skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
As far as I know, the `instances.insert` API only allows individual VMs, although the CLI can issue a bulk set of API calls[0], and MIGs (see below) allow you to request many identical VMs with a single API call if that's for some reason important.

You can also batch API calls[1], which also gives you a response for each VM in the batch while allowing for a single HTTP request/response.

That said, if you want to create a set of effectively identical VMs all matching a template (i.e., cattle not pets), though, or you want to issue a single API call, we'd generally point you to managed instance groups[2] (which can be manually or automatically scaled up or down) wherein you supply an instance template and an instance count. The MIG is named (like nearly all GCP resources), as are the instances, with a name derived from the MIG name. After creation you can also have the group abandon the instances and then delete the group if you really wanted a bunch of unmanaged VMs created through a single API call, although I'll admit I can't think of a use-case for this (the abandon API is generally intended for pulling VMs out of a group for debugging purposes or similar).

For cases where for whatever reason you don't want a MIG (e.g., because your VMs don't share a common template). You can still group those together for monitoring purposes[3], although it's an after-creation operation.

The MIG approach sets a _goal_ for the instance count and will attempt to achieve (and maintain) that goal even in the face of limited machine stock, hardware failures, etc. The top-level API will reject (stock-out) in the event that we're out of capacity, or in the batch/bulk case will start rejecting once we run out of capacity. I don't know how AWS's RunInstances behaves if it can only partially fulfill a request in a given zone.

[0]: https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/instances/multiple/cre...

[1]: https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/api/how-tos/batch

[2]: https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/instance-groups

[3]: https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/instance-groups/creati...
No it isn't. But OP is talking more about government suppressing public information. Like when the FBI told Zuckerberg to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story because it was Russian disinformation.
> Or put another way, you can tell YouTube what you want (to be perceived socially as wanting) to see, but the algorithm knows what you actually want to see.

Except the algorithm doesn't know what I actually want to see. Nobody but YouTube knows what I tell YouTube I like or dislike, so there's not even a theoretical pressure to lie about by wants in order to present an appearance to others.
The Intercept does a better job of explaining that. The problem with Lab Leak is that because it was suppressed for so long there's been a lot of time to destroy evidence. At that point the "smoking guns" are pretty few and far between though they mention at least one in that article. There's plenty of evidence in the article, saying that there is none is incorrect. I don't know why you'd be saying that.
Surprised Dolby has survived for so long.
And building green unstable energy sources is contributing to burning coal.

But anyone opposing solar power is branded as “climate denier”.
So it’s anticompetitive to give away tools for free or paying content owners to use it?

Would you say the same about a search engine company that gives its browser away for free and pays its competitor in mobile a reported $18 billion a year to be the default search engine for its platform?

I would much rather tie my horse to Dolby than a company that has the attention span of a toddler.
Meta has to pay walkie-talkie app $174M for infringing on its patents
Show HN: Go http.RoundTripper that emits Open Telemetry Metrics automatically
Do you think you have the right to go into a newspaper's office and force them to print speech that supports your point of view?

That's what you're arguing for. The government regulating speech is a violation of the first amendment, period. That includes forcing speech.

The problem isn't corporations having the right to moderate. The problem is corporations have become so large and powerful that meaningful competition can't exist.
Trick That Solves Rubik’s Cubes and Breaks Ciphers (Meet in the Middle) [video]
For 1, there's probably a case where a picture that exactly matches the prompt is very famous, so maybe the right prompt would manage to effectively select an image licensed by Getty. The GPLed fast inverse square root routine was an example of this kind of thing: one good match and the model finds it. Finding such a case might or might not be possible.

For 2, you can't find what isn't there, so something random would come out.

For 3 or 4, I suppose you could pay paparazzi to stalk the celebrity and try to produce a similar original shot, and this might be impossible depending on the prompt (for example, photo of [person] at [event] on [date]"), but if it's possible it has absolutely no resemblance to 1 or 2. The photographer would produce an original work, unless your #3 contractor tries to remove the watermark and pass off the Getty image as their own, which would be idiotic.

There is no particular "Getty Images" style, other than their quality requirements, they are a huge company that acquires and licenses a ton of pro photography. There's no such thing as "getty-like".

So, no, only option 1 might possibly produce a problematic derivative work.
If you change the mass of the earth then you have a new orbit problem to contend with too.
And, of course, Ohmu are fricking rad as hell.
I wish there were a way to screenshare with customers while I troubleshoot that didn't involve more than one click. I currently use GoToAssist which is good software, but I have to screenshare with a lot of elderly users for my company's products, and most of them have no idea what "download" means. God help us if they're on Mac, because then I have to guide them through permissions settings over the phone to let me see their screen.

