skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Just take a look at the generated code and explanations. A surprising amount of it is subtly but fundamentally wrong because gpt is just a regurgitation engine. The issues may look superficial, but when you start looking at why they happen, you realize the truth. The ml tools are usually great at writing boilerplate that's the same every time. The instant you do anything else, they fall over. They're statistical autocomplete, not any kind of important change to the process of programming.

I don't see any reason to believe the current approaches can extend to something that actually changes programming. They're not based on understanding code, they're based on generating text that matches what they would expect to see given the context. They have no model of what code means, so they can't model why sometimes code is subtly different if there are no local contextual cues. And when there are your prompt would need to reproduce those contextual cues for it to key off of. In other words, you as the programmer still are directing the generation of the code. You're just doing it via an undocumented and somewhat unpredictable autocomplete.

This doesn't remove the need to have someone who knows what they're doing in the loop. Best case is that it reduces the amount of time you spend typing by a little bit. As long as your job is to know what you're doing rather than to generate text, the current systems are no threat to it.
Ukama is selling boxes that let you broadcast your home internet as LTE
Technically it's not a get out of jail free card, as I understand it, no one is actually held in jail for this right now. Though it does remove it from their records.
Politicians caused that, not a power plant.

>We need to do something, this is something, egro we must do it.

You can't fix stupid.
High school chemistry reminder. A salt is a compound made up of a metallic and nonmetallic element ionically bonded together. There are hundreds of different salts.

Molton salt reactor designs work because of the properties of salts. The radioactive fuel is mixed into the Molton salt and the salt acts as a moderator for the reaction. Using molten salt lets you achieve much higher temperatures(and thus higher energy outputs) without having to use a high pressure vessel like in modern light water reactors. There are a couple other properties that remove the possibility of a runaway reaction, and they can develop some unique safety mechanisms like a 'freeze plug' that can be passively triggered to drain the fuel medium into a storage tank to cool down in the event of catastrophic failures of other systems.
I am both baffled and relieved that most terrorists seem to lack creativity.
Trump pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Comprehensive_Plan_of_...
This would be useful to drop into North Korea?
Fukushima was designed in the 60s. Had they updated the design to next gen the accident wouldnt have happened
The homestead cap limits annual appraised value increases to 10% over the previous year. In theory, if the taxing units maintained the same rate as last, yes, it would result in a 10% jump in tax amount too. Many taxing units reduced their rates a bit this year, given the higher appraisal values. Surprisingly, many Austin area homeowners reported their estimated tax amount stayed the same as last.

The owner has to live on the property and make it their primary residence, to claim homestead exemption. CADs will not know that until the owner applies for Homestead exemption. Not sure they can make it automatic.
*a small portion
Thank you. DNSLB = DNS-based load balancer or..?
Isn’t an average mp3 for a 3min song close to 3MB? It seems to me that this type of tool already assumes you have some bandwidth available
The site really needs some instructions explaining how to use it. It's not really clear what's supposed to happen. Do I type something in the Say something (in English) field and click/tap *Say It*? Or do I click *Say It* and then speak? When I do the latter, an error message like this displays:

Notice: Undefined offset: 1 in /home/u477137059/domains/oh-aha.com/public_html/kendasi/other-langs/chatter-de.php on line 68

As well, is the text at the top of the page supposed to be read to me automatically? Or is something else supposed to happen?
Does GitHub's new code scanning service let you run arbitrary CodeQL queries against its databases? That was one of the really useful extra things LGTM.com let you do back in the day, on top of seeing the results of their standard query set.
$15 can help
Given the sheer size of Wikipedia dumps - it's around 90 Gb with images! - I would recommend downloading them outside of the app.

https://download.kiwix.org/zim/
Definitely some demo-only things going on there. Pass through keyboard is different, and this person just happens to go in to a meeting where the table is in the same orientation and size as the one in his house/office?
As others have noted, formal drug scheduling is a requirement of our foreign obligations.
Not a US citizen but had zero problems flying to US last couple of years. Can't even remember the questions at the passport control point... But there was even a humorous, friendly officer there one time. No bag searches. Sometimes the queues have been long tho... Especially arriving in early morn.

