skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Useful resources: colleagues, professional training, case studies of errors.

If your job is safety critical software I guess they'd pay for relevant training. If not, looking at the course outlines at least lets you know what trainers think are important topics, for example

https://www.feabhas.com/content/robust-software-embedded-sys...

One training course I had talked about how to design a system with integrity while integrating open source code of unknown integrity. Since software quality and safety critical software depends so much on process, then open source by default isn't built to any integrity level. If a system needs two independent implementations of a calculation, an open source code base would never show that.

If you have an experienced safety engineer, ask them about how typically to design the system and software to make the safety case easier and they'll have some ideas of what needs to commonly be done. It depends on the integrity level what strategy and process needs to be followed.

It's not just the code style, but there's a broader mindset that you need to develop.

There's also good presentations and lectures that come up from time to time here or on YouTube where the failure of safety critical software is studied. These can be excellent case studies: Such as:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31236303
Best I can do is this homebrew comp I'm organizing - https://dejabru.org
I tried throwing some underground rap artists at this app, as stem splitters usually struggle with them

I split
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDaL7KBjkDI

And it gave me this
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/inyk38n2jrp5i45/AACpB0xXNFxamEmP3...
I noticed some weird hissing with the 808s, but other then that it sounded pretty good

For more of a challenge, I inputted
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAwQ3njiU4M

and it came up with
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/97lzke0puh9dzeo/AACE75vsbNS43UqqH...
It was able to separate some of the kicks from the 808s, which is really impressive to me!

Overall, I'm very impressed! This sounds much better then lalal.ai to me
For me, the tactile sensation of chalk on a blackboard is deeply irritating. Something about the noise it makes, the dust and vibration it just repulses me. A whiteboard has none of these drawbacks and it also requires less effort to make a mark on the board.
Show HN: Encrypt Text to Emojis
Where does he find the time to run Tesla and SpaceX? I'm starting to conclude that he's fake and the man was created by investors to serve their purpose.
It really is unfortunate, but I applaud yegg for responding regardless. Freedom and privacy are unfortunately a polarizing topic. You can't make everyone happy, and people are more likely to comment a negative experience than a positive one.
Defamation, Slander, etc. None are protected. Free speech protects you from the Government, not your fellow citizens.
When all of its responses are modeled from input derived from prior work of sentient beings (humans), how could one expect that the output would not appear sentient? It only "knows" how to respond like a sentient being would since 100% of its inputs actually were from sentient beings. Whatever it modeled should look like what it modeled. It's pretty much the definition, or at least the purpose.

What blurs the apparent distinction with modern AI is the sheer number of knowledge inputs. But the computer will never be sentient until we figure out what sentience is and how it emerges. Only then can we build something specifically able to do whatever that is.

Aside: I just finished reading Blindsight by Peter Watts. It envisions an alien race that lacks sentience, and what that would be like. Its conclusion questions whether sentience is actually a flaw that holds intelligence back. Pretty interesting thought experiment.
But we did have to invent the (social) technology that enabled us to transition to a post-feudal society. And we did so without fully understanding feudal society.

For another technological example, we didn't fully understand bronze when we transitioned to the iron age (in fact, at least in the west, the transition to the iron age happened in large part due to our understanding of bronze getting substantially worse).
Pixelfed.
Facebook Research: Demucs Music Source Separation
> I can actually see Google shipping Chrome with the Dart VM in addition to V8 a few years down the line.

It was called “Dartium” and it was discontinued with Dart 2.
Does it work fine with Windows 10 Pro? I don't care for Windows 11 yet, only plan to upgrade when I need to and / or when the hardware is upgrade.
How do you break dependency cycles across shards (i.e. deadlock detection)?
It depends on what you are interested in? If you only know Django, then learning Flask would be a good next step. You may want to take a look at the itertools and more_itertools (https://more-itertools.readthedocs.io/en/stable/) modules if you are into writing functional Python code. Also see https://docs.python.org/3/howto/functional.html
I did the same as you but iTunes Match for $25 per year is my ‘vault’.

