skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There is a fundamental ratio between actual productivity and money. If new money is greater than productivity, then over time stuff is worth more. If productivity is greater than new money, then over time money is worth more. You typically hear about this when we talk about 'deflationary spirals'. What's more typical in today's world is the first scenario. When that happens and stuff is worth more, since we know that new money will keep showing up, it's not consumptionary stuff that is worth more, but assets like stocks and houses. So even though the money supply is growing, you don't see any inflation.

As those assets are worth more, they quickly reach their 'true value' and start to bubble up above it. But once the bubble point is reached, true value no longer matters. So APPL might go up, but so do things that are truly worth nothing, like tulips and beanie babies and Bitcoin. And since those things start out at such small values, their values go up exponentially more, which drags more attention to them, and keeps the values going up higher and higher.

The Fed is the cause of these bubbles. They set the interest rate at an artificially low value, and it pushes people to invest in garbage with the too much cash. Once they see that garbage assets that drag productivity is what we are investing our very valuable time with, farming tulips instead of wheat, creating ASICs instead of building cars, buying houses simply to sell it six months later, they need to step up and pop the bubble.

When they switch from scenario #2 to scenario #1, those assets that are worth nothing quickly go back to nothing. Those assets that were worth $15 PE but were driven to $30 PE go back to $15, and might even drop down to $10 briefly. As an asset holder, and knowing this is going to occur, ahead of time you rush to the exit. What do you buy? Whatever you can that didn't already bubble. What is that? Consumption goods. Oil futures, corn futures, used cars. That's the inflation trigger.

By raising rates they flip the ratio, and this is all an inevitable cycle. The more it went up, the harder it comes down. Why don't they just keep money created equal to productivity so that we don't have these cycles? I don't know, ask them.
./configure --prefix=/usr/local && make && sudo make install

(I consider it a feature that this doesn't automatically download and install hundreds to thousands of things I haven't even heard of)
Why can't consenting adults broadcast their own private activities? Why is it their responsibility to parent the world's 12 year olds?
While it might not be sufficient to ensure one can continue living, in the US, Social Security has been in effect since 1940 or so.
I really appreciate the thoughtful responses, what a great community this is
If mass storage densities had kept on doubling every 13 months or so, 307 gigabytes per movie file would probably not seem extraordinary today – we would have several-PB storage media by now. But as it stands, even a state-of-the-art hard drive isn't going to hold many uncompressed movies – especially given that 640x480 doesn't quite cut it anymore!
This statement is the hard problem in a nutshell.
http://underpop.online.fr/r/ruby/rails/tutorial/ruby-on-rail...

Use transactional fixtures as much as possible. Minimal db usage between tests.
I thought home prices were high because new home construction fell off a cliff after the 2008 market crash and has never fully recovered - thus leaving a massive shortage of homes and the Millennials (i.e. Baby Boom 2) generation now reaching the age where they want homes for their kids. Low supply + high demand = high prices. Don't see that changing anytime soon. What we should expect from higher mortgage rates (what I as an old-timer would call "normal" mortgage rates) would be a cooling off on prices. We're already seeing that happening. That's an example of how high rates combat inflation. Your food and energy costs may be soaring but housing costs have just been brought in check.
Shielding people from the actual prices does raise the actual prices typically.
Put in one buck, take out two bucks. The American Dream.
People (EDIT: posts on this forum) keep saying that. It's cousin I guess. Daniel Cussen. Nice to meet you.

Since in this case surely you're not insulting me by proposing I'm an AI, may I too ask you are a bot? We both have full human names as our handle.

Is it like in Terminator, are you more advanced, am I obsolete, should I be afraid of you replacing me?
I was surprised how nice their homes were. Had nicer villas than most people's homes.
There are many many things in the world that grow slower than US money supply but nonetheless see their price go down or plateau.
I guess it's down to a mixture of it being a very controversial issue (though I think it shouldn't be that much, at least on the topics I mentioned) and one that is currently being used by political operators to stoke division.

On that note, I also find it quite interesting that both the conservative right and the subset of the left that are radical feminists and/or gender critical are taking a similar stance on this issue. Though for fundamentally different reasons of course. Some issues really are bipartisan, I guess.
I believe in that case it's pronounced "reál".
Ask HN: Feedback on landing page (OSS project to address pains of Jupyter NB's)
Hi HN, curious if I could solicit feedback on a landing page we've created (this is a project we're looking to OS in the next 2 weeks but looking for beta testers). The project is an IDE/workbench we've been building from our learnings building deep learning models at scale (the tldr is taking a lot of the concepts of Jupyter notebooks and helping integrate that in to a cohesive IDE to productionize models faster).

Goal of the page: get users to sign up for a beta release of the platform.