I normally get my bags searched at the public "nothing to declare" area entering Japan and Thailand tho at the customs check point, and sometimes leaving.

No questions or searches ever in Malaysia.

No questions or searches ever entering Hong Kong. If you're e-gate enrolled it's not even an officer at the passport checkpoint, you just scan it and go through a double sided gate. If you have a HKID you don't even need to use your passport for entry, you can scan the ID for entry from international which I think is cool.

No questions or searches ever at Turkey.

Flying into Europe they normally have more questions at passport but no searches.

I'm always honest in my ESTA applications tho, maybe that makes difference.
"why do they call you 'copperjet'?"

watch!

blasts through twenty inches of solid boilerplate
Even real-time isn't good enough. They should have to pre-announce all of their transactions like corporate insiders have to.
I made a tool to convert between parquet and CSV
AI is making stride in comparatively easy environments, i.e. highways and squared suburbs – when they don't crash into white trucks.

Now, what tends to be forgotten is that there AI-average vs. human average is that humans can also drive e.g. in Turin or Paris at rush hour, on mountain roads under the snow or in the Cornwalls roads while under tempest rains.

It's not that I believe that self-driving AI will never progress to this level, but let us be honest when comparing; they still drive themselves into fully-visible plots by daylight or run over cyclists at night.
I find that a useful test. If an honor system doesn't work, it's probably not a society I want to live in.

In Helsinki, local trains, trams, and the metro have used an honor system as long as I can remember. According to the estimates I've seen, only 3-5% of people don't pay.
Its funny how the modern social commentiary associates "incels" with the classes of people they disagree with. It is evident that these people do reproduce.
> CEO and Co-Founder Fixie.ai.

Okay, so this is an advertisement.
Just watch James Lipton.
What would have been the correct 9/11 response?
The US govt hasnt announced the recession have they?
This has a really interesting point, that's being overwhelmed with weird color stuff that I frankly don't understand at all.

The point is about a marked-up document's concept of 'itself as a document', and how this rarely matches to an HTML document, which is a container for the document as well as a bunch of not-document things (navigation header) and para-document things (section sidebar, preview embeds and popups).

I think all of the color stuff is meant to illustrate (or should I say, ink) the bad design revealed by this disparity. I didn't actually get it, but I've always been a <b>bold</b> sort of person, <strong>strong</strong> just seems like another way to say the same thing, which caught on as a fad.

But HTML having markup for documents inside of documents? Strikes me as a good idea. What I don't know is if that's blue or chartreuse.
Living in Seattle, I can attest that the police did riot and deploy chemical weapons.
When the full car auto-pilot is getting released you said? Oh, I forget about foreign language translation. As a person who speaks multiple languages, we still cannot translate from one language to another so it doesn't look ugly.
Or, they'll sell add-on kits that let buyers weaponize those robots ...
> humans can also drive e.g. in Turin or Paris at rush hour, on mountain roads under the snow or in the Cornwalls roads while under tempest rains.

I'm not sure the median human driver can do all that.
Coal power kills 25 people per TWh vs nuclear's 0.04 (yes that includes the 4000 people who died at Chernobyl and the 1 person who died in Fukushima). [1]

The US generates ~22% of its power from coal, about 900TWh. As such, coal kills 22,500 people per year in America - five and a half Chernobyl's per year. [2]

Meanwhile the US generates ~19% of its power from nuclear, about 800TWh. This accounts for 32 deaths. [2]

The disparity is so huge that even if you include the 2202 people who died evacuating the area around the Fukushima plant (who may well have evacuated anyways due to the tsunami), the nuclear power plant saved significantly more lives than it cost vs. having a coal, oil or natural gas plant there.