I would pay good money for something like this.
It's been a couple of years, but I thought Chainalysis said they could break CoinJoin.
Pretty sure everyone who wants gov data collection of private individuals would want this to be illegal as well.

I'm disappointed to find most of the complaining on this thread about businesses collecting personal data, rather than the government. Even more so that the first comment's top response regarding this is shooting it down because of an imagined loophole.

It disgusted me about CCPA that a private company can have a breach and be fined millions, but the CA govt is immune. Same thing here, and it should disgust everyone who supposedly cares about privacy.
We will!

Part of what we're doing is building a platform that captures the broader lifecycle of tasks beyond "inference alone" -- things like data import, index building & maintenance, drift detection, corpus query.
I hate that fines proportional to the revenue giant companies make from doing shady shit are the exception and not the rule
As far as I remember those calls were actually not made with deep fake tech, but by reusing video material from a previous call, skillfully edited to be believable enough.
It made a lot more sense back in the analog days, when figuring out how to encode and decode stereo audio on an LP was non-trivial.

But things like 5.1 audio or HDR or spatial audio aren't that much more than adding a bunch of extra channels/bits to a stream, defining relative power levels, and the signal strength follows a curve, and oh there's some positional metadata.

The heavy lifting is done by compression algorithms which deserve to be patented because they do genuinely non-obvious stuff. Just like the way Dolby got digital audio onto a filmstrip was similarly clever.

But stuff like 5.1 surround sound... it's just channels, man. In the digital world, it seems like it should be awfully easy to design an open standard.
Climate science isn't settled, although the data is compelling, more needs to be done and level set, separate wheat from the chaff. Investigate incentives, censorship and funding. Evidence is nowhere as strong as defining the radius of the earth or questioning the law of Gravity.

There is a giant machinery of Big Tech + ESG + Environmentalists + MSM that's spinning up the public opinions on climate change to the point where it is everywhere from products we buy to Apple keynotes, from Tinder profiles to corporate PR releases. It has become a religion of sorts. That alone makes me question every aspect of the policies, but also the underlying science.

We need more debate, not less.
Can you describe how it could be read with a warrant, or how it's relevant at all to people who have email accounts with online services?
We (people) already accept the lies we perceive. I think we choose to accept these fantasies because they're often outside our direct influence and when something is distant from us we have the luxury of turning it into entertainment. I think of beauty in media, every video we see today is processed to make people look pretty. Most play along with the fantasy: admire old celebrities for not aging, complement friends for clear skin. But when a friend says, "I feel so ugly" we move closer to reality and acknowledge the makeup, beauty filters, etc. The same effect happens in politics, news, business, technology: people indulge in fantasy at their convenience.

I don't think people will be more mindful of what they watch and believe, I think the opposite will happen: an attraction to fake content. People will embrace the fantasy and share deepfakes at a scale so large governments will be running campaigns to alert the public that such-and-such video is fake, possibly attempting to regulate how content shared online must be labeled.

That said I still believe when these lies are closer to us, enough for us to care either as professionals or friends and family, that we will be more discerning about reality.
this is a decent take, but i think you're missing a crucial centerpiece, which is the child's direct connection to the past, as represented by the kami (spirits) and her own parents. the bulk of chihiro's journey is discovering where she fits in within that past, so that she can then uncover her own sense of self within it, and thereby ultimately find the resolve to take action (find her agency). without this base understanding of eastern social/philosophical tradition, much of the journey seems like senseless obstacle-jumping, and that sounds like the context that the GP is missing to appreciate the movie.
I think "engagement" in the discussion here is more of a term of art, and it's not really a question of what it implies.
It has been years since I was tempted to template metaprogramming. It is a specialist technique being made redundant by straightforward language features that compile much faster.
> High bypass turbofans are the "engine" part we're talking about no body wanting to make for them. How saucy is an engine that doesn't exist?

The plane doesn't exist either, it was a plan.

> And composite materials like on the A350 and 787 have been around, see the A350 and 787

Their point of comparison is the Concorde. If they can make a plane that is significantly cheaper than the Concorde, thanks to the great tech that is now mainstream (composites, turbofans, CAD) but wasn't back then, it can be similar in cost to modern day business class, while still being supersonic. At least that was their marketing pitch, i don't see it taking off without an engine.
USDC has a block list in the smart contract. Other possibilities include validator block lists, and of course exchanges.
Yes, I agree. Skype is even worse, maybe just because it's older and has been neglected longer.
I had never built a JVM app and needed to, evaluated a bunch of technologies, and went with Jakarta EE + Eclipse MicroProfile on Quarkus.

