skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Its relative velocity with respect to a Cartesian frame of reference fixed on the surface of the Earth may be dropping, but that's not particularly meaningful.

Think of the moon being in free fall, without any external forces acting on it. It would be moving at a constant velocity in a straight line, except the space and time it is in is curved due to gravity. Because of that curved spacetime, the moon appears to accelerate relative to the Earth. It's not actually accelerating, though; it is moving in a straight line at a constant velocity, the straight line just happens to be curved completely around the Earth.

The tidal forces are literal forces, and forces cause acceleration. So, the moon isn't quite moving at constant velocity. The change in velocity means the moon isn't quite travelling in a straight line through spacetime. The orbit changes, and in this case gets higher and slower relative to the Earth.

Another way to think about it. If you're in a space ship at a point X1 in an orbit, you can steer the nose of the ship in the direction you're moving relative to the Earth, and fire your rocket engine. You're now going faster. The opposite end of your orbit, point Y1, will now be higher in altitude than it would have otherwise been. Your relative speed at Y1 will indeed be slower than where you would have been had you not fired your engine, but when you circle back to X1 again your speed will still be higher. When you get to Y1 again, you could fire your engine a second time and increase your speed even more. You'll no longer end up back at X1, but a new point X2 at a higher altitude than X1 was. Your relative velocity at X2 will be lower than it was at X1.

In space, "speed" isn't really velocity, but acceleration. Big rocket engines make you go fast! In The Martian, the main character makes a comment to that effect when he talks about NASA convincing him to strap himself into a hodge podge death rocket, by claiming he'll be the "fastest" astronaut in history.

In a future where humans practically travel to a distant star, a "fast enough" space ship would be one that can maintain constant non-trivial acceleration for many decades. You would accelerate to the halfway point, then turn around and decelerate the rest of the way. Assuming you got fast enough relative to the destination, weird relativistic effects would become obviously apparent and the travellers would perceive space and time compressing.
I really like Azure Container Apps for this. It's a great way to dip into the world of containers.
You did suggest that, even concluding with “That's the world of cryptocurrency” to re-affirm the equivalency of the comparison.

This framing is disingenuous. Crypto proponents do not suggest holding all assets in a single key and leaving it in a vulnerable location. It would be like suggesting that investing in fine art is futile because investors might accidentally drop their Picasso painting on the way to the restaurant.

Many outspoken proponents advise against “CeFi” including centralized lending services like Celsius. Meanwhile with Aave, which is analogous to Celsius and is actually DeFi, the protocol is still doing fine and the users still have access to their funds. This goes against the general tone of your statements, and is an example of Web3 product that is actually continuing to demonstrate its effectiveness.
While I agree with your points regarding the security of TOTP / SMS, and I do push for hardware keys at work, I think a case could be made for a mixed use for "regular people".

Maintaining two hardware keys is an absolute PITA, especially if you go down the route of storing one off-site, hence not having it with you to enroll when you get a new account.

What I do, is use the hardware token as the "main" factor and use the TOTP if for some reason I don't have the token (I may sometimes forget it at home when I'm at my parents' house).

The point is that, since I usually have my key, if I'm presented with a Google or whatever prompt for a TOTP, I know something's fishy. I don't normally use that, so I'll investigate why that happens and won't just go ahead and type my code in there.
Indeed. I think they are trying to imitate VSCode UI... which in my opinion sucks big time.
I haven’t used Copilot but do its samples give links on where it was from? If so, that seems to be a sufficient funnel back to the OSS repo itself without the community harming aspects mentioned in the article.
> Next you're going to tell me...

Nope, I won't. Because anything except aneutronic fusion will be much dirtier than the 'nukes' we have now. Which is hypothetical right now, and maybe stays so forever.

Which can't be said about 'nukes', neither the ones we have, nor the ones we could have with a little bit of more investment into materials science. (Liquid salt, etc.)

We and our children won't make it with 'renewables' alone, because they emit at least as much greenhouse gasses, or more when you consider all the externalities going into their production. They are not the solution.

Edit: /me mumbling something like 'Look into fucking GESAMTSTOFFMENGENKREISLAUF'

Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sankey_diagram
I do not know if this particular 51-day limitation was intentional or no

I highly doubt it was intentional. Boeing's already had to issue an AD for similar behavior on the 787:

https://www.engadget.com/2015-05-01-boeing-787-dreamliner-so...