[edit] For those curious about the math, the Fukushima plant has a nameplate 5306MW capacity and operated from 1979-2011. That means it generated a maximum of ~1500TWh. Based on the numbers in [1]:

- A coal plant at Fukushima would have killed 36,900.

- An oil plant would have killed 27,600.

- A natural gas plant would have killed 4,200.

- A biomass plant would have killed 6,900.

- Hydro would have killed 1,950.

So the second-worst nuclear accident in history was safer than a natural gas power plant even if you count the worst-case metric of everyone in the area who died leaving the area they may have left anyways.

[1] https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy

[2] https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3
Somehow, I've managed to work 40/hr week or less at all of my jobs.

Recently, due to a disability, I've been limited to a max of 40 hr/wk with a restricted schedule (M-F 0800-1800). Unfortunately, I can't do on-call and no matter how severe an incident is in the middle of the night, I'm not available.

No one has an issue with this. In a funny way, it's good I'm on the team because we're always testing the "Kayodé bus factor". Thus far, it's been more than 1.
Why does it seem unreasonable when it is a known side-effect (regardless how rare)? Is it more reasonable to assume mystery of the universe? Like, there's no better candidate, but we're more comfortable with 'random thing' than 'maybe we should investigate if the vaccine could have been involved' (i.e. vaccinated recently, previous reactions, etc).

It's strange to see so many people going out of their way to justify not investigating something because, god forbid, supporting doing so might make you a perceived nutter or something.

It's probably completely unrelated, but it's not something you just don't check because culture war.
I’ll wager that today’s premiere AI engines would tell Vlad to go for it. Any way to test?

So maybe the doomsayers are right.
Not OP, and I can't answer yes to that, but they like to waive their proverbial dicks around as though they can. You used to be able to drive from Canada back into the US by showing just your US driver's license and birth certificate. About six months before that option went away, I drove across the border with exactly those documents. I hand them over, dude spends a few minutes huffing and puffing, kinda rolling his eyes. Asks me, "Is this all you have?".

Few more minutes pass and he goes, "You know, you're lucky I let you through with this stuff now. In a few months I won't be able to and your butt would be hanging out in Canada tonight. Have a nice day."
I don't think its creativity limiting the actions, its factors of capability, reliability and gullibility of those carrying out the actions.

Batman style "poisoning the water supply" isnt really a viable option due to the complexities of pulling it off successfully.
The cynical view is that this role used to be called “senior engineer”. However due to title inflation, it needed rebranding, and “staff” is the new name.
In the middle of nowhere with no car or household appliances or health care where half of your food comes out of your garden, of course you can afford that.

You could also afford to live in a fire trap tenement house with your family of 8 in two bedrooms, although said houses are now illegal so you probably can't physically do that anymore.
There's still a number of prominent examples of chemical terrorist attacks, but they're mostly arranged by larger groups rather than 2 angry 4channers. Aum Shinrikyo injured hundreds in their sarin gas attacks, and the Rajneeshee bioterror attack left hundreds sick and dozens hospitalized.

The reason we don't see more of this is pretty straightforward. Although we have active imaginations, the majority of people carrying out these attacks are not Walter White. It takes organizational power to pull off an attack like that.
> > If there is not enough of a flow of cooling water, the rods can overheat, and the entire facility is at risk for a nuclear meltdown.

> This is not true. Water is the moderator in a light-water reactor. Without water the reaction will stop. Water is both the coolant and the moderator, unlike the Chernobyl reactors, which used graphite as the moderator.

If what you're saying is true then the Fukushima reactors would not have melted down. It's important to remember that there's not just one nuclear reaction going on there's the initial fission of the uranium fuel, and then there's several following radioactive decays that generate heat as well.