The page can be found here: www.cnext.io

Thank you in advance for any feedback you all might have (good, bad, indifferent - all is appreciated). If any of you are interested in learning more about the project as well please don't hesitate to reach out.
Would this technically count as science, given that it was a real test of perfluorocarbon breathing and that it was documented?
Well, we already have a society where a large chunk of the population asks a bag of rocks, or read a horoscope or pray to a faded picture for guidance so it seems like it wouldn't take long before people listen to chatbots each morning as they plan their day.

At least with the chatbot, the guidance they get will be (somewhat) more observable.
https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/7807215106396985...

FTA:

"Canada is home to some of the world’s most admired and successful public pension organizations" and
"The core characteristics of the Canadian pension model, articulated in more detail in the next section, have been demonstrated to improve performance. Strong, independent governance is often cited by experts as a driver of outperformance. Inhouse investment management tends to result in improved returns after taking costs into account."

The pension funds all take a much more broadly diversified AND deeper approach than actively managed mutual funds. They are more akin to a Blackstone or Apollo.

Almost all of the top Canadian pension funds have better performance to benchmark over a 3 decade horizon including during the financial crisis, so arguably the proof is in the pudding so to speak.
No, it doesn't. The support isn't there for other OSes (yet).

You won't be able to do viable GPU pass-through for quite some time and even then, it will not work like you think.
Regarding the “too good to be true” part, I wouldn't take them seriously based on what they have published (and more crucially what they have withheld, like an ISA manual or sources of a GNU toolchain port), except they managed to hire a very senior GCC developer. I trust that he did his due diligence before joining them, so I must assume what they are building is real.

Did they make any performance claims about the cross-ISA support? It might just be QEMU port with qemu-user and TCG.
See luxottica and their “brands”.
Strange...I thought it was pretty clear by the end (without going into spoilers) that Ava is sentient. Interesting that there is another interpretation of what happened.
What testing tools are you using? rspec+database_cleaner+FactorBot/Fabricator?

How many tests do you run?
Not only is the core issue difficult to pin down, it's continually clouded by "edge cases", e.g., Am I sentient when asleep, when in a vegetative state, when on drugs etc. etc.

It should be obvious if somebody or something is sentient.
Our Journey to Multi-Region: VTickets, Hublet-Compatible MySQL Auto-Increment
I went through a React course that used Github and some online service to setup CICD in a few clicks with some service. It was painless.

At my company, it would involve going to weekly meetings to get all the updates and changes happening as they keep developing it, one-off meetings to get onboarded and setup... I'm pretty sure they also designed the system for Kubernetes, so I figured it would also mean containerizing the site, as it has been running on VMs for almost 10 years. Those weekly meetings also mean constant changes so things keep working (which I'm not dealing with on a different site that is going though CICD). All of this in the midst of a lot of bureaucracy. It's also a custom home grown solution, so it's not like AWS knowledge I can take with me or google.

It likely would have taken several months for little to no tangible benefit. No one on my team knows how CICD works. I'm the only one who has actually used it, and even my use has been pretty limited. It took 8 months for someone to bother to tell me where I could see build status/errors, at first they just told me to "wait about 10 minutes". There is no documentation anywhere. It's all tribal knowledge and no one seems to have the time to share it.

The only way to maintain my sanity is to not get too involved in it all. It will likely all change and go away within the next 2 years. Nothing lasts lone enough to get too invested in.
The problem when you don't have a formal education is that you don't know what you don't know. A degree is definitely worth it.
I find this works great in 1:1 communication. Inverting 1 and 2 has been more successful for me on communication to a larger audience.

Example:

Need to update windows by tonight or you won't be able to log in. Because x xploit.

Compared to:

We have been notified of x xploit. We all need to update windows by tonight.

But good framework.
For some reason I doubt the creation v. destruction works out in the favor of dams.
Quantum effects aside, yes.
Many third party podcast players for both iOS and Android use Apple’s directory as the canonical source of podcast RSS urls and for search. Once they retrieve the RSS feeds, then they poll the RSS feeds directly.
This sentence translates to "lol u mad bro"

That is I think you are trying to defend someone indefensible position (a google engineer taking a kinda normal ai chatbot conversation and claiming that the AI is alive) by ignoring the core issue and focusing on instead an ansilary issue. I find the misdirection uncompelling.
I obviously could be wrong here and you could genuinely be wondering why this person would be mad.
Historical context:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_River

Briefly put, the Yellow River being powerful, dangerous, and impossible to control was really, really old news a thousand years ago. Ditto the huge quantity of fine sediments in the river, which are (in effect) causing the problems which the article discusses.
That's a bold claim, do you have a source to back that up?
> Crypto needed a tangible market/reason d'etre to be valuable.

The reason, as we have been reminded so many times, is that it's an inflation-resistant store of value.

Pay no attention to BTC tanking right after actual inflation started.

