skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I recently worked at a large state university. I remember a conversation with an instructor in a master-level operating systems course. One of the assignments was to implement a simple filesystem. The amount of cheating was insane. He started academic dishonesty proceedings against many of the students but the department pressured him to "work it out."

He had to basically interview each student individually and ask for an explanation of the code. Most could not explain what their code was doing (because they didn't write it).

They were all given an opportunity to resubmit original work. Many could not do it, because they simply didn't understand the basics of programming, or the language they were using, or how computers even worked.

These were Masters students.
I suppose we could test that. Why don't you give us a couple of examples of where blue collar workers have made this stuff without an artist directing them?
Face Scan Class Actions vs. Walmart, Kohls, Best Buy, Home Depot, over Clearview
C++ stage1 compiler is a magic binary blob :)
I hated this course, and later taught it at Stanford after enough years of real engineering that I didn’t even remember the topics. By that time I had developed my own way of doing everything: linear algebra notation, ODE and PDE solvers, etc. If you start with the solver, it makes more sense. For instance: let’s say you have something like a driven heat equation in front of you. It is a second-order mess, foreign and unrecognizable. Now discretize it. It becomes stupidly obvious: change in heat occurs at a rate proportional to the sum of differences with the neighbors. Okay, now I get it, and I can write out the solver iteration. How can you speed up the solution? Convolution. Derive that kernel from your solver iteration. We can also do that in a transformed space like Fourier. Okay so, now let’s transform the original equations and then use some magic tricks to simplify. Wow, look how much faster our solution is! Does it give the same result as our simple simulator? Great, now we know why we’re learning this.
This is a whole field of philosophy. You can read this to get started: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_alignment

Tl;dr: It's hard to define what humans would actually want a powerful genie to do in the first place, and if we figure that out, it's also hard to make the genie do it without getting into a terminal conflict with human wishes.

Meaning: Doing it in the first place, without going off on some fatal tangent we hadn't thought about, and also preventing it from getting side-tracked by instrumental objectives that are inherently fatally bad to us.

The nightmare scenario is that we tell it to do X, but it is actually programmed to do Y which looks superficially familiar to X. While working to do Y, it will also consume most of Earth's easily available resources and prevent humans from turning it off, since those two objectives greatly increase the probability of achieving Y.

To illustrate via the only example we currently have experience with: Humans have an instrumental objective of accumulating resources and surviving for the immediate future, because those two objectives greatly increase the likelihood that we will propagate our genes. This is a fundamental property of systems that try to achieve goals, so it's something that also needs to be navigated for superhuman intelligence.
Yes, they are not the same. The chain rule is what solves the one non-trivial problem with backpropagation. Besides that, it's just the quite obvious idea of changing the weights in proportion to how impactful they are on the error.
A professor could put up an almost correct but slightly wrong answer on github or even a right answer with a copyright trap.

So it might be more like bringing a tennis racket to a grenade fight.
Not doing it marks this as prior art and prevents other people from patenting it.
Mostly everything can be done in the traditional way - and much faster indeed. The point of blockchain is a superior social solution, not technical.

I agree with you we will use blockchain where it’s necessary, but I suspect that’s a decent percentage of our future digital world.
Just an idea: you could always prep for an algo interview and jump ship from developing infra for google.com to developing infra for the next generations of cures in https://www.isomorphiclabs.com/
13 years here, 18 years there are blips and outliers in the grand scheme of millennia of successful political systems.

I think your system needs to prove it can survive at least a generation if not multiple human lifetimes to be historically proven.
There is an unavoidable endgame as academic fields evolve: groups whose ideas have stopped generating cutting edge advancements have to go deeper into rhetoric to compensate, arguing that the cutting edge is actually what they were talking about all along. The need to constantly justify your existence distracts from using your methods to contribute to problems people care about, and your part of the field gets further behind.
Why not go to the person whose job you're trying to supplant and show them your POC? Approach from the angle of "this can free you up to do other things" and not "I'm trying to figure out how to replace people".

As far as ownership of this project goes, you need to think carefully before making any sort of claim. Depending on the language of your employment agreement, the IP of this project likely belongs to the company because it's based on their systems. "I did it on my own time" probably isn't going to hold up in a lawsuit either. And companies tend to have a lot more money to spend on lawyers than individual contributors, especially in cases where significant aspects of their operational model is threatened.
Previously discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30842587
The Vice site auto-plays video, and defeats Safari "Reader Mode".
Live-seq enables temporal transcriptomic recording of single cells
Actually, can you go the other way, using an executable as a shared library?

