
as a web developer, this might be the project I'm most excited about. I've been following for a while and these guys have been making constant and steady progress, attempting to solve a very interesting and prevalent problem. Plenty of reasons here to be pumped for the future
You can't put the genie back in the bottle. The reason AIM felt better was because way fewer people were online and it tended towards smaller groups of more recent friends. In that environment synchronous chat was fun and novel.

Since then we've been inundated with always-on expectations, and the only way to maintain sanity now is to treat all text communications as varying degrees of asynchronous. Slack and others provide plenty of tools for this, though ultimately it's up to the individual to enforce them.
Thank you for the illumination. Is it correct to say that CO2 causes an increase in temperature provided all else remains the same? I realize that not else will remain the same but it was my understanding that increases in CO2 have a heating effect, in the sense of keeping everything else the same, and that this is indisputable. Am I wrong?
I don't understand this article at all. The author mentions that:

> The theorical complexities are:

> For list: O(n)

> For vector: O(n)

... but then goes on to compare running times of list vs vector and notices vector is 90 times faster than list for many operations, mulls over cache locality and whatnot. Did he seriously expect O(n) to give him a way to compare running times? Big-O is about asymptotic behavior, not a way to compare running times in milliseconds between two implementations.

That is, "how many seconds does this take?" cannot be answered with "oh, it's O(N^2)".

The author seems very confused about what he is trying to argue.
Based on the letter[1] it sounds like Musk is asking for raw data about the users to perform his own analysis of who is fake and who is not.

This could end up as endless argument about the correct methodology of determining real vs fake/bot account.

[1] https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001418091/000110465...
The flaw in our approach to the Fermi paradox is that we are looking for intelligent life which resembles us as we are now. Big, corporal bodies made of proteins communicating with big, inefficient, slow frequency vibrations. But this is just a transitory phase in our evolution which will pass in the astronomical blink of an eye.

Consider if you agree with these propositions:

- Consciousness is an emergent property of computation

- Computation is possible in any media

- Computation is more efficient in smaller, less massy media

- We are already beginning to fiddle with our own brains and this will accelerate

- Our bodies in general have huge room for optimization and eventually will be completely unrecognizable or even unnecessary as we currently imagine them

- Progress is exponential as our population grows in education, size and free time

If these are true, what does that mean for our destiny as a species in 100k years? 1M years?

I think we can all agree we will become cyborgs, but I think we still imagine our bodies having the same form factor. But that's the flawed assumption. Really we will shrink down. And what's the limit to how far down we shrink and how efficient and massless our bodies/brains get? How would we even be communicating in 1M years? Through entangled qubits? Vibrations in subspace? Who knows, but it's probably not something 21st century earth would even notice with a radio telescope.

So the answer to the Fermi paradox isn't that intelligent life snuffs itself out after a few million years. That's terribly unimaginative. The answer is that from our perspective intelligent civilizations disappear because they change themselves so radically that they transcend our concept of what to look for.
O(x) = O(1) if x is some finite constant.