skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Marx talks about this a bit in Das Capital... You would think that the automation of an industry improves working conditions inside of it, in practice the opposite has usually been true: fewer people work longer hours in ever-more-tedious ways. So you used to go to work to design something, but in this vision of the future, you now go to work to craft prompts to DALL-E-2 so that it can design something for you, but because design is now so much cheaper you have to do three or four times as much design in the day, and this mechanism only doubles your rate of production... Gets to be a real mess.

However, I would notice that we have been blessed with a different exponential, which we have been riding into the future. That is the exponential of processor speed and storage and all of the other computing resources. It's a perennial observation that our actual programs have not gotten much faster. The extra resources are immediately wasted. The reputation of hiring developers from developing countries, the cheap foreign labor force, for us has always been that you get a big ball of mud which you cannot maintain very easily. I do not see AI helping with this, but rather exacerbating it. Beforehand, there was a reasonable limit to how many lines of code you might expect from a developer per day, maybe a couple hundred if they test their code well and do other things to refactor and simplify. But with AI you could imagine it multiplying 10-fold, just throw more mud at the problem, the mud ball is already huge: what could it hurt.

In fact, we may see the Smalltalk revolution! Of course this has been prophecied before, but never really come to pass. In this more-dystopian form, the idea is that everyone leans heavily into AI and something like kubernetes for modularization. Every single cell, every pod, in these gigantic supercomputer clusters which shall exists to serve up a smallish blog, needs to do something small enough that with its abundant AI generated code, it can nevertheless live and die successfully, spawning new processes as needed. The blog is thousands of small mud balls, and they work together in signaling pathways that are no longer understood by any human who works on the blog, and the dominant metaphor ceases to be one of mechanism and design and inputs and outputs... Rather it is biological, or even ecological. To start such systems up requires a story of “childhood” where a harness coordinates the first thousand nanoservicesv and grows the cluster into a template for the living application, then it needs AI-style “training” to reconfigure itself to handle actual business purposes, finally it will be released on the world, only to make mistakes which we will have to educate it to discern as mistakes... We certainly can't fix the system, we don't know how it works. Not what Alan Kay envisioned! But who knows. Maybe our kubernetes clusters will go to school one day.
The full list and criteria is here- https://osf.io/fywae/
>We sequenced complete mitochondrial genomes (mitogenomes) from 71 archaeological dog
remains collected in North America and Siberia (Fig. 1a; Table S1) and analyzed these with 145
mitogenomes derived from a global dataset of modern and ancient canids (3). A phylogenetic tree
constructed from the mitogenomes indicated that all sampled pre-contact dogs (spanning ~9,000
years) formed a monophyletic group within dog haplogroup A (Fig. 1b; Fig. S3; Fig. S6), which we
refer to as pre-contact dogs (PCD). This analysis indicated that the most closely related
mitochondrial lineage to the PCD clade are ~9,000 year-old dogs from Zhokhov Island in Eastern
Siberia (3) (Fig. 1b; Fig. S3; Fig. S6). In addition, molecular clock analyses suggest that all PCD
dogs shared a common ancestor ~14,600 years ago (95% high posterior density [HPD]: 16,484-
12,965; Fig. 1b; Fig. S6), which diverged from a shared ancestor with the Zhokhov Island dogs
~1,000 years earlier (95% HPD:17,646-13,739; Fig. 1b; Fig. S6). Interestingly, these time frames
are broadly coincident with early migrations into the Americas (10–12).[0]

Population genetics / migration can get quite complicated (different waves etc.) but the bottom line is all pre-contact dogs (meaning before the European colonists came) share a common ancestor @ 14,600 BC which in turn diverged from a shared ancestor with the Zhokhov Island [Siberia] dogs ~1,000 years earlier.

>The history of the global dispersal of dogs remains contentious (1). In North America, the earliest confirmed dog remains have been radiocarbon dated to ~9,900 calibrated years before present (cal BP) (Koster, Illinois; (2, 3)), approximately 6,000 years after [!] the earliest unambiguous evidence of humans arriving in North America (4). While these early dogs were most likely not domesticated in situ [i.e. from North American wolves] (5), the timing of their arrival and their geographic origins are unknown [!].

[0]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7116273/figure/...
> Because they lose money, nobody has ever made them profitable ....They are always subsidized

That's how it appears but that's not an argument against them. Two things: firstly they are regulated because nuclear fuel can be used for warfare, so when a government gets involved things cost more, that's just an unfortunate fact, secondly they've never been commercialised.

Could you imagine if cars or jumbo jets were built ad-hoc? What would the profit or loss be? A better example, perhaps, is Space X vs NASA. How much does a NASA rocket cost (government controlled), versus Space X (private industry) that has had to industrialise a process? And how much profit does NASA make per launch versus Space X?

