skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ya the more this is said out loud, the better we can prep for whatever this part of the workforce can do next.

It feels like we’re in a dangerous in between of applauding the technology and aggressively staying blind to the jobs it’s obviously coming for.

End result is a lot of pissed off truckers and warehouse workers who were sold for years on robotics improving productivity (or robot dogs not showing up patrolling neighborhoods without a real cop), and were stupid enough to trust tech product leads about it.

The tech improves productivity and might be intended as a ride-along in some cases, but the MBA at the user company will see it differently via labor costs.
First amendment has limitations. Saying fire in a movie theater, for example. Multiple courts in a number of separate jurisdictions have ruled that the first amendment does not protect Jones in these cases
Math follows a completely different approach with respect to how machine-learning AIs do their thing.

Reason derives its strength in having a few primitives and creating new assertions through the transformation of symbols by following precise rules (which is how algorithms work).

In ML-based AIs, everything is imprecise and probabilistic, and this kind of generation gets its strength from building recognizable from utterly imprecise inputs and training - quite the opposite of how logic and reason evolve. Now, "classic" AI was a powerful way to derive new knowledge, and automatic theorem proving is a strong discipline; but the recent breakthroughs in AI are not directly applicable to classic techniques.

Do you know what machine-learning AIs could be good for? Generating "insight" in problem solvers for guiding the theorem demonstrations through the proof search space, trying to find the best sub-spaces to explore. If there's a way to create human-like general AI, it will likely combine both kinds of generation - the rational methods of symbolic logic and the "irrational" statistical methods of ML.
> started sending his content to the PR team for approval:

are you reading something I'm not?

It says other companies were asking HIM how his company used socials for PR.

> I sent these inquiries over to our PR department

He directed these companies over to their PR department for an actual answer, he didn't send his posts over to the PR department.

> After fielding several of my PR referrals, I eventually got the attention of a senior vice president (...) He then asked me if I could teach him how to use Twitter.

This SVP noticed he was basically sending them free marketing and decided it would be great to learn how to use it himself.

Nothing in your quote says he was sending his posts over to PR for approval at all.
Their reputation, their safety, and the emotional damage of attacking their loss. There is more to it, but that should be enough to reach 1B.
See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_Equity_Fund

"The Wikimedia Foundation Knowledge Equity Fund is a new US$4.5 million fund created by the Wikimedia Foundation in 2020, to provide grants to external organizations that support knowledge equity by addressing the racial inequities preventing access and participation in free knowledge."
If this is true that would give a big opportunity for your company to release studies directly countering studies like the one you’re responding to. Is your company planning on doing so?
I wonder if they are allowed to put a fan in to suck it down to the road surface, offering better static friction to the tires. You would of course start the fan before the wheels.

That would mean you could get by with lighter-weight tires, an important concern.
The $965m is entirely economic damages. Punitive damages will be added later
The first amendment is not a free pass to say statements that are dangerous or harmful to others.
Why does making money change the legality of what he was saying?
I'm sorry to hear about your situation. It's a hard time for everyone, and there are many factors contributing to mental health decline in our society. However, I don't think your view on using phones as an escape is a correct one. Using social media, porn, or games as an escape are not a healthy response to difficult times in one's life. Getting in touch with reality, being in nature, and spending time with quality people are better ways to live a healthy life outside of work. Everything in moderation.
How Managed WordPress Startup Rocket.net Bootstrapped to $1M ARR
Collatz Conjecture possible solution using statistical coverage
Carmack: Quest2 Price Raised B/C VRChat/RecRoom More Popular Than Quest's Games
Gamers prefer anything that has better performance for cheaper price.

Tho overall having a more stable PC that consumes less electricity is better in long term and ppl really see that.