It's weird how, as an inflation-resistant store of value, it only seems to work when we have asset-inflation, but stops working when we have main-street-grocery-prices-inflation.

Perhaps it's some web 3.0 financial wizardry that I'm just not smart enough to understand, but it seems to me that the only reason it was going up in price was because printed money (USD or USDT) was chasing yield.
1. Biology can produce things which are incredibly smart and efficient. It can also produce things which are dumb and inefficient.

By your second sentence it follows that such structures aren't a leap of faith. It is very possible.

2. Human intellect and consciousness is one of the most complex nuanced phenomena we are aware of in the universe.

complexity isn't indicative of efficiency.

3. The human brain is one of the most complex things we know about in the universe.

Same as above.

4. We know very many things about how the brain processes information. We know structure and function are heavily intertwined. We know that the brain uses virtually every aspect of neural biology, from macro structures down to intracellular mechanisms, to facilitate information processing.

But we don't know whether the entire structure is efficient.

>That is all evidence to support the belief that the complexity of the brain is meaningful with respect to the production of human intelligence.

But it is not evidence supporting the thesis that the brain being inefficient is a leap of faith.

>It seems that you want to believe that most of that complexity is not meaningful, and your only evidence is "you had a feeling" and "biology is inefficient sometimes".

The feeling has been rationalized. I explained the logic, it is now backed up. The criterion here is not absolutist. The criterion is just stating whether or not such a scenario is likely. IS it a leap of faith or is it not? I've sufficiently proved that the brain being inefficient is clearly NOT a leap of faith.

>If you want to prove it's not a leap of faith, you have to present examples in which the information processing of the brain is actually inefficient, or how it can be replaced by a much simpler system. Otherwise it's all just a guess.

Easy we have many ML models that already beat humans at certain tasks.. Those models use much less neurons then the entire brain itself and follows a much simpler model. See spam filters. It shows that a simpler model is already possible for certain aspects of intelligence.

I disagree with you. I believe I've shown enough evidence to move the probability out of "leap of faith" territory. I just threw in the example up above because you requested it.
There are various sizes of CLIP, many are not enormous. For example, one of the base models is just a standard resnet50. So very usable on a mobile device.
I think there is a non-zero chance that AI as it stands today actually doesn't suck at animal-level common sense, it's just that we don't have a realistic enough simulation environment built that it can train on.

While at first glance it may appear that humans learn much better than AI in unstructured environments, I would argue that from the very moment a human is born, it is in a very highly structured environment provided by their parents and modern society.

If you made some baby robots and gave them human parents, would they be much better suited for driving a car after 16 years?

Of course I am hand waving away a lot of technical complexity here, but perhaps the road to artificial general intelligence... is an artificial general simulation?
Yet somehow market driven healthcare is almost universally more expensive, it’s like there are some monopolistic effects involved.

For example several attempts to privatize the VA failed because of the vast increase in costs.
Thanks! :)

It currently does gzip compression by default. Compression modes for specific files sounds interesting, I will definitely get around to implementing that.
I check occasionally, most of the posts there are right wing nuts. Like 100% without merit will get thousands of upvotes and lots of comment from what are obviously russian/chinese/whoever bots.
This is awesome. Especially the ability to compress delimiters. I can't tell you how many times I want to grab a couple fields from the output of another command but can't get delimiters to work correctly or they're using custom spacing to align columns and it blows everything up and then I'm crying in awk land.
It's not clear that we will succeed at the fairly simple KYC process. A lot of exchanges have fairly stringent requirements around customers' directors' citizenships, and those that do not often like to play 100 round matches of email tag with us.

If you work for Tether and you created a new Hacker News account to offer to onboard us, that sounds great :)
One assumption people seem to be making is that sentience is a binary: either one has it or one doesn't. It's possible that there are many levels of self-awareness, some which we would recognize and some which we would not. There may be levels of sentience humans have not yet experienced, even.

For instance, ants exhibit self-aware behavior when presented with a mirror test. Does this mean ants are sentient?

https://www.npr.org/2021/08/09/1026227683/mirror-mirror-on-t...
I had a 7200 and it never really performed very well. The "software" modem/telephony device was interesting, but the backing software was too crashy. Mostly I remember it seeming slower than the last generation of 68k Quadras; I had one of those on my desk at my day job.

The first generation iMac, on the other hand, I did think was a lot of fun. All of the sudden the UI was responsive and the software was surprisingly reliable.
They’re pretty clear that this is not the case. However, that doesn’t stop our imaginations going wild as per the GP’s point. It’s impressive how good these bots are compared to the state of the art 10 years ago.

https://help.replika.com/hc/en-us/articles/115001070971-Is-t...
They just described a situation where most of their readily available bitcoin (exchanges do not keep more than a minimum of their available cryptocurrencies in a programmatrically available wallet) could be stuck in the mempool.
That’s what I initially tried for fd, but unfortunately glibc is required for it, and probably other utilities as well.
Developer's Guide to SaaS Compliance
It sounds to me like you’ve said that BTC will both go up and not go up in an inflationary environment.