Nuclear power stations could be industrialised and would definitely be cheaper.
Just found again the following thread on HN:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32110631
I love to recommend ViHart’s “Suspend your Disbelief” video:
https://youtu.be/deg1wmYjwtk

It takes a special place in my heart for being able to break apart and explain the effects of media and belief - especially of media referenced within media.
Using "Latest Tweets", I've not noticed any change in the last few months.
I feel like that has changed over the past few years. Many restaurants in my area started using them for menus, and I recently saw them used to setup wifi while on vacation.
I don’t have hard information but I believe so. If you have a line with more than 998 characters you’re taking a risk that your email will be rejected. But I’m pretty sure there is never any problem with lines <= 998 characters, and it works far better on more devices than trying to break lines to fit some imaginary screen, which always ends up in a mess.
It would be like blindfold solving. Competitor starts with their hands on the timer and they remove the cover themselves.
Cloud vendors are not all lock-ins. Kubernetes is an open API. If you've got your project working in Amazon, you can migrate it to GKE, Digital Ocean or just bare metal.

Yes, cloud vendors love to lock you in, but right now it's possible to use clouds in a vendor-neutral way. Managed postgres is just a postgres. Managed Kubernetes is just a Kubernetes. S3 have plenty of alternative implementations.
A question. I've no problem with hardcore porn but I'm put off by badly by some of what I assume to be porn oriented at men; completely emotionless robotic banging. Porn for women is much more affectionate and for me that makes it so much more enjoyable. I really want to see people genuinely having a good time or (to me) what's the point.

I don't know if I'm unusual in this but I'd like to know what other people think. I seriously wonder if a lot of porn produced is aimed at what the studios think the audience want rather than actually finding out if it is. I could well be wrong though.

No judgement on anyone for liking what I don't, that's fine.

So, is it just me?
I would expect to see a code example, but overall makes sense.
> I'm also not sure I agree with the statement that they're "already solving the cube".

I think it depends on whether you think the record ought to represent a chess-style intellectual feat or a physical dexterity feat.

In the inspection time they've clearly started the intellectual feat - just not the dexterity one.
I think it will just be a junky convenience store, a lot of people are fine with that. I'm disturbed by how little they care about kindles / ebooks though as they've basically fundamentally altered the book publishing market forever and don't seem to care.
Oh, that didn't cross my mind. Yes, that's a serious potential.

Take it a few more steps and then you get to automated analysis tools, system simulations, and NLP systems. This looks essentially like IronMan's Jarvis running heuristics interactively.

"Which edge cases did you cover?"

`I covered 3000 edge cases extrapolated from these bug reports...`
It wouldn't be at all difficult to remove the variable "uncover" time. Place the cube behind a small fence or curtain that disappears mechanically and starts the time, e.g. Ultimately the "sport" can be whatever its players want it to be, but as an observer, the time used to prepare the solution seems way more important than the current scoring method permits it to be.
hell yes to both.

after years of sleeping in subpar beds, i finally got us a king-sized Purple Hybrid Premier 4 with Purple pillows. Cost ~$4,500 for the whole thing (thank goodness for 0% apr credit card offers! paid it off within a year), but this stack has CHANGED THE GAME COMPLETELY for sleeping.

we get good sleep much more frequently now than before. and it has definitely shown in increased energy throughout the day!

as for cooking our own meals, my wife subscribed us to every plate last year, and it's been amazing. it solved the single biggest problem I had with cooking: every one of their meals can be done in less than 45 minutes from zero to plated _with zero waste_! (we don't have kids, and sizes at grocery stores assume larger family sizes).

i still prefer eating out, but cooking is much less of a chore mow.
I hope the filter rule auto-replied "Congrats!" and archived the thread :)
Prior Omicron infection protects against BA.4 and BA.5 variants
It sounds like you didn’t read the article. The discussion of slavery is just brief context for the majority of the article, which is about the post-slavery period.
I think some people careen from fully trusting one thing to fully trusting the opposite thing. If you're not one of those people, you'll never understand dismissing things on the basis of "you should be critical of this, because not everything that people say is true."

I do feel like that, even though being critical is something we should always do, that in cases where

1) the only reason you started paying attention to something was an intuitive hunch that it could matter, and

2) the only reason you started treating that hunch as established science is because you did experiments that had significant results, then

3) later you found that significance could be entirely accounted for by the file-drawer effect,

you need to adjust your expectation that there actually is an effect to lower than your expectation was at step 1). It isn't that the theory hasn't been tested (although you can argue it hasn't been tested for ingeniously enough yet), it's that it has been tested and no effect has been shown.

