skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Think about it in a non-web structure: Should someone be able to send a letter about "Killing all the Jews and make all black people slaves" and the New York Times HAS to print it and distribute it to all its subscribers?

Or do you think the NYT (as a private enterprise) can decide what messages they distribute on their platform? (this is a different question than whether or not the NYT has a moral responsibility to not distribute hateful messages)
> I think requiring some sort of proof of being a real person before being able to post content might be how this shakes out, similar to accounts requiring a valid phone, or services with KYC requirements

While, on a descriptive level, I believe that your idea of the implementation of this would win, on a normative level, I would argue that such an approach would be privacy-destroying and very dangerous for human freedoms and tyranny-resistance - simply because it's very hard to prove that you are a human without also indicating that you are a particular human.

A privacy-preserving alternative might be to build a "web of trust", where the nodes don't actually have to be proven to be owned by a human (or by a particular human), but the reputation associated with the nodes still allows humans to curate meaningful non-spam content.

With email/SMS spam, we have tools like Hashcash[1] that imposes a cost on each spam message (which is disproportionately burdensome on spammers), but I don't think that that works with "published" spam (as opposed to "direct" spam).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashcash
That is true in theory, but not in practice.

A large program is itself essentially composed of many subprograms. You must prove every single aspect of those subprograms (hard in and of itself) then you must prove that every possible combination of those subprograms is also provable. As there is no general formula for the halting problem, each combination must be uniquely proven.

This essentially means that if you have N possible branches, then the difficulty proving for each unique case would be the factorial of N.

Proving 9kloc of code for L4 took 5-10 man years. Adding just 1kloc of similarly dense code would likely add decades of man-years. What about 100kloc or 1mloc?

Even if you could find tricks to optimize similar branches, the fundamental factorial problem doesn't go away (as making it go away would mean that you've solved the provably insolvable halting problem).

In practice, only the most trivial of programs are completely provable before the heat death of the universe.
I spent time in Singapore where living in dense high rises and traveling on a very well run public transit system is commonplace.

Same thing. I found that people who could afford cars bought them for the convenience (despite the 100% import duty and $100,000 COE charge for 10 year permit).

And same with detached housing. It’s was pretty much the ideal for families. Constant complaints of noise in apartment buildings, crappy neighbors, limited space.

Don’t get me wrong, many people like the apartment living car-free. Mostly, young, childless people. But when kids came into the picture or even wealth increased and people got older, preferences changed.
Honestly, my issue with calling a call center is never the accent or nationality of the other person. It's that they're usually either incompetent or forced to behave as if they're incompetent by corporate policy. Every HN user has likely had the same experience described in XKCD 806 [1] and wished there really was a code word to get to talk to someone who actually knows something.

One of the more annoying ones for me is contacting tech support with extensive debugging information/logs and only being able to talk to people who can't understand what I'm talking about and insist on power cycling the device (which of course may momentarily resolve an intermittent issue, and is enough for them to "close" the case).

[1]: https://xkcd.com/806/
Being the best at something is a good ideal, but hopefully you'll never get there. Because if you do, what will be your drive? I'm serious about this. Think through your stated motivation, and ask yourself what you want out of life. Are they the same? If you are the best, what metrics are you using to determine that? A lot of money? Fame? When I was a programmer, I was happy knowing that my program was making someone's day a little easier. They certainly weren't the best programs, but they were what my users wanted, and I talked to my users often. I think a programmer who is a good people person would stand out, but it doesn't matter what I think; you need to answer these questions for yourself. Good luck.
Probably one of the concepts I like the most when building a startup.

I have heard this definition in a french video, and I liked the idea of the 3 points:

1/ Are they understanding what you do? (UVP etc.)
2/ Are they using/buying?
3/ Are they sharing? (word of mouth, social shares, mentions, etc.)

Do you have a better definition of product/market fit?
And are young enough not to being dealing with physical issues/disability.
I had the same experience with my first manual car. I learned the basics by getting in and driving it.

Like many things if you understand it at a high level then getting the basics down quickly is easy. It's the details that require practice and experience, like starting on a hill.
If I remember correctly, the first days of Reddit were filled with bots posting to fake some user activity so that humans would ditch other platforms.
If your solution to racism is to disguise as a white man it's not a solution to racism. The tool is almost the complete opposite of what their selling pitch is

And let's not play dumb here, the end goal is too milk workers from third world countries
std::shared_ptr doesn't use mutexes in any implementation I know of. They use atomic instructions for incrementing and decrementing the reference count, which are very fast.
To charitably read and steel-man the GP's comment, one could argue that while undergraduate education is fine - there are better patterns of research - such as industry (bell labs, spaceX, google ml research), or government (oak ridge, NASA center). That the mixed mission between doing research and teaching at the same time in a T1 research university doesn't work as well as more formally separating those functions.