Believe it or not, it's a very pleasant and modern experience and the technology is easy to understand (except for CDI, that took a while).

I didn't like that all the other frameworks had invented their own ways of doing things. Having a standard/specification with a voting committee from multiple organizations seems much more rational to me.
Their annual revenue from the EU is only 17 billion dollars, as of 2021. The current fine is about a quarter of that. This is revenue, not profit. So this fine very likely impacted the bottom line for what Google is pulling out of the EU. And it was not even as big as they could've made it. It's very likely the EU refrained from the maximum fine amount because it would've pushed Google's EU operations firmly into the red.

And this is setting aside the costs of compliance to avoid more fines. Even if the costs are less than another fine, they're not nothing. You're looking at an entire year's profits from the EU essentially being wiped out by this fine, plus reduced profits going forward due to increased compliance costs and probably losing sales. And this is your best case scenario.

It would not take a 100 billion dollar fine to make Google leave the EU, it would only take another fine like this one.
The cheapo alternative bluetooth earbuds have gotten so much better recently. I have two pairs of $40 earbuds off Amazon, which I bought when my $250+ AirPods Pro broke for no obvious reason.

The sound is a little worse, the noise cancellation is a little worse, the battery life is a little worse, the ergonomics are a little worse, the price is a lot better, and can't see ever going back to Apple.
Maybe they should automate the requests then. There's zero reason why they couldn't just write something where you log into your account and click "download my data."

These companies are happy to harvest up all your data, run all this crazy automation, spend millions analyzing algorithms, setting up machine learning, NFTs, run datacenters, networks, etc etc, but they can't figure out how to automate GDPR requests? FUCKING BULLSHIT.

There is literally zero reason why a data request should add any burden to a tech company.
The app measures more than 2 genders but there's not enough sample to draw any conclusions.
It keeps me coming back.

Ruby itself is just such an enabler.
Having both approaches available would be better IMHO. Builder pattern is very nice but I frequently miss having named arguments too. Even if macros can partially fullfill that need, it's not the same and introduces more quirks and complexity...
Launching a free (often restricted by number of users or "beta" for a limited time) version is a way to get users to experience your product and possibly get hooked.

It makes the most sense where you expect your actual hosting costs to be symbolic for small-scale users and hope to earn from bigger customers.

This practice has been present since the dawn of (software) time — even Microsoft never really bothered with private illegal copies of Windows (or DOS), knowing it will get future customers into the Windows world and they'll want Windows at work too.

However, going straight up with the paid model has been there forever as well: it mostly depends on your individual market evaluation and existing entrentchment.
Wouldn't it be the same if the ISP sold the gov. the extracted info they want ?

In this setting the gov can hint at what data it wants, and private parties will manage to get it for resale.
Catholic here, just wanted to chime in with a few notes: the Bible is very hard to read because it's not even a single "book"..

It's a collection of books called the Biblical Canon and has been written by many authors, over the vast period of times for nearly 2000 years. Further, it contains many genres and verses with plenty of parables; So think of it more as a compiled library.

If you would like to read it on your own, I recommend selecting a translation that is easier to understand.

My favorite one is of course the Word on Fire Bible [1], though it's not a full Bible yet, the Gospels, Acts, letters and Revelation are already included and other volumes are coming; that should be enough to get you started at least.

Good luck!

[1] https://www.wordonfire.org/bible/

P.S Anyone is welcome to read it regardless of their spiritual outlook. Same goes for attending Mass or accessing various Church services and programs.
We have a database engine layer that can wrap around multiple databases. Today though we're mainly using SQL since it's so fast with the right indexing. Soon though we're planning to support search using embeddings too. We'll probably use an optimised db for that like faiss or ngt.
Their website is awful and I’m afraid my money will be locked away with no recourse due to a technical error.
But as COVID science got clearer, the spreaders of fake news (“vaccines prevent virus” “masks work” “kids are endangered”) didn’t bear any responsibility nor suffer any consequences.

Same as with climate science. When predictions turn wrong (glaciers still existing in 2020, Great Barrier Reef recovering) everyone just moves on to new fear-mongering.
There were fraud claims on the fringe just after the 2016 election. The evidence was sparse. It didn't take long for even those pretty angry about the election to realize fraud probably didn't happen, and if it did it was at too small a scale to meaningfully affect the results.