It shows in sale numbers.
It wasn't an off hand claim, it was something he extensively talked about for years.
shouldn’t the harassers be tried ?
I think what made the parent comment "shallow" was because you didn't justify your claim with any supporting context. For example, claiming the APA has a track record of misleading claims (ideally with supporting evidence) would have added some depth to your comment. Or perhaps you feel that all academic communication is biased by misaligned incentives, who knows? The reader can't extrapolate any further discussion topics from the initial comment, and as such it does not effectively promote discussion.
That’s not the privilege but the consequence of unfortunate experience with shoplifting and groups more likely to perpetrate it. Crime statistics is hateful and racist, no doubt. But it drives bias which serves as first order simplified decision making
thats hilariously good, well done sir
PHX is in better shape then a lot of places for water. The work SRP puts in to ensure that is really interesting (1, 2, 3) PHX actually gets water from 3 rivers (colorado, salt, and verde) as well as huge groundwater 'banks' (holding a multi year supply). We're also using less water per year due to conservation, etc. However, outside of PHX its a different story. Agriculture and 'urban sprawl' are rapidly depleting ground water.

In summary, I guess I'm saying I have no qualms about water living in PHX...but I'd be really worried if I lived outside of PHX. Also, it really is fascinating how SRP manages it all...

1 https://www.srpnet.com/grid-water-management/water-managemen...

2 https://www.srpnet.com/grid-water-management/water-managemen...

3 https://media.srpnet.com/srps-granite-reef-underground-stora...

edit: fix link formating
Fruits of evolution. Blocking information is a battlefield where the overseer can either win very easily or cannot be able to win---the only fundamental way to block anything is to block everything.

Imagine if your ISP blocks the front page of The Post yet you are still allowed to talk to me. Well, I can simply read the information to you over the phone under a plausibly deniable "eg even number of words in a sentence =1" algorithm.
Pretty sure the first continuation is a famous piece with a few notes messed up. Can't remember the name. Honestly it only sounds marginally better than the old markov chain continuations.
This was standard on the PC-Engine, and I think the majority of VDC type display controllers of the time.. Personally, I’d take a bank switching scheme whereby CPU reads come from RAM as standard and CPU writes go to graphics memory.. Even as simple as 1 bit mapping of writes to either CPU RAM or VDC RAM would suffice well.. Though more complex is possible..
The fact that you defend this type of measurably harmful rhetoric as "free speech" is beyond fucking disgusting.
> You can't call all criticism as small-mindedness.

You appear to be hallucinating. Where did I do that?

> to some this is just not that impressive

Of course I agree with that point because, you know... opinions
I'm happy to share the best information I have with others and most of them are glad that I do.

I had recommended signal to others, but thankfully I've already warned those same people against continuing to use Signal years ago. Nobody was mad at me for Signal's actions and changing your default SMS app isn't hard anyway.

I don't think you have to stop recommending things to people just because situations change. Hasn't everybody had some service or software they depended on go from great to shitty? It's just the nature of using someone else's stuff. At some point they get greedy or busy or decide to pivot into something different from what you want and you have to find something new. Isn't everyone used to that? Why would they blame you?
The full title is "Carmack: Quest 2 Price Was Raised Because Free Metaverse Platforms VRChat & Rec Room Are More Popular Than Quest's Premium Games" but that wouldn't fit so I tried to trim it down to meet the character limit without editorializing.
Key moments from Alex Jones defamation trial (5m 17s)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JepMo2y7Zek
Cracking the coding interview is really good, especially for non-seniors, you'll learn so much if you've patience (700 pages).
You couldn't lie in the 1970s or 1980s. If you did, you would be sued for libel or slander (depending on how exactly you lied).

In the 90s, 00s, and 10s, we somehow forgot about libel / slander laws. I'm happy to see that something as egregious as Alex's Jones's lies here are finally getting punished, but I'd like to see more protection from libel/slander in modern 2020s era America.