I'm pretty sure I don't agree with the above ^, it probably discounts the value of grad-school research as an apprenticeship model amongst other drawbacks. But it does have some merit to bear consideration. Surely the current model isn't perfect - where could we improve?
Correct. The car situation is worse there, which is why I think their theories are so whacky when postulated as "get rid of cars" because it fails to be relevant beyond those areas.
Toast Q2 2022 Earnings Review: strong growth, terrible margins
> Using a pre-trained Latent Diffusion model (by @multimodalart), I generated several hundred pieces of AI Art. I created an Instagram account and scheduled the better ones to upload once a day.

That last sentence is kind of interesting. It would be one thing to auto-generate and auto-post, but that's not what the author did. The author acted as an editor to the robot.

It's one thing for robots to post stuff online. It's another for them to post good stuff, all by themselves.

The next logical step would be to create a robot that samples from the AI art, posts to the account, then adjusts its editorial taste to likes, shares, etc.
Yeah, it is completely dumb, but it is what it is..

The problem is that whastapp is old and it was first designed those decisions made sense..

the only other option around was SMS but it was expensive in many countries.. So now you had the option to pay a few dollars to buy the whatsapp (yeah, had to pay for it back then) and you could send SMS-like messages for free..

That is why it is so widespread in many countries, because it was a cheap alternative to SMS..

It was designed as a replacement for SMS and many of the early technical decisions that are limiting then today were made with that in mind..

One phone number = one phone = one whatsapp account

that is no longer the case today but they have to deal with the technical debts of those early decisions..

AFAIK all the other alternatives available today came much later with a completely different mind set, so they do not have those same limitations..
Proving you're a real person doesn't need to be at odds with the user's privacy concerns.

Look at the verification system used by risky subreddits for example, you only have to provide a few pictures of yourself posing with a sign with your username written on it from different angles. Currently hard to replicate by bots or photoshop, and privacy preserving.

Short of reaching AGI there will always be tasks that can differentiate humans from machine and won't require the users to post a photo of their passport or phone number.
It is what it is. It would be unfair if we (I'm Portuguese as well) were suddenly taxed at a higher rate than foreigners, but the truth is we've lived with higher taxes and lower wages for a long time. Anything that brings rich/skilled people into the country will be a good thing in the mid-to-long run.

As far as the housing market goes I've always seen blaming foreigners as a very convenient excuse. Truth is our market follows the price of mortgages and those haven't been this cheap ever. Blame your fellow countrymen whose parents can loan them 50K to get a foot in the door instead.
I really enjoy posting sites that seem to meet this vague standard, and it's just plain fun when a discussion emerges.

Example deleted.
I honestly think that most Americans have not traveled enough to realize there is a better way. Only 30% of Americans even have a passport.
>Our homes are also designed in way that causes alienation from family members.

Have you been in a house from the 1800s or early 1900s? Walls and doors everywhere. Hell, there's a good chance the kitchen sink isn't even in the kitchen. People are much more readily in each others company (for better or worse) in newer houses with their big open spaces.

>Many rooms have TV and the seating is arranged in such a way that we can compulsively watch to dull our anxiety instead of having meaningful conversations with wife and kids.

Back in the "good old days" the kids would be doing some sort of labor (chores or otherwise) as their age and ability allowed and husband and wife would have spent more of their time doing the stuff needed to run the household. We spend far more time interacting with each other these days as a result of the sheer abundance of leisure time. Having daily leisure time with your SO, even if it's also screen time, is basically unheard of by 1920s standards of living.
> notoriously difficult to properly set bounds on behavior

Actually it's trivial: just put a bound on the amount of available memory and do a worst-case analysis to GC it all.

The hard part is not engineering the system to have a bound, it is engineering the system so that the bound is reasonable for practical use.
It would actually be lovely to have a search engine that only serves up single-creator or few-creators websites. I'm sure one exists, but I'm not aware of any.
Annabel turned her app idea into a growing business
Turns out, people who make websites are usually the sort of people who make websites.
MLIR (https://mlir.llvm.org/) is a quickly growing compiler toolkit which attempts to synthesize the learnings of LLVM and currently powers compilers for programming languages, machine learning and circuit design (https://github.com/llvm/circt). and there are a ton of companies with real employees working on it (including Microsoft) and MLIR is at the core of Chris Lattner’s new company, ModularAI. I’d recommend taking a look at it, there are a large number of ways to get involved and a number of paths from contributor to employee.
But wouldn't someone as anonymous as Satoshi use the fact that nobody but Germans use GMX, as a way of throwing people off?
Yeah, and while 3c per spam would absolutely destroy spam for direct-message systems (email, SMS), it'll do next to nothing for published spam (blogposts, videos, etc). The economics are different.
One of the things mentioned was generating AI art and just starting an Instagram with it. I wonder to what extent all these novel AI art generation sites are taking steps to prevent bots from using it (if at all). In a couple years you could sufficiently inundate Artstation/Instagram/etc with completely bullshit accounts and a layperson would have no fucking idea.
AFAIK (maybe someone else will correct me) there are two things that people run into when implementing interpreters:

1. You can't write a JIT because you need to be able to dynamically allocate executable memory, which is typically not allowed

2. The App Store needs to know up front what native methods & behavior your app accesses so that it can allow users to observe and control what your app can access. Accessing new native methods by downloading random code over the internet is not allowed

There are ways to get around (2) by ensuring you request access to everything your app could possibly access up front, but that could also lead to rejections for asking for permission for things your app doesn't actually need. It's a bit of a dice roll.

There was talk that ability to do (1) might be coming in an update a couple years ago, but no official policy change ever came of it.
Museums are filled with art produced exclusively for a specific audience, or rather a single patron who commissionned it. And most of everything is shit - I'm sure this is true to even things like paintings in the past.
I saw a documentary about a young fish trying something like this.
Because I don't trust a faceless megacorporation with adjudicating the truth or falsehood of all speech
Thunderbird 102 is now available in the Snap store and FlatHub
I bounced around between browsers a lot and settled on Brave. It works great on all my OS (Windows, Linux, MacOS, Android), sync all the extensions and settings, has adblocker on Android.
You’re probably in for a nasty surprise when you look up the process for replacing the battery pack in an EV, which is a more apt comparison than the standard hunk of lead and acid in an ICE car. Just like Apples laptops, EVs are trying to cram batteries into every possible space to maximize capacity, meaning that replacement will involve some substantial disassembly.

And yes, Apple can do it and has even said they’re going to do it. So at this point, it’s just a matter of guessing for why they don’t do it now. And that could be any number of reasons, including easier manufacturing or in a surprise twist maybe easier repair. Look at the ifixit instructions and look at the spacing available to access the pull tabs for the adhesive around the various frame parts. It’s entirely reasonable to think that Apple did some math on battery repair frequency; on that fact that even when an M* systems battery is at the 80% mark where it’s eligible for repair that it will still be near or over 100% of the old intel laptop runtimes when new; evaluated the chances of those adhesive tabs breaking or having the battery or top case damaged while removing one or the other and decided that bundling the two together and eating the cost on battery repairs was the easier option for their repair people. Because ultimately Apple’s priorities likely are ease of manufacture first, ease of store based repair second and ease of user based repair third. Because even with really easy user based repair, I would venture to say close to 90% of people will still have Apple do it for $200. And I say that based both on the fact that Apple used to offer various DIY repair options for older models* and people have their mechanic or AutoZone replace their car batteries for them even though that’s literally just 2 bolts.

* I worked for an Apple authorized repair place in the G5 iMac days, in which for example the power supply was “user replaceable” and for which Apple offered customers DIY repair options on them. I can count on one hand, with fingers to spare, the number of customers who took us up on the option to order the part and do it themselves, even if having us do it meant longer turn around times. On the whole people don’t DIY repairs for things, and so engineering and manufacturing for that use case is probably a worse decision than engineering and designing for your own people and while those people might benefit from DIY friendly features, if that makes manufacture harder or more expensive, then that’s still likely a net negative trade off.
In this case, I figured the context is enough to figure it out. People don't tend to talk about how many bits of content their browser downloaded.
Most Americans don't have a choice.

Why are cars and phones giant these days? Is it because nobody wants smaller ones, or because perverse market incentives have distorted offerings in a chase for product growth?

Why is the USA unbearably car centric? Is it because nobody wants to get around any other way, or because perverse market incentives have distorted the world around us in a chase for GDP growth?

Some people like cars. But the price premium of the small number of walkable places in the US (and the fact that that kind of infrastructure is literally illegal to build today) implies that there is a significant portion of people who like walkable places.
> Hard real time GC is hard.

Hard real time is hard, full stop. If you have malloc and free you will encounter the exact same real-time challenges as you will with GC.