If you allow the existence of interest in a theory (represented in amount of ink spilled and number of experiments done) to raise your expectation that the theory is true, despite experimental indications to the contrary, you're not really doing science, you're just throwing good money after bad, probably motivated by a desire to protect the researchers and institutions that are heavily committed to the truth of the theory and/or the desire to protect other theories that depend on the one that hasn't shown results.
Easy for an outsider to say, though I’d imagine it’s a perfectly reasonable precaution to be cautious in the first post they make. Also he’d then not need to worry about what he exactly says in the post or mince his words/self-censor.
The Chinese property market is the world's biggest asset class (~$62T)
Ketchup really just means a fruit based sauce, so it long preceded the arrival of the tomato.
The Light-year zero is so efficient that it can gain 70km per day from its rooftop solar panels:

https://lightyear.one/lightyear-0

Initial model is > $300k but they plan a $30k model in the future.
Amazon makes most of their money from AWS. The webstore is the majority of the business - but in some ways it's irrelevant.
Now if we only had this for diagrams.
I'm sorry. The idea that there is outright fraud running rampant is so foreign to me that I clearly can not interpret your experience very well.
If you are truly interested in sustainable methodologies, I think one area that requires acceptance is that the volume one consumes needs to be second to the volume one can take meaningful notes on. There is no sustainable notes strategy that can support randomly opening HN and skimming a random article on the front page during a break at a bus halt.

If you want to take notes of what you are reading, no matter what method you choose you need to synthesize your ideas. You need to make them your own. That takes time. Personally, I found that for the time I was taking notes* I had to first discipline myself in how I consumed material. This lessened how much I read and made me focus on quality which in turn made me focus more on what I was reading which then turned into a positive feedback loop.

This answer may feel like a cop out, but I add it only because too many people try to find a note taking methodology to support an unsustainable consumption habit and then they think the note taking method was the issue when it really wasn’t.

* - I ultimately stopped taking notes on most things when I decided one day that I didn’t want to do it anymore. I narrowed my areas of interest to ones where mostly practical experience mattered much than theoretical knowledge (eg: illustrating). The only areas I take notes in still is security research and even that is far more practical
I didn’t suggest people should be manipulated, you ignored my qualifying clause in order to interpret what I said negatively. What I said is that trust is required in order to fix the funding problem. Our funding process by and large does not fund things that have no public support. I did not say or even imply that we should attempt to manufacture trust. If anything, the whole problem is that right now the distrust is being actively manufactured, and we need to stop that.

I agree completely we should fix the problems, and I have no problem openly discussing what those problems are. In order to do that there needs to be hope that fixing the problems is a viable and likely-to-succeed activity. Summarizing all of science activity as broken is neither accurate nor helpful in terms of fixing the problems, right? That really is a framing problem because it is not broadly true, the parent poster implied that the practice of science is the problem, when it isn’t the problem. The problem is that people are involved, and science is actually one of the least problematic things we do. It’s incorrect to call out science as broken without comparing it to all other fields.

If everyone is convinced that science is a complete and total waste, and people are opposed to spending tax money to fund it, we will not be able to fix the existing problems. If we believe something about science specifically is broken, and not with the rest of the world, then we will come to the wrong conclusion about what is broken and be unable to fix the existing problems.
I would object, The Indian technocrat cohort is giant, and makes most of high grade ICS officials. Tons of engineers there, an irrefutable fact.

On other hand, I would say civil service in India is horrifically elitist, and values degrees, over competency, and real experience.
We produced it using Project Gutenberg's modern F. P. Walter translation. At the time, there was no copyright notice on the text, only PG's public domain boilerplate, so we produced it thinking it had been dedicated to the public domain. Some years later PG added a copyright notice, so we were forced to take our edition down.

There is no acceptable PD translation of 20,000 Leagues; all the classic translations are widely considered to be slapdash, very bad, or severely bowdlerized.
Was Verizon and are those 2 companies the only companies doing this?

Are there any other known cases, just not made such fuss about in other countries?

I know that the Croatian branch of the German Telekom is often used as a testbed for new developments, like their IPTV service or fiber overland, so I wouldn't be surprised if that already was reality in Croatia or other branches of one of those corps, just kept under the rug.
Visions of Chaos perhaps?
You argue this a lot on HN but real world shows the opposite happening.
From: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/scuttle

>scuttle verb(1)

1: to cut a hole through the bottom, deck, or side of (a ship)
specifically : to sink or attempt to sink by making holes through the bottom

The actions of these people make you to give up on Occam's razor in disbelief. Sometimes they're the owner of the company who are doing everything someone who'd want to sink a ship would do.

The worst is when the ship was amazing (generating revenue like crazy, great reputation, top notch record, satisfied clients).

Also, promise people equity then change the goal post by introducing new variables, haggling over everything, and attempting to screw them in every sentence (for instance, change the vesting period in one sentence, add a condition in the next sentence, claim they've had no impact on the company in the next, threaten to fire everyone in the next, add yet another condition in the next, tell people you can't give them the equity you promised because you promised someone else and do that for the other person too).

