skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The PoC requirement seems to be there to help the triage team filter out the many garbage reports they get.

Having seen a glimpse of what you get out of a bug bounty program (lots and lots of people with no clue submitting bogus reports) I understand why companies are doing that, but especially for a commercial company, their triage burden is not my problem. I'm doing them a massive favor by reporting it, and as mentioned above I'm not getting paid adequately for it... so either they do the triage properly (yes, that's a lot of work), or they pay me to spend time to give them a clearer proof... or they don't get the vulnerability reported/responsibly disclosed.

Ironically, if you went through one of the platforms initially and they responded like that, you can't just go full disclosure anymore without violating the platform ToS, just like this post showed.

The absolute minimum that such platforms should do would be report closed = NDA lifted, but since they're more dependent on their paying customers than the researchers, they won't do that.
You shouldn’t even want to work as a dev in a position that is screened by leetcode. Not because the interview sucks, but because you’re going to hate the job. You won’t be using legos, you’ll be building lego bricks.

It’s not the same job. low level engineering is nerdy and often tedious, and is not for everybody.

You may like cooking, but don’t necessarily enjoy building the oven.

There is a place for people like you in tech. Just do your thing, stop worrying and let the leetcoders be.
I tend to upvote too many things for the upvoted list to work for me, so I'm glad the favourites function exists. If I find a comment useful or insightful, I automatically upvote it without thinking. Maybe I upvote too much; I don't know.
Well, there are plenty of quantum effects required for cells to function (everything is just biophysics and biochemistry after all), but those are irrelevant at the scale of the brain as a whole. The properties we care about (especially in this context) are emergent.
They do.

https://www.lg.com/levant_en/mobile-phones

No idea if it's good or bad.
This seems like an overly narrow reading of gp. One does not have to anthropomorphize evolution to speculate that consciousness would likely have fit this pattern of “some things that happen”

If you’re taking “hates” literally… it’s probably a misreading
Because by most measures they make some of the best TVs. The complaints are just about software which nobody does indepth reviews of.
It's only possible to see the vote count on your own comments, so OP must have been referring to OP's own comments. One way to check your comments' vote count is to go to your /threads page, but if you have a comment that is threaded underneath one of your own comments, it will be harder to see because it will blend in with all the other replies to your original comment.

I have found that it is very rare that one of my grandchild+ comments attracts more upvotes than my original comment though, so I don't concern myself with these comments much.
The experiment is okay, it's actually a special case of a concept explored in Egan's Permutation City and your observation about what's really doing the work applies there too. Except story goes in unsettling directions by really taking noise generator aspect seriously. Things get interesting when sections of patterns become self interpreting.

A similar thing could be done for brains: record with necessary accuracy, all voltages, membrane potentials and any key biochemical concentrations. This will take a finite number of bits. Look for a decoding of recorded data from heated iron bar, convert those readings, instead of using original, and play that back into state clamped brain. Does being able to read conscious state into brains from hot iron invalidate them too?

Another relevant story is Wang's Carpets. We might look at some alien moss or fungal mat and think it primitive. But later our technologies and knowledge advance to the point we can now see it's running a complex computation with intelligent agents inhabiting. Did the creatures not exist until we could decode them?

One of its pivotal flaws is:

> Since there is no definition of computation without reference to an external observer, a system in isolation just cannot compute, which suggests that a conscious being cannot compute.

This is an assumption they do not try to and cannot prove. It's also what much of their argument rests upon.

Related ideas are subjectivity of emergence or what counts as an observer for Wigner's Friend.
Because we do not know what consciousness is, it is impossible to say if consciousness is computation or not.

we must not resist any idea about consciousness because it is very poorly known phenomenon. Anyone who argues that it is known if consciousness is computation or not, is just completely wrong.
Not speaking for them, but I do contract work on the Pi/Arduino systems for the pasteurization process. It's all pretty straightforward technically, but I thought HN readers might be interested to know that it's making use of open source software under the hood (and might be open source at some point).
I’m shocked, absolutely shocked, that now that US developers have voluntarily chosen to rid themselves of agglomeration benefits their salaries are converging with those in the rest of the world.
Hard work alone does not yield success. Any of us who have succeeded have had a huge amount of luck. Simply being born in what is presumably a first world country during a time of relative prosperity is already a tremendous amount of luck.
Yes this! I've worked so much with static typing and I always think this when people talk about all the bugs that it prevents. I do from time to time wonder why stuff isn't working while I'm building it in a dynamic language just to find that I have a typo somewhere and I might get annoyed but then I think about all the types I would have to write and maintain and I'm happy again. I'm convinced that most of the time there is not enough ROI to justify the added complexity and mental burden of adding something that does nothing for the problem you're trying to solve.
No, it won't. I would join FTX if you want to work in crypto. If not, join apple or Microsoft. They are the only good safe play for next few years among MANGA.
They are a public company. Go look at their financials. They almost certainly aren't going bankrupt in the next 6 months. They have 6 bill in cash, and until this past qtr were cashflow positive for a couple years.