Even spent fuel rods that have been removed from reactors for years still have to be kept in a chilled storage pool.
It isn't your crypto if you don't hold your own private key.
Too bad distributed DBs are very expensive atm. Their multi-region offerings are only good for companies who can spend thousands on a database each month.

I’m actually thinking that with GDPR and similar regional lock-in laws, the future might well be “distributed but independent” DBs, and then both the compliance and the performance problems are solved using more traditional architectures.
"Over-communicate. In the world of async work, it is best to over-communicate than to leave gaps - making people wonder what you really meant to say."

IMO, this is key. All of the previous async teams I've been on - the ones that worked the smoothest always over communicated.
Incels and "lone wolf" shooters had/have a significant overlap.
> by many metrics the safest forms

Safety costs money.

Traditional pressurized water reactors have their water under a pressure of 150 atm. A stovetop pressure cooker has a pressure of 2 atm. Sometimes pressure cookers explode, and it's not pretty. Now take that, multiply by 75, and make sure it's safe. There's only one way to do that: very thick steel walls. Walls that can only be made with huge forging presses, like in this eye-popping quote [1]

Westinghouse says that the minimum requirement for making the largest AP1000 components is a 15,000 tonne press taking 350 tonne ingots.

There's currently no forge of this size in the US. There's one of 15000 t, but it can only take ingots of 175 t, half of what AP1000 needs.

This is what keeps the costs sky-high.

[1] https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-c...
nm I dumb
The .zim file format is heavily optimized for compactness and ease of serving. For starters, it doesn't even store the original MediaWiki markup, but rather pre-rendered basic HTML. Images only have the thumbnail version (the one that's shown inline when reading the article), there's no full-size to zoom in. And, of course, no edit history. Multiple articles then get bundled into clusters of ~1Mb each, and each cluster compressed using ZSTD.

https://wiki.openzim.org/wiki/ZIM_file_format

This all lets you squeeze English Wikipedia into 90 Gb. But it also makes it much more difficult to edit in-place, and, of course, no MediaWiki means that it cannot possibly work like git pull requests.
yes there are shortcuts that one takes for a demo, but these were multimonth projects extending existing systems, it's not like the optimal solution was going to take much longer (if at all), we just needed an architect that understood computer science

I think my biggest failing in my career is in being able to convince people that just because they don't understand something doesn't mean it's harder to code. Many O(n^2) solutions take just as long to code as O(n), for example...
You used the argument that the Lisp reader isn't parsing Lisp because it doesn't actually know Lisp; it has no idea what the operators mean.

But, above, the message "error while parsing arguments to DEFMACRO DO" is just a destructuring error on "macro lambda list" pattern match on a piece of datum: the unevaluated macro call. That pattern matcher has no idea what DO means, in much same way that the reader doesn't know what DO means.

The reader has done so much work, that the remaining parsing is just a very easy job which enjoys easy positional access to everything in the tree, at every level, at worst having to loop over a sequence of similar items.

The syntax notation like:

do ({var | (var [init-form [step-form]])}*)
(end-test-form result-form*)
declaration*
{tag | statement}*

is relying on read syntax; it has parentheses in it! Moreover, it is a greatly condensed specification, due to its reliance on the properties of the read syntax.

The init-form can be anything: a struct literal, vector, string, character. Yet, I don't see the rules for that in this grammar; they given elsewhere, and just assumed here.

If everything were to be made explicit here, the way a handful of parentheses have been made explicit, it would be pretty large specification, of which the do-specific parts above would be small.

The do-specific material is just a handful of self-contained patterns applied to individual objects that have already been parsed out by the reader.

For instance, the pattern pattern {var | (var [init-form [step-form]])}* is understood to be applied to that part of the form which can be conveniently retrieved as (cadr form). The amount of work left is very small, of low complexity. The pattern is not a recursive language; it is a regular language (if we pretend that var, init-form and step-form are terminal symbols).