That's, in essence, how to fuck up your own company lightning fast.
What about earth quakes?

(I didn’t click the links)
Another no container idea (this one is crazy): just blow them in the ocean, that will evaporate some water and speed up evaporation of some more. Harvest energy with existing hydroelectric setuos once it passes the weather cycle.
patricia tries are cool. used them once while working on an infrastructure management tool; makes searching word dictionaries very efficient.

also love the Option<T> struct with pattern matching that all of the hippie-dippie functional languages seem to like lol
I would argue it applies to most engineering disciplines, not just software.
You missed the most declarative language Qt has to offer: QML https://doc.qt.io/qt-6/qmlapplications.html
>Here is the link of the article: https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-list-government-su...

Business Insider is well known for twisting things to fit their biases. Case in point, the first two items on that list are the equivalent of the government paying a pen company to provide them with pens after determining that said company was the best one to supply them.

Relating to SpaceX, the only 'real' subsidy there is the $15 million towards Boca Chica. Although they've paid twice that in donations to local schools there.

>You have to be curious about who are their customers
>https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/07/will-the-ukraine-war...
>The EU coming to subsidize them even more

Same here, they'd be paying for the service of launching a payload on a SpaceX rocket. Should SpaceX just not do business with governments? They happen to be one of the few people with a reliable rocket available right now that has a short enough lead time.

>And the fact that they are not profitable says it all

Again, dishonest take. They're building technologies with high setup costs, of course they aren't taking profits, they're taking all the money made from Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy and putting it back into Starship and Starlink.

Edit: Oh and of course none of the government money mentioned there accounts for the majority of their funding, which at the moment is largely driven by private funding rounds (because contrary to your biases, investors can see SpaceX's success and potential for even bigger successes) and previous F9 related profits.
Nuclear energy as a concept is trivial. There are a lot of details between "concept is trivial" and "it's practical at scale"
I'm comparing "Latest tweets" with lists all the time on the web version (looking at "Latest tweets" throughout the day, and scrolling through lists of users I follow in the end of day) - inconsistencies are pretty rare, sometimes a tweet disappears from "Latest tweets" for no obvious reason, but that's like 1/1000 occurrence.
The Three Uses of Contrastive Learning
I think gp and you probably see eye to eye, but gp has a problem with your phrasing.
If the effect does not live up to scientific rigour, that (more or less) implies that the effect is roughly indistinguishable from randomness.

If folks have results that speak for themselves, then the effect more than likely is scientifically rigorously testable. It may already have been - by those very results.
but is the source of the mental anguish that you've experienced internal or external?

Like if you were born in a society where religious zealots who espoused bisexual bigotry just didnt exist, toxic masculinity wasnt a thing and there was a bunch of bisexual representation in media would you have had that anguish? very unlikely.

People with gender dysphoria face the same negative external influences as you do, arguably worse (lets be real, much much worse) but if it would be removed and they lived in a world without it they would still be discontent with their state, to the point of depression which would result in a poor quality of life and for many suicide.

Thats the hallmark of the disorder. thats what gender dysphoria is.

Lets do another thought experiment, what if we lived in a society where gender reassignment surgery was impossible. like lets ssay we just didnt have the advancements in surgical techniques necessary, but we had much better pharamcuticals. If surgery was impossible, but giving someone a pill like I described in the first thiufht experiment was possible that would be the morally correct thing to do as opposed to doing nothing, right?
> why BEVs are better than fuel-cell hydrogen cars for basically everything, except maybe long distance air transport.

The place where BEVs have yet to prove themselves is when energy density is absolutely critical. Long distance transport of any sort (air, sea, train, semi) is really the next places for them.

Semi is a maybe at this point. Train MIGHT make sense, but, IMO it'll probably make the most sense as an energy capture/getting the train up to cruising speed aid rather than as the sole power source. Heck, for train, it'd make sense to instead electrify the rail system. Sea seems unreachable (Sails make more sense at this point which is sort of wild). Air, IDK, there are definitely projects to hit it, but I don't see a large commercial plane doing BEV. Perhaps for smaller regional hops it'll make sense.
Then one could surely find multiple occurrences of externally archived but deleted forum post showing just that. You are implicitly asking for proof of absence of such censorship. This is an unreasonable standard.

Preventing motivated people from harassing others on a forum is impossible if anyone can join the forum.
When they deliver them and have been on the market for 10 years we have data. Until then it’s vapourware.
I love how nobody commented.

AI, new tools, and globalization is going to destroy the software developer class. Alright, great. I'm now the 3000th person since the late 80's to predict this!
(2012) is date for videos from this thread.

Happy to see Vi Hart’s still making videos:

https://m.youtube.com/user/Vihart/videos
Supercharging A/B Testing at Uber