------

Lies, traditionally speaking, have NEVER been covered by the 1st Amendment. I dunno why we stopped punishing them as a society. But its a good thing that we're remembering about them today.
> Making an x86 instruction set processor that did on the fly analysis and conversion to a superscalar computation core sounded really hard, so VLIW was the safe "we'll do the superscalar decomposition at compilation time and run that".

The first superscalar x86 processor was the Pentium, which came out in checks notes 1993 (Wikipedia claims design work started in 1989, hit working simulation in 1990 and taped out in 1992). Intel didn't start work on Itanium until 1994, after Pentiums were already shipping to customers, and Itanium itself wouldn't ship until 2001.
Kind of an aside, but this theatric style of writing is irritating to read on HN. It also confuses the point here: Jones's payment isn't about what "should" be done based on personal morals, but what is dictated by law, and that is what GP is asking and the question you are ignoring.
>Calling someone a "crisis actor" is like saying they are from Mars and have 3 arms. No reasonable person is going to believe it.

I've had to counter that argument from many of my high school classmates on facebook. They repeat these statements like sheep from Animal Farm.
are we holding all news to the same account regarding deliberate lying for profit?

i hate double standards
There's a difficulty with research like this (in the US at least, although the US also offers us interesting contrasts) in a) that something like 6.5% of workers are in unions, so they constitute an extreme minority, and b) that the unions that lasted the longest were probably the strongest, so the longer your union career was, the better your union probably was.

There's also a problem with applying it to the future, because union jobs are largely in manufacturing (and government), and manufacturing once paid a premium that it doesn't anymore. Since 2006, the average non-management manufacturing job pays less than the average non-management job.

https://www.turboimagehost.com/p/80306414/fredgraph.png.html

All that being said, I am downloading and having a look.
These comments are extremely unconvincing. If the best sales pitch for VR is that you need to invest a bunch of time and money in order to see why it's worth investing a bunch of time and money into, that makes me even more skeptical about it's future. VR will never grow beyond a niche of technical fans until less interested users can see the value.
I normally would agree with you - I'm very pro free speech - but what Alex Jones did was not just "the wrong words", it was blatant slander that permanently ruined the lives of these people. I understand why you're concerned, but we've had slander laws forever, and this is exactly what it's used for.
Show HN: How I debugged and fixed Git-grep macOS UTF-8 support
HN isn't one guy with coherent views...

But anyway, it's not a very good question because it isn't plausibly serious nor logically related to the previous post.
His lies encouraged harassment and death threats.

Did they ever fine / jail those doing the harassment and death threats?
So the extraordinary amount of harassment the families received as a result of the crap he was spewing is completely meaningless? Sure no reasonable person is going to believe it but there are a lot of gullible idiots that eat up everything he says.
Really easy to say you could shrug it off when your family wasn't just murdered.
Just hear me out: flexible, relaxed office standards but also no mandatory fun.

(But I guess there's literally only two cities in the world.)
Alex Jones did a lot more than that. His defaming the families of dead kids resulted in his followers and supporters harassing those people. The harassers need to be held civilly and criminally liable, too. But Jones persisted over years in encouraging this harassment.
People keep saying "it couldn't happen to a nicer person" when it literally wouldn't happen to a nicer person
I don't know what you mean by "obligation," but I assure you employers have a legal duty to negotiate in good faith with their employees' representative. See 29 U.S. Code § 158 (a)(5) - It shall be an unfair labor practice for an employer...to refuse to bargain collectively with the representatives of his employees, subject to the provisions of section 159(a) of this title.
At first, I thought it was surprising that a language model with a restricted vocabulary (e.g. banning the letter "E") acts significantly more "mentally ill", and then I thought about how I would come across if forced to use that constraint all the time, and I realized that maybe I'd appear mentally ill too!

You can play with LMs with constrained vocabularies here: https://huggingface.co/spaces/Hellisotherpeople/Gadsby
Jones has a rabid following who engaged in a campaign of stalking and harassment - including death threats and harassment by mail to their homes - against the plaintiffs. It went quite a bit beyond one guy saying some mean things.