Here's my usage scenario: I want to test a subset of the code in a large binary. One thing I could do is to build a test program from a subset of the application's sources, and then call the required code for the test. But that gets laborious in a large codebase.

So could one hack around that, by somehow turning the binary into a shared library, and telling LD to ignore the fact that there's a main() in there, and replace it with a different one?
but maybe, they'll end up learning anyway? one thing i realized when i went back to studying online is that i was no longer the student who needed to prove something to someone else, and the typical test annoyed me. I get that this article is about a teacher trying to find out how much their students have learned a subject, but maybe that needs to change?
> Ugh I had someone ask me to debug a verbally communicated error message in an interview.

i dont mean that the problem is only verbally communicated. i mean that the debugging process the candidate does is verbally communicated.

in the scenario you're describing you'd be sitting at that machine with access to the internet on another machine. like, you know, in real life.

> The problem does a really good job of showing a candidates grasp of all the tricky parts of js, so I keep using it despite the drawbacks.

async stuff in js is pretty good, but it's also easy to go too deep on it with some bizzarely poorly architected code. many js devs still fail to grasp all the implications of closures, or how to avoid memory leaks, or how to work with the GC rather than against it.
Try to get an idea on why nobody else before it was not done, why you could do it, try to open up a conversation as if you did not implement anything. Every business is different.
> Why not go to the person whose job you're trying to supplant and show them your POC? Approach from the angle of "this can free you up to do other things" and not "I'm trying to figure out how to replace people".

No no no. Go to your manager first. Otherwise that other person might tell your manager, who will be very displeased about being blindsided.

If you know your manager would react badly, even if they heard about this directly from you, then you already know what to do: keep this to yourself.
Probably makes sense these days but back in the 1500s when they were doing all the sailing, distorting the water might well have caused problems of a terminal nature, I think.
Only matter of time before CoPilot like systems (if they do not already) just reverse engineer the compilers to produce and link a dynamic syntax to know instances in plain-text source code of the “foreign” programming languages and render them within a language the user already understands; yes, there might be gaps in idioms, assuming a natively written language, but using example you provided, there in theory would not; ...and if need, return a final version in the target “foreign” programming language.
But not all technologies are equally likely to develop in equally problematic directions.
It's fine to want a different society/policies, but you need to expand on how that new society should look like then: How would sanctions work, for example? Or if there are none, will there be other means of defense/offense? Who would set the rules of the monetary system and what would give legitimacy to those rule setters? How to move from the old system to the new without (too much) disruption? ...

The endings of proper monarchies weren't always simple and nice events - if that is the magnitude of change you have in mind.
These are just literally giant triangles of concrete, and city curbs holding in gravel. So an example would be: any freeway overpass in the city of Albuquerque, Las Vegas, or Phoenix.
I loved diffy-q. It made the math real for me, much like physics did.

It was still a hard course, but worth it. Now, if only I remembered some of it...
There are plans for HSR between Vancouver, BC and Portland, OR. Washington state just allocated a few hundred million to advance design. I think they are waiting for some matching federal grants before proceeding. I think they are hoping for a high speed line within 10 years or something.

I actually think that if the High Speed line is built all the way south to Eugene it kind of makes sense to build a traditional electrified rail way between Eugene and Redding CA. through Medford, and a higher speed line to Sacramento where it could interline with California High-Speed Rail to LA. Connecting Medford with Redding and Eugene with a traditional rail should be worth it on its own, but with the surrounding high speed lines it becomes possible to operate a west coast sleeper between Seattle and LA in like 10-13 hours (as opposed to the current 36 hours).
I don’t think this would work for users using aliases for their email signups.

In the existing system, myemail+yourservice@domain.com can be verified.

In the proposed reverse method, sending emails from myemail@domain.com, not myemail+yourservice@domain.com, breaks the sign up flow.

This is true for catchall emails where people register using yourservice@domain.com (a forwarding address) but their real address, myemail@domain.com, as well.
I've been writing code for nearly as long and man, you have to try it. It's more like autocomplete on roids than something that generates Fibonacci methods automagically.
Then let's define the problem as passing a rigorous Turing Test. And by rigorous I mean one lasting several days conducted by a jury of 12 tenured professors drawn from multiple academic fields including philosophy, mathematics, history, computer science, neuroscience, psychology, law, etc.
The accurate use of technical terms wasn’t really what I had in mind when I used the word snobbery.
what do you mean by slashed?

having hardware is not the thing that allows you to attack a PoW network. especially if it's one of the ones that anyone actually puts any stock in the network security of.