It’s very convenient especially now that lossless is an option.
I’m guessing you’d just have to create a derivation for the python package you’re trying to use.
It is very common for satirists to deny that they are writing satire.
I agree that critical mass with third-party Nix code, especially in important projects like Home Manager and Nix-Darwin, is crucial and it's almost there.

I don't want to rush the finalization of flakes or the new CLI, though, eager as I am to see them come out from behind the 'experimental' flag. There's clearly still a lot of work, including bugfixes, going into the flakes implementation.
Just wow! There were methods extracting acapellas from tracks, but this tool here is another level. Fascinating how good the results are.
So glad for that verdict. Lies should be allowed to that degree.
Nothing. I was commenting generally about what is achievable in endeavors like this. Normally it's a parry for blockchain bros (who are stupidly enthusiastic) or cynics (who are often blind to vulnerabilities in existing trust relationships).
You’ll get an explanation of what matzoh ball soup is…
The point to me seems to be to set up things where this won’t go to court: if the primary claim is that Twitter misstated mDAU, the downside risk to Twitter is far greater than to Musk (I think) to have that fact finding occur. If it turns out the court agrees with Musk, then in one swoop the deal falls through, Musk is vindicated, the reputation of Twitter’s entire executive leadership and board is permanently damaged, and the market will punish the hell out of the stock due to the first and higher order impact of this on their valuation.

The choice for Twitter boils down to what level of price cut are they willing to make to remove that possibility.
Command Line Reference
Hold on, are we talking about the same Cisco that also outright stole its first product, with the founders narrowly avoiding jail time? [0]

Huawei vs Nortel (Canada) is a far more interesting story.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisco#1984%E2%80%931995:_Origi...

>On July 11, 1986, Bosack and Lougheed were forced to resign from Stanford and the university contemplated filing criminal complaints against Cisco and its founders for the theft of its software, hardware designs, and other intellectual properties.[15]
The standard definition of ad-hoc polymorphism imputed to Strachy, where:

Strachey chose the adjectives ad-hoc and parametric to distinguish two varieties of polymorphism [Str67].
Ad-hoc polymorphism occurs when a function is defined over several different types, acting in a dif- ferent way for each type. A typical example is overloaded multiplication: the same symbol may be used to denote multiplication of integers (as in 33) and multiplication of floating point values (as in 3.143.14).

That is from the Wadler paper where typeclasses are formalized. Typeclasses and Traits are the implementation details for those function symbols that vary in implementation for each type. The restrictions on the types (like which types implement a trait or have a type class defined for it) are the types the symbol can be used on.

You seem to be focusing on the ‘arbitrary set of types’ point, but the only connection between the types accepted by Rust’s generic functions (which are functions that accept a type provided it has some trait) are that they take types which have an impl for that trait.

I think there is a bit of ambiguity regarding the term ad-hoc polymorphism at play. You seem to think the trait/typeclass implementation of ad-hoc polymorphism (which was invented to formalize a well behaved class of ad-hoc polymorphic functions) makes it no longer ad-hoc. My position echos Wadler, it’s still ad-hoc but just less ‘ad-hoc’ (i.e. more formalized).
They had a privately known way to weaken DES that effectively shortens the key length. They could have pretended to allow a longer key length while secretly retaining their privately known attack that lets them shorten it (without also acting to strengthen DES against it). They knew this in the 70s 20 years before it would become publicly known. They actively strengthened DES against this while not revealing the exploit. Doing this secretly doesn't narrow the field (doing it publicly might have), it's also inconsistent with their argument for short keys.

I read the blog post and I've read a lot about the history of this - what you're saying isn't really convincing. Often people I mostly agree with, maybe 90% just take it to the extreme where everything must fit their world view 100%. Rarely imo is that the case, often reality is more mixed.