I think you’d probably find that harder to shrug off.
Weed-killing plant-based foam shown to be as effective as herbicides
Wow, this is really important. I'm certainly prone to extrapolating a little too much; but, this gives me real pause for the next 18-30 months of AI.

God help us once Quantum AI starts solving it's own problems.
In this experiment, they created identical dating profiles, with the only difference being the brand of phone displayed in photographs. The control was no phone shown in the image.

Featuring an iPhone increased the number of likes received by 82%. Featuring a Samsung increased the number of likes by 20%. That means if you display a Samsung instead of an iPhone in your profile, you will get 34% less likes

Other phone brands did even worse. If your dating profile displays a Oneplus phone, you will get 55% less likes than an identical profile featuring an iPhone

https://www.moneysupermarket.com/mobile-phones/features/mobi...
They have been repeatedly and viciously harassed by those who believed Jones' lies. So, yeah, besmirching their reputation is worth a billion.
Yes, in a world of hyperbole you may be correct. In this case, you're taking a very nuanced situation to an extreme and throwing out ALL of the important details in the process. I trust you are an intelligent person and you're able to see this case for what it is, not for what potential "GOTCHA" counter arguments you can filter through it.
I think you should look at the theatrics Alex engaged in during the trial as well as his repeated failure to provide documents during discovery. He was arguably incompetently represented[1] (Infowars is probably going to sue their lawyer[2]) while treating the trial(s) as both a joke or a conspiracy against him. With that kind of behaviour, I'm not sure what kind of outcome he expected - him and his legal team failed to mount a serious defence of his actions.

[1] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/alex-jones-lawyers-acci...

[2] https://ca.movies.yahoo.com/alex-jones-turning-own-lawyers-0...
What society has ever had unfettered right to free speech without any consequences for what you say?
> For this reason, formal proofs of correctness are valuable for distributed algorithms.

I have a massive amount of respect for Martin and his work, but I think that this emphasis is the wrong one (if our goal is to increase the correctness of deployed distributed algorithms).

Instead, I like to think (building off work of folks like Ankush Desai, an AWS colleague and creator of P) that the process of specification, and it's products, are more valuable than the creation of a proof. Model checking - either exhaustive or stochastic - is valuable for checking the properties of specifications, but pushing the last step into full proof is often not worth the additional effort. Instead, I think making proof the focus and goal tends to turn most programmers off the whole topic.

I think we should be saying to folks "If you pick up these tools you'll end up with a crisp specification that'll help you move faster at development time, extremely clear documentation of your protocol, and a deeper understanding of what your protocol does" instead of "if you pick up these tools you'll end up with the mathematical artifact of a proof". This has been a big shift in my own thinking. When I first picked up Promela, Alloy, and TLA+/TLC/TLAPS, my own focus was on proof (and remained so until 2014 ish, when I spent a lot of time talking to Chris Newcombe and Leslie Lamport as we were writing the "Formal Methods at AWS" CACM paper). Over time I've found the journey much more valuable than the artifact, and tools like PlusCal and P which make specification more approachable more valuable than tools with less familiar syntax and semantics.

We shouldn't be surprised that few people can make progress when we ask them to understand both Paxos and Isabelle at the same time! Maybe if that's your focus as a PhD student, then it's OK.

> The real challenge in verifying distributed algorithms is to come up with the right invariant that is both true and also implies the properties you want your algorithm to have. Unfortunately, designing this invariant has to be done manually.

This is true. Invariants are hard. But maybe I'm more optimistic: I think that there are a lot of very real systems with straightforward invariants. Lamport's three invariants for consensus (section 2.1 of Paxos Made Simple), for example: https://lamport.azurewebsites.net/pubs/paxos-simple.pdf Similarly, invariants like Linearizability, and even formal definitions of isolation.