bitcoin's network security is a joke (although certainly better than PoS), so hopefully we're on the same page about that as well?
React didn't come up with anything new, not components or really any of its tooling, it is simply a conglomeration of many tools.
Obviously. No company would practically have been able to do it, due to the investment required, but there would be no laws stopping it.
Hats off to your prof. This is such a brilliant idea for how to teach, anchored in a solid reflection of what “doing the job” is like day-to-day outside the academic context.
As someone who's used machine translation as a tool to learn 2 human languages, which I eventually gained fluency in, I'm really tired of AI being considered "cheating". Yes, you can use it to approximate answers to questions and be fairly certain those answers are correct. But you can also use it as a tool in your learning process to help you fill in the gaps until you're all the way there. In language, it's quite obvious that using the language will increase your abilities over time. In programming, that may not be so intuitive, but it's also true. The more software you build, the more you will understand about building software well, even if you use Copilot to help write your algorithms. I think the "problem" here is that tools like this make it difficult to enforce that others learn something. But for self-directed people, who are committed to learning and understanding what they are doing, AI is more of a useful tool than a cheat.
The article seems to imply that people are primarily exposed to Mercator in school without discussing its shortcomings. However in my experience growing up in the 90s/00s, we discussed lots of different projections and their respective tradeoffs. It was drilled in pretty deep that the Mercator reflected shapes accurately, but not relative sizes. I also remember seeing Robinson projection far more than Mercator, though again we were reminded that it's not perfect either, and that any 2D projection will have its pros/cons.
While this will definitely be an issue in the short term, it's part of a long standing series of panics where a new technology develops, and everyone worries that we'll lose the skills it abstracts away.

And to some degree we will! I certainly can't do long division anymore, and I struggle to navigate my own neighborhood without GPS. This is a bit sad, but I think something of an inevitability.

If history is any guide, academics should embrace the new tech and try to teach students bigger things that copilot can't yet handle, with the assumption that they'll use copilot to fill in some details--the same way we now teach students to use graphing calculators to solve problems that would have been out of reach for their grandparents.

There are so many things I never learned as an undergrad because we were too focused on algorithms. Database design, testing strategies, different architectures, programming language design, etc. Maybe these things can come to the forefront of the curriculum if we don't need to drill basic algorithms.
It would be nice if there was a globe, with the center of the projection facing the user. Once you start rotating the map, it is really difficult to make sense of what is going on.

Other than that, it is really cool, and quite trippy to play with.
Which guarantees the centralization of assets in the hands of a monied few. You might as well just write carpetbagger on your forehead. It's quite clear the outcome you're vested in. The entire concept of an estate existing to anyone but the already well-heeled would become even rarer than it is now.

If you want to invest, go solve a problem that isn't creating a predatory pressure on the real estate market. Homes and property should be affordable. Not investment vehicles, or somewhere to hide cash from that nasty inflation.
I'd call tools like ASAN and friends debug tooling. I'm not sure if zig has tooling that doesn't have an analogue in the c++ world, but having them built in to the compiler by default is a notable feature.
In case it's interesting for you, Windows and macOS have OS-level support for this:

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/use-color-filter...

https://support.apple.com/guide/mac-help/change-color-filter...
Nah. You are extrapolating from zero data points.
You’re missing the point completely. It’s not about law and regulation literally being append only, it’s rather about the number of laws and regulations consistently growing over time, with very little repeal of old regulation, which are mainly removed only to be replaced by more complex and extensive ones on the same topic. If you even superficially learn about how regulations and laws are created and curated in the US, you will find that this is exactly how things work here.
The hand-wavy explanations never explained why the exhaust went out the back rather than the front and the back.
I use it with python and vscode, it's great there. Sure, half the stuff it makes isn't correct, or nearly correct, but it's very close, and I just need to change a little here or there.

It also does a fantastic job of filling in method parameters from my local variables, again not 100% of the time, but 90% of the time it nails it.
What's wrong with the graphics?
Also, the photos of the author in their underwear is to make it clear to the viewer about the positions being demonstrated.

Also, the backstory of the author was that he was in the army (before he got blind), and spent time with people from Kenya then. Thus, there is likely a focus of a person from Kenya in this photo. Also, it is about finding people who are not the ones in developed countries sleeping on modern era invented beds and beddings.
Well each process has its own state, so if you needed to sync that you'd be storing it in mnesia, ets, or an external DB. Processes can watch and get messages about other processes if something were to succeed/fail.
You are wrong about the majority of validators having to approve a certain transaction for them to be included. Even if 80 % of the network were censoring, those transactions would, on average, make it into every fifth block.
I teach data structures and algorithms among other subjects.