Heck, you don't even need malloc and free. All you need is a WHILE loop to make hard-real-time extremely challenging.
I think most Americans would like to have the conveniences of a walkable area and the space/affordability advantages of a suburb. Some parts of the world accomplish this by building many walkable towns and neighborhoods that people can live in. For some reason in much of the US we give people a binary choice of living in a small number of extremely expensive, dense cities -- or living in sidewalkless suburban strip-mall hell with a massive commute. I don't think any of this precisely "what people want", really: most folks are just given a very small menu to choose from.
we have the same kind of situation in America just a little behind, so here are my thoughts "as a young person": none of my peers want to pay for that. we're not going to sit around letting old people leech from us instead of working. and at the end of the day younger people hold more physical power and more working ability so we will have the final say regardless of how many old people there are to vote themselves our $. i expect that if they try this a couple things might happen:

1. young people leave for better states

2. young people outvote old people (not likely)

3. young people refuse to pay and force the government to raise the social security age to 83.

i hope it's 3. in 1935 the average life expectancy was 60 to a social security age of 65, so 1.08 times the life expectancy. the life expectancy now is 77, so keep the same 1.08 times and we have a minimum age of about 83.

it really baffles me how the same generation that talks about how "millennials and gen z wont work hard" literally wants to force us to pay for their retirement. they had 65 years to save up money, they can pay for it themselves.
People say they hate driving manuals in stop-and-go-traffic and I don't get it - maybe it's because I've been driving them as my daily driver for over 30 years? My left foot and right hand just take care of what needs to be done without my even having to think about it. Essentially I am driving an automatic! :)
That's not what they will tell you on the phone. https://youtu.be/RQqk45ps9kg?t=31

"It would cost more than it's worth to like... break it apart, to open it up, and replace the battery" (because we designed them that way)

Have you ever heard of planned obsolescence?

To your second point, the problem isn't that they come from recycled. The problem is that they won't be recycled again.
> the terrorist who killed worshippers at the mosques in New Zealand posted on Kiwi Farms before the attacks.

I think you misread the Wikipedia page. Kiwifarms got in the news for refusing to remove the video as it was not breaking any laws. Not for supporting / encouraging him.
> The problem is that the "throw text at the wall and see what sticks" can be gamed by seeing how many upvotes you get. You can get machines to receive upvotes not by actual helpfulness, but by fooling people.

The most popular human-generated content on the web is created this way. People post fake news articles and fictional how-to content just for clicks. They copy and riff off of other fake content. "Woman mistakes wild animal for a pet and takes it home" is an entire genre now. Not to mention that conspiracy media was an industry before the internet.

But you're right that the quantity and quality will eventually far exceed what humans are capable of. Imagine DALL-E but for conspiracies and religions. Type in a few words, wait a few seconds, and generate a bot cult leader, capable of social media usage and text and video conversations, with more powerful charisma than Jim Jones, acting independently on the internet and creating a cult around whatever theme you asked for. Imagine that at the fingertips of anyone on the internet, and governments and corporations having access to far more.
You get the bare minimum service because company don't want to spend money on that and outsource everything to the lowest bidder.

If you want good service you'd have to pay for it, but you don't want to
> Would you find it reasonable for a law to force them to continue hosting this content?

Yes, at least in principle. Generally, I don't think companies should have any business deciding what their customers can say.

Now, if this site was sending threatening emails to Cloudflare employees, that would be a different discussion - I do believe that a company may have a right to protect its own employees from attacks. Though even here, requiring Cloudflare to go through some legal process where the senders have a chance to defend themselves before a neutral 3rd party would be a good thing.

In general, the principle I'm following is that companies should have minimal rights, and definitely minimal to 0 obligations, to police their customers' behavior, outside very specific niches (e.g. AML and KYC for banks are probably important enough).
My email's domain is as exotic as it gets (I own it, and I'm the only one using it) and I've yet to encounter a website that rejects it.

Temporary email address providers though, yeah. I've seen plenty of rejects with those.
I think this matches well with Sturgeon's law.

Hopefully the 90 percent that is lost was the same 90 percent that is crap.
I don't this will be a good paradigm, just the direction we're probably unfortunately headed in. The Chinese already have something like this implemented[1], though I'm not sure how it works. From a state's perspective monitoring whistleblowers seems like a feature.

[1]https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-41081676
Ok but what does that have to do with white Americans?
Currently a simple heuristic (don't mean to sound racist here) would be 'don't trust anyone with an Indian accent who calls you'. It's obvious from watching all the scam baiting YT channels like Jim Browning, Scammer Payback and so on.

But yeah, a better one is probably 'don't trust anyone who calls you', which people will need to adapt eventually.
Fatsecret has full barcode scanning in their free version. MFP is more popular, but I tried both apps concurrently for a week and found that I preferred Fatsecret. I'm not wild about the name. https://www.fatsecret.com/
That's fine. They just need to start paying for their externities and stop relying on being subsidized by the dense urban areas.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7Nw6qyyrTeI