If they do go bankrupt in the next 6 months it will be because they are doing something shady and it blows up. I don't think they are, but they are in a very shady industry so they might be.

Why is a company which is in an industry which is full of scams and bs your dream company? May as well join Philip Morris? The other consideration is long-term, because either a) crypto blows up or b) margins will erode significantly. But those are 5-10 years out.
I think the idea that evolution has a purpose and a direction is more than common enough that when someone says something like that things that evolve never lack a purpose, they've gone wrong in their understanding of evolution, even if only in subtle ways they may not be aware of themselves.

Anyways, I think the juxtaposition is funny no matter how seriously they meant it. We all want to believe that consciousness is something that can be easily defined and yet our use of aspects of it is extremely fuzzy.
The Federal Reserve took strong measures to make sure another credit crunch did not happen. They let banks exchange their illiquid treasury bond holdings for cash. This increases what gets counted in the currency base. They cut the reserve ratio requirement to 0%. They did QE. They even proposed buying corporate bond ETFs and just this announcement eased the market stress in the bond market. They did swap lines with other central banks. They pulled out every stop short of negative interest rates in order to ensure businesses in peril could draw upon existing lines of credit and then tap the capital markets to raise cash.
Despite paying hundreds or even thousands, you're okay with that?
I don't think anyone can answer that for you.

My advice would be to have a diverse skill set and be ready to work on things that don't involve crypto/DeFi if that's where the market goes.
I think he is referring to “computation” in a strictly binary sense.
"From a $ perspective, most bug bounty programs look rather uneconomic to me, which I presume is by design."

It depends. If you're a graduate with multiple FAANG offers in the US, they're not worth it. If you're in a developing country, they're worth it a lot.

Unfortunately, that also means that people who have good skills are less likely to participate and people who don't have marketable skills have an apparent incentive to try (they will not get the money, but the promise/possibility still lures them to submit reports) resulting in an absolutely atrocious quality of reports.

I don't think authentication is useful for white hats. A whitehat can just report it (which he'd do anyways) and then either get the bounty or not. The only benefit of authentication would be for the receiving company, and that's called triage and exists as a service (as we see in the full timeline, it was used here).
Philosophers in general have no special insight, but certain philosophers do and I'd argue more than certain others in other professions. They seem to have the best grasp of the consciousness question when compared to physicists, biologists, computer scientists, and psychologists, who all seem to get wrapped up in applying their expertise. A philosopher's expertise lies in crafting and analyzing questions and concepts. Which is the stage our understanding of consciousness remains at and seems to be stuck at for the near future.

I thought the article was very good, you claim it to not be. You say

> Poking at the edges of consciousness (mostly with drugs) leads to all sorts of contradictions and challenges to what people usually think of as consciousness

Well I personally have done all the drugs, and I find those experiences have only strengthened my confidence in what I think of as consciousness. This article outlines my views more or less, which is closely related to the philosophical field of phenomenology. We can take our experience of consciousness in and of itself as a way to define consciousness and this shows how that clashes with the computational (and I think mainstream) view.

Interesting that our personal experiences are opposite. However I don't particularly care about yours or others experiences of consciousness; I'm more interested in my own.
Good question! If I knew the answer, (well if I knew it would be NO) then I could get rich by betting on it using options or something like that.

Ahh. hold on, let's use that fact:

Let's say another 50% or more reduction in share price is 'bad' for you, the options market says the chance of that happening by the end of the year (well Jan 2023) is 10% ish, if I am reading it right. So the market thinks they will likely survive for about your internship anyway.

The probability of 10% is surprisingly about the same going forward another year to Jan 2024. So I think you are OK. If someone disagrees, go make some money, the market is ready to hand you cash.

This is quite a crude way, but it puts some probabilities on it, otherwise it is just my opinion something like "yes crypto is dead they'll go bust" which is just not based on anything.

Reference: https://www.barchart.com/stocks/quotes/COIN/volatility-greek...

Where "Delta" is approximately the probability of the option being exercised.

Now if you really want to make money, bet with your friends on things that sound unlikely but are likely, based on the deltas of options.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31781650
> In my experience EU (particularly NL/FR/DE) engineers have a very different understanding of the level of effort work should entail

Could you elaborate on this?
You can start there then wind up with floating point.

Say we have a 32 bit CPU. Let's store fractions in two halves, the numerator and denominator.

This turns out to be super inconvenient for irrational numbers. We can use an alternative representation where the number is in two halves, the integer half and fractional half. In other words your first 32 bits are 1X2^0...31 and second 32 bits are 1x2^-1...-32. This is called fixed point.