If they knew about it there'd be no need for an AD. Boeing tried to become the aviation equivalent of a fabless chip designer with the 787 and it didn't go well at all. Turns out they had little-to-no experience managing external development and manufacturing teams. I don't know anything about the 51-day bug, but the 248-day bug caused critical failures that you really wouldn't want happening in flight.
> I think OP explains clearly, in many paragraphs, why it's fair use. That's literally what their whole post is about.

Actually, what the OP said is, "is typically or commonly a fair use under existing law, because the AIs can and commonly do learn non-copyrightable elements and aspects of those works". The rest of the eight paragraphs had nothing to do with fair use.

It's honestly a ridiculous argument to say that learning one non-copyrighted thing means that the regurgitation of another copyrighted thing, after stripping the license, will magically be fair use.
I didn’t know this until I read it. Whenever I listened to Ghosts, I’ve hit a few tracks and thought “I’m sure this was on The Social Network”. And then some time later, I’ve done the same thing listening to TSN OST. Never clicked!
On a different website I argued with a microsoft employee who said that copilot is great and so on and would not discuss unless I tried it.

I tried telling that it requires a credit card number to try it but he didn't believe me… I guess the thought that non-microsoft employees have to pay for microsoft stuff didn't occur.
Phishing doesn't require stealing the watch. It just requires me to type in a TOTP token on a phishing website. Very different threat model than physical access.
Ask HN: Is there any Open Source alternative for BannerBear?
I love bannerbear, a tool for creating dynamic images via API. But I wish it was open source.

Is there any open source alternative for that?
That makes sense. Companies want a "maximalist", i.e. someone who's addicted to consumption. Such person has no other option but to continue working - their addiction demands it. Whereas a minimalist has a large degree of freedom and can often just ditch the job if it becomes too shitty.
'Every needle needs a haystack' ... (when playing Hide and Seek) a.k.a... 'Anonymity loves Company'
Just because you don't care does not mean others should not care, even if they are less valuable coders than you.

I mostly contribute by finding issues and reporting them, does that make me less of a OSS contributor than you?

And yet I do care if my private project is used by behemoth like Microsoft without my consent, even if it's only poorly written fizzbuzz. Why? because if I wanted to share it I would publish.
Frankly I think this is a non issue for any serious professional.

A proficient user will have learned the keyboard commands for actions and navigation and rarely if ever use the visual elements. This holds for any tool.

Those who have yet to take this step, but are unhappy that the UI update is coming, should take this opportunity to step up their professionalism and master the tools of their trade. It will be well worth the investment.

Negative space is perhaps the one thing I might worry about, since not all devices come with giant or high resolution screens.

Otherwise I welcome the update, and understand that Jetbrains need to continue attracting new users, who are used to different UI then those of us who are older.
Not them but I have stopped backing projects on Kickstarter, because I have been burned to the tune of $2,000+ (2016-17-ish currency conversion).
I've yet to see anyone come up with a harm current CoPilot could do that is within an order of magnitude of the good it does. Why on earth should we care that it resulted in 20 lines of code being copied in some rare circumstances? The transaction costs alone make that code worthless as a saleable thing.
when I was looking for a job last, my limit was "accept until scheduling conflicts are likely". It doesn't do anyone any good to play the calendar-shell-game on the regular, but until that point keep saying yes. More leads/channels are better.
Personally, all my code open source is in public domain (CC0). SO it's a free game. However taking any other code without any regard to license,or author's permissions, is unethical and undesirable.

At the very least add a comment in the generated snipped where the code originates from. That won't suffice in all cases but it's disingenuous to profit from others' work without any credit/permission.
Is detection of EM radiation really that easy? Broad parts of the EM spectrum are heavily attenuated by water - this is what makes underwater comms difficult.
Probably not great, but still by necessity better than the odds of the UI improving while not changing at all.
I use Duo Mobile [1] with my Apple Watch.

Authy gets recommended often here but got turned off of them because they require a phone number to set up the app on iOS. There's no phone number requirement for TOTP implementations so I eventually found Duo Mobile. This was before they got bought by Cisco.

1: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/duo-mobile/id422663827
>code is not worth that much if splitted into functions

Some algorithms in scientific computing require lots of effort to implement as nice, reusable, performant function. Those functions often more important than whatever the whole is doing because it's what most other people will be interested in using.
Getting used to a new look is possible, but that does not mandate disrupting - no, that is not a good thing! - changes. Just for the sake of it along questionable long explained philosophy. This is actual work not beauty contest.

Especially in cases when much more important tasks are at hand, as you rightfully note.
The confidence of it not going to court is wrong. It will go to court, but the people saying it's obviously infringing are wrong. And even if it is Microsoft can just change their terms to make copilot compliant.