I’ve been wondering why a hedge wouldn’t be for this exact environment, so can you explain your thinking a bit more?
Looks like they're doing it bespoke:

https://github.com/lucacasonato/fresh/pull/108/files#diff-27...

Although the way it's implemented seems similar to mkdocs.
The claim that 1 hour solar charging will get 32km range is… bullshit.
It's relatively new that it isn't; wasn't culture pre-1970 or so arranged with kids in mind?
I too found a lack of strong opinions and recommendations for using Django with TypeScript and modern web technologies. So, shameless plug, I built https://www.reactivated.io . Give it a look if you ever work with Django again.
Thanks. Do you have some good link to explain the mechanics, particularly the "unwrapping" of eg. WBTC? That involves a trusted third party, doesn't it?
Okay, but Bitcoin won't make that happen.

We didn't build nukes because we wanted to protect the USD, it was a fight about ideas like Communism, national control, etc...
I don’t know which electrons are going to go through a particular logic gate either, but I’m still pretty sure that 1 XOR 0 is still 1. I’m a bit rusty, but I’m pretty sure quantum theory suggests that I never will be able to know.

If you spend enough time with biology, the messy parts are all abstracted away and what you’re left with are observations of things we can measure. How much of protein X, migration of cell Y, etc. You don’t need to know what a specific molecule is doing, only what the population of those molecules is doing.

It’s not so much a statistical problem as it is an observability problem. And while not exactly for the same quantum reason as Heisenberg, you quickly hit the the same problem — you can’t observe the location of an exact molecule without affecting the system.

The real point being — these are all abstractions on top of abstractions. And while you can measure things at one level, the level underneath may be a complete mess. But to discount a computer compared to biology because we “understand” it all is silly to me. We also “understand” a lot about biology. Especially that complex behaviors can result from very simple inputs/instructions. At the core, we are very complex biological systems. But systems with rules and patterns nonetheless.
I wasn't even aware this was a question.

I'd also consider the possibility that high-achievers realize that drinking calories is hardly ever worth it. And if you want something that tastes like soda but has all the nutritional value of water, Diet Coke is your best option.
They even own the insurance company, EyeMed...
> I wonder how you can be so sure about digital logic not being able to produce subjective experience? How is being able to describe how a mechanism works related to knowing if it feels something or not?

I have a consciousness, and this is something I am able to observe. I hope that some day there will be an explanation for this, but until then the lack of an explanation does not invalidate my own observations.

>How is being able to describe how a mechanism works related to knowing if it feels something or not?

It's not, but if you can't observe that a machine is conscious and you also can't observe any mechanism that would make it conscious then there's no basis to assume a consciousness exists.

>We have no sure way to tell if any other human experiences anything or if they are philosophical zombies. This is just something we have not figures out how to measure conceptually let alone technically. Where do you take the confidence of judging whether the AI has subjective experience in this case?

Yes it is technically true that nobody can be sure of anybody possessing a consciousness but themself. However, it's not illogical to assume that another human being who is very similar to you must also have similar experiences even if it cannot be proven outright. It's highly illogical to assume that a computer program would have similar experiences to a person.

>Do you think that there is something still to be found in the human brain that will explain why we (humans, animals) uniquely have subjective experience and others (AI) are zombies?

Yes. I can't even begin to speculate on what that is, but the fact that we (or at least I) are conscious implies that something must be causing that consciousness.
Because market cap is price * shares.

And price is the price of the last trade.

You wouldn't be able to get every shareholder (or 51%) to sell you for that price.
Money isn't wealth. What you can get for it is. Hoarding casino chips does not prepare you for the future. It just makes the people running the casino richer with goods you traded for the chips.

Oh you say, I can trade the chips with other people. Also the chips are numbered and we have an agreement to never accept a casino chip numbered over 1 trillion. Then we pay the casino one chip every time we trade. So the casino always has some chips to trade.

The casino always wins. You're even paying their horrendous electricity bill.
I'd be interested too, the only thing I could find was the Lead Contamination Act of 1988 that was supposed to fight contaminated water coolers - pretty bizarre that this was actually a thing.

[1] https://www.congress.gov/bill/100th-congress/senate-bill/261...
Who is saying there is anything against either poetry or religion saying whatever they can about consciousness? I'm doubting the value of pidgeonholing.

To claim an ontological gap is to put the cart before the horse. If or when we understand consciousness, we will be able to tell if there is a relevant ontological gap, or whether it is an illusion generated by our ignorance.