You run into a problem where this is usually extremely wasteful in the number of bits used, so you can fuse them into a single 32 bits used, and the binary decimal point is at the 16th bit, 18th bit, whatever you need. You just need to track it when multiplying or dividing numbers to handle the appropriate shifts. This is "fixed" point math, and it's what we did for decades because it's super cheap in hardware (it's the same integer adders/multipliers, just some extra work for division and shifting for multiplication).

You might even want the decimal point to move. Say your numbers are almost always less than 1, why use more than 1 bit for the integer part and in software, handle the overflows and change of decimal point when needed?

Well that software part is super complex, so you can implement some special hardware to do it. It's even really convenient to change the representation from a fixed integer and decimal half to a decimal mantissa and integer exponent. Now you've reinvented floating point. It would be great if there was a standard so all languages could agree on representation and hardware to implement it really fast. That's IEEE 754.
I think I adhere to the duck-typing theory of conciousness. If I walks, talks and acts like concious being, then it doesn’t particularly matter to me how that comes about (e.g. the opposite of the chinese room argument).

If someone is following a ‘program’ for responding to Chinese characters, that’s as good as speaking Chinese since there is no distinguishable difference.
You wrongly assume the output of such "computation" cannot itself be an input to the computation. Which, if you know anything about the brain, we know certainly happens by virtue of watching synapses fire.

See also simplified models like recurrent neural networks for example.
Where did the collateral come from?
Whoa! No need for such hostility.
Can I use a Lumina if I don't run macOS or Windows? (Does it show up on the bus as a UVC camera?)
No, dogs and birds can't "speak", not in the same sense you do (with dolphins it's a little more debatable).

Animal calls have no syntax - each call has some meaning, but they do not compose in any way. The order in which an animal performs its calls is arbitrary, and an animal hearing said calls doesn't pay attention to it. Even basic modifiers like "no" don't exist in animal communication - if a call means "food", and another call means "no", then an animal hearing the call for "no" and the call for "food" will behave as if they heard there is food somewhere.

The exception to this seem to be dolphins (orcas, in particular), where it seems they have been quite successfully trained to follow a series a short commands in order, in a sign language (so you can sign "jump, swim, splash" and they will follow this; and then sign "swim, splash, jump" and they will do it in the new order). This can't be done with dogs, and it's even questionable if it has been successfully done with chimps.
I can’t explain to you how a whole brain works, but if the question was genuine, I would actually recommend starting with Blumenfeld’s “Neuroanatomy through Clinical Cases” textbook. It’ll demystify a lot of the larger scale questions around structure and organization. It’s fairly easy to study how neurons, axons and synapses work using any number of freely available resources. You’ll never find out exactly how every cell is wired, but after a while (especially if you have a comp-sci, ML or statistics background) you’ll realize that that’s besides the point.
Repost from another thread [0]

> To pasteurize the pee, it stays in the jug for at least two months before the farmer applies it

A 2 month "buffer" (beyond that needed due to crop seasonality) needs to hold a lot of pee.

This processing time can be reduced to 10 hours by adding watermelon seeds[1], which contain the enzyme urease.

If only the Romans had known this! They stored large amounts of urine (converting to ammonia) for washing clothes. For this reason, Roman laundries were legally forbidden from being located within city limits.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31800128

[1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/291165299_Citrullus...
Is Lamarckism making a comeback?
Isn’t there already a notch on most MacBooks where you can stick your finger to pry open the screen?
There is negligible transaction volume in cryptocurrencies. If no one is transacting in them, then they are a solution in search of a problem.

Why exactly is Coinbase your 'dream company'? If they are basically a brokerage that deals with a particular asset type, then what about Coinbase differentiates them from e-trade, Charles Schwab, Robinhood or any other brokerage?

Working at a brokerage was not my idea of a dream when I was looking for an internship many years ago. I'm curious to know why it's your dream.
Why is Asian left out of the first chart, yet included in the next?

This happens all the time. Leaving out Asian when it comes to analysis with race involved.
Often it seems for ideological reasons...
That was the goofiest thing happened in Apple presentation in a long time: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5D55G7Ejs8&t=5226s
I used to play Kerbal Space Program in VR. It was hilariously terrifying.

But for exposure therapy, you're probably going to want to go with Microsoft Flight Sim 2020, right? I think it supports VR and it's probably the most visually accurate experience. I could be wrong though as I've never played it myself.