My assignments are similar to everyone else's (CLRS, JeffE, Leetcode) yet different enough that simply copy and pasting will not work.

All I ask is that they comment their code, analyze complexity and cite sources.

I've been using copilot for the last year in my live coding sessions. It saves so much time (especially in comments). If students want to use Copilot I do not
see a problem. It is just another tool.

Copilot is near useless without decent programming knowledge.
80% of time it is fantastic.
About 10% of time Copilot gives you subpar snippets. O(n2) instead of O(n) etc.
Then 10% of time it just gives you wrong snippets.

Just like GPT-3, once you go beyond a paragraph it loses context.
It's already in Chrome Beta meaning "has" will be shipping in Chrome within 1-4 weeks. It's not like Safari are leading with this feature and others are catching up.

Leading is when you implement something and no one else as started. Example, Firefox and Chrome shipped WebGL2 and Safari did nothing for 4 years.

When multiple browsers are implementing the same standard at the same time and one ships a couple of weeks earlier that's not leading. Leading implies followers. Maybe in this case Firefox will follow both Chrome and Safari since Firefox has (no "has" support in Firefox Nightly)
> The problem of authenticating art before this, for a digital artist, was that you HAD to have a gallery do it with you in order for it to work. No one trusted anyone, not even the artist, to say that there would only be "10 copies" of that digital artwork, since they couldn't do any follow through if the artist decided to say there were ten copies but sold 10 000. This was an issue with digital art that was previously only solved by the reputation of X art gallery - the art gallery would say - "we certified only 10 copies, and our reputation as a gallery protects this artwork from being certified again".

> With NFTs you just do it.

No, you can't. Anybody can go right now and mint their own series of BAYC or any artwork they want. The blockchain will allow it. It won't even care if you mint it against the exact same data, because as far as I know nothing in the blockchain cares that there's more than one NFT pointing to the same URL, or pointing to an URL that resolves to content bit-by-bit identical to something somebody else already minted.

The only guarantee you can have is an extremely weak one, in the form of "this precise collection, with this precise unique ID is set in stone". That's not going to stop anybody from creating another one 5 minutes later.
Must watch: Why are we changing maps? from The West Wing

https://youtu.be/eLqC3FNNOaI?t=44
Why is Russia sending gas to, and through, Ukraine?

At the end of the day, it comes down to their goals and what other countries will tolerate.

On the face of it, Russia, allegedly, claims to be interested in liberating the average Ukrainian citizen, not killing them all (Bucha etc. notwithstanding). If they started making cut and dry moves to shut down the entire country and cripple it, this goal is totally out the window and the optics shift from 'atrocious' to 'utterly indefensible'. Russia has allies that they have to keep feeling safe and secure, to ensure cooperation, trade, and thus guarantee their war machine.

More broadly, there is an agreed framework for how to 'ethically' wage a war and whilst they have violated a number of such rules, drawing universal ire from a unified international community by using any and all the means at their disposal to affect Ukraine, not distinguishing between civilians or soliders, is probably a step too far even for Russia.
How does medical school, law school, and non-CS engineering resolve this?

Seems like they would have had to solve the “how do I know what you know you know issue”.
Wondering how it handles monsoonal flash-flooding ...
They will inevitably reach the point of a world-ending threat, but I'm very confident Carmack is right that this won't happen so quickly we can't see the signs of danger.

There's a lot of policy we can do to slow things down once we get near that point, which is something rarely talked about among AI safety researchers, but the fundamental existential danger of this technology is obvious.
[Disclaimer: Not a doctor or nutrition expert]

From what I've read about postprandial glucose levels, the question seems less about whether or not something elicits a glycemic response, but by how much and how that compares to glucose/fructose.

Another useful measure would be comparing satiation after consumption of sugar vs non-caloric sweeteners, to determine if the significant drop in calories leads to more food ingested overall.

Stevia in particular seems to be one of the lesser studied sweeteners, based on a handful of papers postprandial glucose levels doesn't seem to differ a lot compared to sugar. But there seem to be somewhat consistent findings that satiety levels remain largely the same given the same mass of ingested food ( e.g. [0][1]).

To your second question, from my view the understanding of the human microbiome is still rather poor, especially in terms of health implications on various physiological systems (including neurological), optimal composition and applicable ways to maintain it. Although the last time I checked was probably 1-2 years ago, if anyone is aware of useful new data here I would welcome a link.

[0] https://sci-hub.ee/10.3390/nu11123036

[1] https://sci-hub.ee/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/art...