If they’re related maybe they wanted DES to be strong so they could use it, but wanted the public to only have access to short keys so they could also break the public's use of it. Still, it's interesting they didn't leave in a weakness they could exploit secretly despite a longer key size.

edited for clarity
That logic is nonsense, 3rd party observers have no way to know what twitter counts as a daily active user. They *could not possibly* make any such estimate.
> The mathematics is complex and computer science hasn't achieved proofs of the hypotheses underlying cryptography.

No unconditional proofs (except for the OTP ofc), but there are quite a few conditional proofs. For example, it's possible to show that CBC is secure if the underlying block cipher is.
I thought it was 5 million. I wonder if he will get out of it like has done in the past... a lot of money
I guess free speech that is proveably false is what is at stake here. Conspiracy theories are OK provided they are cannot be proven to be untrue.
All execs have to do is not staff the FOIA department, and requests get ignored. People generally prefer free time to doing paperwork, if boss allows.
Thanks, another data point for future audits. Such incident report claims can be aggregated in an open-source, CC-licensed index, to improve visibility for defensive analysis and benchmarking of potential responses.
> could apply to the vinyl version too

They can't, because these choices create enough volume for the needle to go haywire, so mastering always has a better dynamic range.
> Do you intend to run this indefinitely?
No. I'm treating this as an experiment. I intend to run it throughout August 2022, after which there will be no more updates – but I'll keep the already generated summaries indefinitely.

Awh this is such a shame! However, I understand this is probably a big burden to author considering it costs around 0.7$ per run! (Costing OP 21$/month) + time they have to spend curating all the answers (because of OpenAI guidelines). But I am really impressed by this, and really want this to be a thing.
I'm a supporter of Jones being able to spread whatever insane theories he wants whether or not he believes them himself, but he slandered the parents of dead children to the degree that some of the most insane and aggressive people in the world think that they're the agents of a world conspiracy with the intent to enslave the planet. $50 mil is a light judgement.
Anyone got a good law blog article for legal analysis on this case and the implications?
It may be beneficial to the government that the organized practice of epistemology remains solely with the (trustworthy) media and The (approved) Experts. The internet is enough of a problem as it is for interfering with citizen's perceptions of what is true.
$4 million was the compensatory damages. $50 million is the punitive damages award.
Been using nix for a few weeks and while I feel like it really has some great ideas, here are what my pain points have been:

- not great documentation, especially for newer features like flakes

- nix wants to replace rustup when rustup is already doing great

- nix doesn’t seem to work that well on mac. Not sure if it’s our config our that it’s painful on mac in general

- the biggest issue: it doesn’t work well with tools (vscode, sublime merge, etc.) as you need to launch them within a nix shell and that doesnt work well (at least on mac). Now I’m wondering if it’d make sense to install tools within the flake dev shell…
> Ignoring that Jones is a garbage human and just focusing on the case: that isn’t protected free speech?

No, while there are Constitutional limits (especially when the injured party is a public figure, see NY Times v. Sullivan), deliberate and often also reckless, harmful falsehood is not protected speech.

> Does this set a precedent that anyone who spouts conspiracy theories about an event is targetable by those who suffered from that event?

No, it just reinforces the existing precedent that people who deliberately or recklessly spread falsehoods about people can be sued by those injured by the falsehoods. Defamation isn't a new thing in law.

And this isn't the first time that has bitten Alex Jones.
> a big third monitor

In what sense is a 17" monitor "big"? It's barely any larger than a lot of regular laptop screens.
The book “make time” has many techniques
It's right in the article:

> A jury in Texas ruled the radio host must pay $45.2m in punitive damages, in addition to $4.1m in compensatory damages they awarded a day earlier.

A bunch of people on Twitter are saying that usually Texas will limit punitive damages to $750,000, but there's also some arguments for why that may not apply in this situation, so we'll get to watch this ping-pong around for years probably before anyone actually gets paid.
> It's a static text blog, not a bank

I want those delivered by https most, because http leaks the exact page I've visited, rather than just the domain.
Extremely unlikely. If they can give test rides on Sunday afternoon they could do repairs.