Unfortunately in 2020 the fringe became the GOP mainstream, treating equally soft claims as fact.
Except that when the recommendations are 90% garbage, I'm not going to sift through them to find the occasional gem. That's just burning time for little reward.
In systemd you can have multiple ExecStarts, which will be run in order (if I remember correctly), and ExecStopPost is brilliant for notifying problems..
I'm not saying they shouldn't be punished, I'm saying that the specific punishment of suddenly shutting them down is going to punish everyone.

E.g. we could simply seize all profits for 3 months, so Google sees no profit but the world can keep spinning. We could fine them a % of their cash holdings, if we wanted to. We could force them to split off lines of business so we don't have to worry about a catastrophic failure if we do need to kill the whole business.

I just don't think suddenly shutting them down is the right move. There are ways to punish them with far less collateral damage.
Are you suggesting that they're supposed to animate? Because they don't.

Edit: No, they aren't even GIFs. They're MP4s. I have to right-click them and select Play to get them to work, probably because I have autoplay disabled in my browser. So they would have worked if they actually were GIFs, incidentally
Slowly and methodically, taking lots of notes.
Should be noted that article is titled Timescale + Postgres vs. Postgres alone. Timescale is built on Postgres so it's not really a competition per se.
>If somebody gets paid $100,000 a year and spends a week evaluating something, the "free" trial costs $2000.

But out of curiosity, what is the alternative?

Blindly buying (or subscribing to) something because it looks cool in a 5 minute overview of its features?

And how would you convince your employer to pay for it?
A relatable, simplified, example: If you withdraw $3858.28 from a bank under the name Alice, and then deposit $3858.28 in a different bank under the name Bob, and those two banks share data, then someone could reasonably say Alice and Bob are connected.
High bypass turbofans have significance disadvantages in supersonic flight due to ram drag. It would require some additional breakthrough for that to make a difference.

The other stuff is incremental efficiencies, not enough to fundamentally change the very challenging math of supersonic flight efficiency.
FYI: the link to the pricing page doesn't appear in your mobile menu
Steamship is happy to support a company looking to develop this!
Can I ask what you used to make that landing page? I've seen a lot of pages use that template lately and it's killing me not knowing
A doctor that is also interested in privacy and crypto - so interesting. Do you have a blog?
Only US citizens, residents, and government employees can buy them.
Why Choose an Open Source Authentication Provider
No date on the article?
The EU seems fine with the idea actually - it wants more independence on technology and said so several times. There will be many many pissed off European users for sure but that never stopped the EU elite from making a decision.
Still - seems like a reach to me.
We can see the exact same process repeating in Russia right now. This could lead to consequences far worse than the recent pandemic.
But... that's stupid. Why would you kill everybody in NATO just because some of them are irradiated by an attack on someone else? It only makes sense to commit to nuclear warfare if they're actively doing the same, and even then it's mostly just out of spite because you're about to be gone.

Letting Russia nuke europe and get away with it does have unforseeable consequences, but the consequences of all out nuclear war is 100% certain and maximally bad. You literally cannot do worse than this.

You could instead, for instance, deploy the troops and just do a straight up invasion with the intent to destroy Russia entirely. Which maybe they do a nuclear response to. But maybe they don't. Because it's still the worst possible option and perhaps they'd like to instead just kill putin, accept a russia fragmentation into tiny vassal states.

I'd also ask then, because you're saying "irradiating NATO citizens is the red line", whether you support killing everyone if there's a russian caused meltdown at the Zaporyzhzhia plant (sp).
Good points! I agree with your interpretation, but given that it is a novel I see several layers that are simultaneously true.

One layer is the psychological drama as you indicate.

Another layer is what I would call Captain Ahab's attempt to exact revenge on God. He is a man who lost his leg. He has a "crucifixion in his face". There are various passages in which the injustice of life is discussed. He seems to become a Icarus-type character: one who flies too close to the sun, to pierce the "pasteboard masks". As to how the whale can be interpreted in divine/mythological terms, there are various passages that make biblical illusions. Off the top of my head, one such passage is the chapter on the face of the whale and that it is impossible to look a whale in the eyes: the face is so larger that one cannot in fact behold the whale "face to face", which has echoes in the Old Testament and the inability to behold God face to face.

I believe both interpretations are valid and are not exclusionary. There are so many layers!
https://www.post-gazette.com/local/neighborhood/2018/08/08/P...

A good read, or you can come ask the locals what they think - be prepared for a big argument :).

From your link "Map of the emerging American-Canadian megaregions as defined by America 2050."

Emerging - not historical.

Pittsburgh is not 100% midwest. We are not like Nebraska, at all. The further you go from Pittsburgh the divide grows starker. There is some in common with some great lakes rust belt cities. That's it. In any case, it's not 100%.