I also played a bunch of Warthunder in VR. The sense of height in those smaller planes is really freaky.
Google and Amazon not safe?
Yes but the business will pivot to focus on USDC redemption, exchange, and KYC. DEX offers better prices for exchanges/yields and non-custodial wallets are preferable.
Just because one tolerates something doesn’t mean they think it’s ok. Besides, what’s the other option? Any “smart” platform needs an internet connection, and will show ads because of that.
I didn't invest in Snapchat, but I did recently manage to invest in SpaceX. I don't really care what the valuation is, I just want a piece of something great!
Sorry but you always forgot that when you sleep your consciousness disappeared. Please take account for this fact. When all sensory shut down, really you feel nothing and of cos think nothing.
They announced they were exiting smartphones last year: https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/4/22346084/lg-exits-smartpho...
"Consciousness is an illusion"

I take the word "illusion" to mean, some type of experience which misleads one about reality. And "consciousness" to mean, the experience of having experiences.

So I parse this claim as something like, "People both do not have conscious experiences, and also do continuously have a particular type of conscious experience: a misleading experience which leads them to believe they have conscious experiences".

Yet I see this claim made seriously and often. What am I missing?
> The assertion that you cannot get there from computation implies there is a currently non understood yet essential piece of physics(I assume, but I do not know) which doesn't fall under "computation"

This conflates "computation" with "physics". I think even the OP doesn't do that, since it allows for the possibility that non-computational physical processes could lead to consciousness, even derived from computational efforts.

To me this is the crux of the problem with that argument, though. The definition of "computation" here seems to be designed to get to this answer. It includes all physical processes that are not like consciousness and excludes all physical processes that are like consciousness, and on top of that presumes that humans consciousness isn't "deterministic", which to me is a difficult proposition to prove since human brains are never not being bombarded with stimuli, so creating two "runs" of the same brain is essentially impossible.

Like trying to add 1+1 on a computer that's sitting in a big burst of cosmic rays twice.
I like it. I wish it could export Airflow DAGs so all I had to do was fill in the interesting parts.
Signal is better than Telegram in terms of security and privacy.

But people use Telegram for its plethora of features, the UX, and its attention to even the smallest of details.
I'm just curious as to when exactly quality arises from quantity
I do that every day moving between WiFi and plugged in Ethernet. It seems you're misunderstanding what exactly is killing processes in your case. Try to collect the logs and maybe ask on serverfault. I promise networkd is not killing your processes and if you don't have strict dependencies in your unit file, systemd is unlikely to do that either.
Great point. You can also tell by the color: The brighter the green the worse the quality.
I was thrilled to see Lumina and bought one. I unfortunately ended up having to returning due to a combination of buggy software and image quality that was no better than my laptop built in webcam. I really wanted to love it… but in practice it was no better than what ships by default. Also had tons of issues controlling white balance. The software depth of field was a bit better than what's built in to Zoom/Google Meet but still doesn't come close to the illusion of a real lens effect.

Ended up going with a much clunkier and expensive setup with desk stands + a Sony a7c + a 28mm lens + a Yeti mic.

Another thing worth mentioning is that lighting is key — so I got a 3 point key light setup (LumeCube lights) which works well.

It might've been a matter of Lumina still being in beta — I hope it can improve to a point where this comment becomes entirely obsolete.
To say that almost all animal communication is without order (syntax) is almost certainly incorrect, and would have a high burden of proof. It’s certainly been a historical assumption, but I think science has moved a little past it. Even bees can communicate relatively sophisticated messages between them.
Maybe a virtual assistant would do what you’re looking for? They can help with scheduling, admin, diary management, checking in with you. If you defined some prioritisation criteria in advance, they would be able to prioritise tasks too
This practice has some interesting historical antecedents. The main species of nitrogen in mammal urine is urea (H2N-C-NH2), but the ideal form of nitrogen for fertilizer is probably nitrate (NO3-) in most cases (and it's easier to store and transport as a solid). Soil bacteria in healthy soils around roots will also transform urea to ammonia and nitrate in fairly complicated processes, and there are pH effects. For an overview:

https://www.cannagardening.com/how_ammonium_nitrate_ratio_af...

However, nitrate has many other practical uses, and in industrial Europe before the invention of Haber-Bosch, a major use was gunpowder manufacture (the ingredient saltpeter, potassium nitrate KNO3). An entire industry existed, based on taking animal and human urine (and other materials, like rotting animal carcasses) and processing it in a certain manner to encourage its conversion to nitrate crystals, typically involving beds of wood chips which would become covered with a frost of potassium nitrate crystals. The British government passed laws about the storage of urine for the king's 'petermen' to come and collect for this purpose. Here's a technical manual from 1862 on the process, from start to pure potassium nitrate (which in turn, could be converted to the important industrial chemical, nitric acid):

https://docsouth.unc.edu/imls/lecontesalt/leconte.html

Whether or not this widespread practice had anything to do with the origin of the British phrase 'taking the piss' is a mystery to me.
it is a good thing you have no states to care for.
google or fb is not going anywhere...