And 24/7 would be way more insane.
Paywalling the web isn’t the answer.
Sorry, if someone doesn't like being called "she", and you really want to call that person "she" -- that's on you. You have other choices, after all.
I’m in a similar situation. If you change your pricing model so that a lapsed subscription means an end to updates rather than an end to access, I’ll upgrade my Tower 2 license immediately.

I do understand that your current licensing model is probably very effective at getting big revenue out of corporates. I am a solo user who interacts with git maybe once or twice a week. I know I’m not an important customer for you, but it is sad you can’t even throw a bone to the little guy.
What a beautiful site. So easy on the eyes.

Thanks.
The court is part of the government.
The US system purposely disfavors the merchant. Imagine being arrested and having to prove your innocence at trial, instead of the other way around. Alipay from what I understand tries to have a more neutral process. And it means the buyer can't exploit the asymmetry of one button click (to get a refund unless the merchant deals with a mountain of bureaucracy) vs dealing with the bureaucracy. It is better that if there is a disagreement, both have to deal with the bureaucracy.
jones is a radio host thats why
> They are completely unwieldy in the normal unfolding form factor, unlikely to fit in your backpack.

50k 16" MacBook users at my company would disagree with you...
Having gotos is a big no no. Put the rest of the function in an else case if need be.

https://www.perforce.com/blog/kw/NASA-rules-for-developing-s....
Here's an oldie but goodie:
https://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2021/10/icymi-my-t...
Poop avoidance is a big concern for me. I have two cats. I’ve had my robovacuum spread vomit all over the kitchen.
This is what I'm saying:

Once you agree to buy the company, a drop in the stock price doesn't make you any worse off. Your circumstances are exactly the same. You are worse off relative to a counterfactual scenario in which you agreed to buy the company after the stock drop instead of before. But you are no worse off after the stock drops than you were before it dropped.

And this fact is not at all compatible with shapefrog's argument. Elon Musk didn't experience a loss. There is no bag for him to hold. He will experience a loss if he cancels the deal, but that's an unrelated scenario.

In your scenario, the car buyer can immediately benefit from canceling the contract by buying a car (from some other vendor) and pocketing the $5,000 difference. No such option is available in the case of Twitter.
> That will be almost impossible to prove

I mean, the trivial case is Musk's discovery reveals some smoking gun email about knowing that their methodology showed 50% mDAU were bots but the CEO overruling everyone and putting 5% on the SEC filing instead. Not close to impossible to prove if it's that stupid (not saying it is)
> I’m not sure I want to have a free roaming camera and LiDAR sensor from a Chinese company in my home.

Don't you already have that in your pocket?
Let me know once he actually transfers a non-zero sum towards either the punitive or compensatory amounts.
It's trickier than that. You can't just plagiarize off your AI's results.
It’s almost as if Musk used a smoke screen to sell $8.5B in Tesla stock before the crash while redirecting attention to Twitter so as to not raise suspicion about selling his own stock…and then instead of going through with the deal he allegedly sold his Tesla stock to complete, he wants to back-out without paying the $1B penalty.

But that can’t be it and what really happened, Musk is buying Twitter for us and restoring our Free Speech…right?
> the one that they advertise doesn't need a cover

Uhh, they don't do that. They sell cases - their own and 3rd party - right in the store next to the iPhones.
I said it was created by him while he was at Apple:

> While it’s true that Lattner worked for Apple while he created Clang and that his personal contributions were probably biased

But it wasn’t silo’d into Apple and then released to the open source field, it was created as an open source project under the LLVM Developer Group from it’s inception.

So yes, his contributions and goals were to make it targeted for Apple’s needs; but there were plenty of independent contributors that were focused on just making it a good C/C++ compiler front-end for LLVM and were more focused on making it a general competitor to GCC.