When the (var init-form step-form) is matched against the corresponding object, the step-form is easily retrieved by position, regardless of the complexity of init-form. This is not true of the unparsed expression in which scanning across an init-form to get to step-form is a complex step. The reader has done the work which allows this stage of processing to treat "init-form" as if it were a terminal symbol in a simple regular grammar that is just concerned with a positionally-determined portion of the do syntax.

It looks like Lisp has a lot of syntax beyond the read syntax if we look at all of the forms together. They all share the read syntax, but have their unique bits that drive their shape. The more of them there are, the larger is the proportion of the language syntax that is contributed by those unique bits. Each time we write a macro and document it, the read syntax doesn't grow, but the amount of deep syntax does.

From the perspective of any one S-expression, though, the bulk of the specification of its syntax is in the domain of the reader. The pattern match for a specific shape like do is a small amount of easily digestible additional information.
Easy - you rope other engineers in to work on the implementation. Then if it works out you claim the credit, if not either scrap the project due to “change of direction/reprioritization” or throw them under the bus.
Can someone explain how this can actually work for a medium sized CRUD app? I’m a dev and don’t understand. I get hosting static or cached files at the edge and serving them. And I get how you could run PHP or another server-side language on edge servers too. But you want a single source of truth and if there’s a database involved, you still need to host that somewhere and the true latency will be at this step.

Are there simple modern solutions for maintaining the same database on servers all over? (This doesn’t even sound like a good idea, or at least like it would either be impossible or would have tradeoffs, and sounds like a minor optimization anyway)

Or are Deno etc only used for database-less sites?

Or is everyone just obsessed with TTFP (screen painting) load times because users hate waiting but like pretty loading spinner gifs?
So I take it you know fully well the entirety of what people want and what the government has been willing to give? Or is this something that happens to be coincidental? The argument doesn't add up to me. Occam's Razor errs on the side of this being a political move, given the timing and the fact that a pardon isn't legalization. Did Biden ask for congress to send him a legalization bill? The federal government's reputation didn't suddenly change here. So no, this isn't really what people want.

Just like the government can give people what they want, only when it is convenient to do so, this talking point also seems to come up when convenient, but it isn't true.

What is your estimate of the number of people who are eligible for this pardon?
Twitter lawsuit halted so Elon Musk can close deal by Oct. 28
It’s like the polyseyster revolution on fabrics, or as the researcher describes it “a new silicon chip”, for nuclear reactors.

The bar of safety (or comfort) changes with the times.

Modern designs are intended to be “intrinsically” or “inherently” safe, unlike older designs.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inherent_safety
So far, I've had 1,010 video calls this year
It can be a dangerous industry, especially if you started in the early days when less was known about safety standards. My dad started in nuclear at Hanford in the mid 70s and died of some weird cancer when he turned 70.
Async is cool, but there is a certain level of magic working on things in-person, tackling problems as a group. I fail to find the words for the magic behind this, but something about being face to face that feels special in this whole "let's go remote" movement.
It's a tool with pros and cons, but its still "the future" because it's in early stages and a lot of the possibilities have not been realized yet
Sends a pretty clear message to any federal prosecutor that is deciding if they want to charge this. Obviously, the prosecutor can spend the time and effort on this if they want, but it’s time that will probably be better served doing something else if they don’t want to see their work wiped away by the stroke of a pen in the future.
> A time traveller from even 20 years ago would have a hard time making sense of the three sentences in the (75-page-long!) GPT-3 paper that describe the actual software that was built for the model

First off, the only one of those three sentences that a 2002 researcher would be stumped by is the first, and that solely due to the unfamiliar nouns. The other two sentences are perfectly classical, and the only difficulty one of the ancients would have is putting their eyes back in after they popped out on seeing the model sizes.

Second, isn't that good? It means the field has advanced, and there are new concepts being used, which I'd have thought is exactly what we want.

Third, how different is this than the past? Would a time traveller from 1982 be equally stymied by a paper from 2002? How about 1962 to 1982?