The research I would love to see is work to synthesize invariants from formalisms like Adya's or Crooks' work on database isolation levels. I think that's a very tractable project, and would be super useful to practitioners.
In this case there is demonstrable harm here. The Sandyhook parents have had their lives threatened and confronted by strangers both on the street and in their home due to Jone's words - the problem is there were a lot of unreasonable people who very much believed Jones and while you claim you would, you wouldn't just shrug this off. His accusations made their lives unsafe by sullying their reputation with irrational people.
I should have specified, Tesla Plaid. Of course a Model X isn't as quick as a fully built 1000hp AWD DCT GTR. Apples to oranges.
It's hard to fathom how much damage he did. What he said is the absolute pit of human depravity. I know a jury isn't really empowered to "send a message" but I hope they did it. Alex Jones is absolute stain on humanity and should be destroyed (financially and reputationally, not physically). I think paying back the families who lost children is the most important step, but the entire country deserves punitive damages for what he did. I wouldn't want them to get paid directly, I'd think they should spend something to deprogram all the people who believed his lies.
Besides from the reduction from 96 to 95 multiplications it would be interesting to know how have they derived these results.

I think it's more interesting and has more impact to know the methodology they followed than just to know the algorithm.
Thanks a lot for the detailed reply. Old radiators operate in high temperature but from what I understand, the fan coil heaters operate in lower temperature more equivalent to radiant floor heating.

For cost reasons, installing undefloor heating is not an option, that's why I opted for low temp radiators on top of floor. However, it sounds like the heat pump system will not be cheap either. According to BTU calculator I found online, seems like I need 28K BTUs to heat the home. I thought about pellet burners as well, but here in Europe, the cost of pellets has sky rocketed this year. I don't want to be dependent on gas either, also electricity is not cheap... So I am not sure exactly what i'll go with. I'll do the calculation, but your input on the effectiveness of the theromosiphon system is valuable, thank you.
When group censorship creates a lack of diversity that's exactly what it becomes.
No. But it would be less bad.
That's actually a kind of poor example. The tort of defamation is much more clearly outside of constitutional protection.
This is great stuff. I did something similar in a 2020 paper[1] using Coq. I did not find Coq particularly suited for this type of work. Isabelle/HOL looks promising.

One thing to note is that these types of verifications can become difficult when the systems are layered. Even the simplest real world systems are layered, when you factor in the underlying transport for the messages. The TLC paper provided a way for distributed systems to be composed in a way that reduces the complexity of the proofs for each distributed component.

[1] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3409005
No, and thank you for asking. No one addressed what to me is the main point, which is that Signal is handling complaints from people who were being charged for SMS and didn't know that would happen. People these days are often not at all civil when dealing with support issues like this, and for that reason alone I could imagine I'd drop SMS.
The result is not interesting for ordinary numbers, where the classical ("slower") method is faster. When each element of the 5x5 matrix is itself a matrix, it could be important.

So AVX ops for the method are not interesting.
I've seen some videos where Brian Eno is tweaking JavaScript code in Apple Logic DAW's scripting tool. But elsewhere I've seen Eno say, "With friends like Danny Hillis, there may not be much point in my learning to code in this lifetime."
> If someone said something about me that was patently laughably untrue, something that no sane person would believe, I'd just shrug it off.

If it were one ordinary person making those accusations to a small group of their friends and acquaintances who also knew you and could see for themselves that those accusations were false, that'd be one thing.

When the person making those accusations is a celebrity, broadcasting those accusations to an audience of millions who know nothing else about you, that's quite another matter.
It's not stigma against you, personally. It's stigma against ADHD-havers in general that encourages policy-makers to keep the system this broken.

> Also why would they want to withhold drugs from you?

Stimulants are bad drugs!!

Though the pharmacy itself is more worried about getting in trouble for making things too easy, because the laws are that awful.

> Conversely, can you imagine the blowback if this were discovered to be the case?

I imagine it to be quite negligible.
While profiting from it and knowing he was lying.