It would be more accurate to refer to is as an Apple sponsored project.
You created it because DALL-E is an automaton. If it has merit, the merit is derived from human work alone.
That makes much more sense. Thank you for the clarification.
The Joy of Painting Middle-Earth with Ted Nasmith
I’d love to read more about this. Could you recommend a summary/article?
The court oversaw the case. It did not bring it.

Example: I specifically prohibit peanuts in my kitchen, because I serve meals to allergic children. You sneak peanuts into the kitchen. I sue you and win.

Does this mean "Peanuts are illegal"? No. I have a civil action and we have a system of civil courts wherein these grievances can be aired and adjudicated.
It's relevant to the article, where a digital source made from a tape should sound the same as the tape.
Yeah I had to read that a few times due to to a triple negative and a comparison, I think it's trying to say that the strategy has no parts that have any chance of earning you less money then normal.
> 3rd-Party Tracker Loading Protection, 3rd-Party Cookie Protection, 1st-Party Cookie Protection, CNAME Cloaking Protection, Fingerprinting Protection, Smarter Encryption (HTTPS Upgrading), Link Tracking Protection, Referrer Tracking Protection, Embedded Social Content Tracking Protection, Google AMP Protection, Google Topics Protection, Google FLEDGE Protection, Surrogates, The Fire Button, Cookie Consent Pop-Up Management, Global Privacy Control (GPC)

C'mon, you're being intellectually dishonest here. uBlock Origin and AdGuard has all these things to check on. Even the obscure stuff, like FLEDGE ( https://adguard.com/en/blog/adguard-privacy-sandbox-topics-b...).

At the end of the day, at your company and at AdGuard's, it is only really one person's full time job to find this stuff. And your guy and AdGuard's guy are both reading the same garbage Twitter posts all day from the guy who's actually sourcing issues. Which he does for free because his particular malfunction is being really passionate about hating Google. And that's why we hear about FLEDGE.

This is tough. I think people want you to succeed. But I suspect the reason you didn't answer my question - why do you think you guys got raked over the coals for the Microsoft thing? - is, from your point of view, you probably think it's a smear campaign from Google, and your people have cautioned you that it sounds really conspiratorial and salty. Maybe it's true!

I can't imagine you're going to say "because Startpage is better" or "because the issues people complained about were substantive" (they weren't). And indeed, Google complains to the press about how you guys are like a mere fraction of their size, "down the street," and receiving so much intellectual attention and funding from the digerati despite having, essentially, a meaningless impact on anyone's use of the web. No offense. Like I said people want you to succeed.

But you have to do so without the sales pitch. Because it makes it sound like you'll do anything to survive, which may be good in the long term but is probably the real reason the Microsoft thing looks bad: It smelled desperate and unbecoming of someone entrusted to provide a privacy focused service.

And maybe you're going to do a full Justin Roiland and accuse everyone on the anonymous Internet forum of being totally lazy compared to you. You can be one of those "ra ra Elon Musk" people. Listen, you have no idea who writes these anonymous posts.

That said, I think the people who are talking about the censorship thing are morons and I wish you'd just focus on what I'm talking about here.
The newer chip fabs, eg. TSMC N5, and upcoming N3 cost around $20 billion. This Italian plant is not for fab, but for dicing the wafers, packaging, etc.
The advanced fab processes used by Apple, Qualcomm, NVidea, Samsung, Intel (soon), and others rely on ASML's EUV (Extreme Ultra Violet) lithography (for fine lines in printing. Each succeeding process has more layers done with the EUV thus requires more of these machines and the cost is around $160 million each. A newer version, for processes such as Intel plans in having in production in 2025, costs about $330 million each. Again, many of these machines are needed for each wafer fab.
> is based on the idea of a lone inventor waking up one morning with an earth-shattering discovery, when the reality is that in most circumstances, those kinds of ideas are thought up by multiple people at roughly the same time

No patents are there for the inventor to go through the process of trial and error for indefinite periods of his life in the hopes he will at one point find the iconic invention. It's about there being a bright light at the end of the tunnel that can be seen all the way from the entrance.