> Even if copyright holders are constantly playing the game of reporting public repos to GitHub to remove it's not going to be enough

There is no copyright police outside of criminal infringement.

The DMCA gives you the tools to protect your copyright, if 1000 people infringe on your copyright you need to be ready to sue 1000 people OR attack the platform under safe harbor.

If someone uploads your code to github, you need to find it and ask them to remove it.

If someone uses your code via copilot, infringingly, you need to find it and ask them to remove it.

This is the law as it currently stands.
I choose MIT because it’s a widely used permissive license most people are confident about using, not because I will personally pursue every clause in it. I will not take action against anyone using my MIT-licensed code without attribution.

Having been a member of a very high profile permissively licensed project and having started a few relatively popular ones of my own, I’d say I don’t need to take licensing advice or be called “does not know how to use OSS licenses” from someone who laughably advises using Creative Commons, when Creative Commons itself advises against using CC licenses for source code, except CC0, which is entirely different from CC.
I really like the new UI (and all the other similar modern UIs) and I just can't pretend like I dont.

I'm a very visual and a design oriented person and I want my tools to look good. If I'm going to spend countless hours using a product/tool I want to enjoy it's looks as well. Too many tools in my opinion are designed by people who want to maximize productivity with very utilitarian and practical user interfaces (which is great!) but don't seem to have enough care for making something that looks beautiful at the same time.
So many comments like this, but none list a tangible harm that's anywhere near the millions of man hours systems like this will save. Heck, basically none (including this one!) list a harm at all!
Why not link the original this links to? https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/17/23410148/microsoft-lays-...
I think the big diffrent here is human have paid for the copyrighted work they learned from, and the AI not.
I think we don't really need a metaVERSE but extensive non-mandatory (so attendants would always be given an alternative) meaningful use of VR in education and art still is a thing I feel enthusiastic about.
>It might be possible to build this app in a way that none of the information ever leaves the device. I would be very surprised if that was the case here.

I'm doing some similar stuff to automate an app for personal use, I might at some point turn it into a paid for app, when I do so I would actually have to redesign the application to send personal information off the device. Which I suppose I would not do.
All nations of the world must band together to build a harpoon, of immensity and grandness the likes of which has never seen before. The moon cannot be allowed to escape.
We've also steadily lowered tax rates over the last 50 years. Many countries are at historically low tax burdens despite rising inequality and no evidence of this improving economic growth.
This is quite stunning. OpenAI valuations are quoted as $3B. Stability AI just popped up6 months ago and is able to raise rounds in very tough economy at $1B valuation. The real differentiator between two is that Stability AI has took upon itself to o democratize AI ignoring all social wokness and thereby multiplying their efforts many manifold through community labor. OpenAI meanwhile is still deeply caught up in all kind of social/ethical/philosophical delima as well as Apple-isc secrecy as devotional offerings to Steve Jobs.

With this level of funding and community following, Stability AI is en route to dethrone OpenAI in almost no time.
If Copilot is deemed a derivative work of its inputs, it would resolve the issue that it does not comply with the AGPL because it currently does not provide source code to its users under an AGPL-compliant license.
- Fair point, guess we will see in the next 60m miles, which by the sounds of it will be in the next few months.

- Tesla's FSD in particular (being an entirely vision-based system) likely operates in less-than-ideal conditions much more often than competitors.

- Where are you finding the "15 FSD-induced fatalities" stat?
No, its mostly isn't. It's mostly done to cheat on academic contests (and thus getting a less skilled student/researcher for positions). Copying entire works of fiction doesn't really add anything to the world.

Copying a passage here and there when making a new work? I don't think the courts have ever ruled that plagiarism.
Hi I just saw that you created https://cubetrek.com/, have you tried fatmap.com? I tried to answer on your topic but it was already locked. So I thought about dropping a message here, if you want to create another thread we can also talk about maps there.
if you don't understand EVERYTHING about this, don't touch it, on risk of life and limb

This is actually pretty good advice for smartphones, too.

Okay, it won't hack off your leg, but it may affect your life profoundly and adversely in ways that are not obvious at first.
This article consists of a few highly selective observations, glued together by make-believe.

Open source was the industry default? On what planet?

"Team, make everything open source by default, unless I tell you otherwise" --- said no CEO or other boss, ever.

We have a lot of open source; a lot of it is very advanced, and forms critical infrastructure, sure. But proprietary software has not gone away even slightly.

> Open source licenses, after all, offer the same equitable terms to all players, and limit neither competition nor usage.

Really? The sole proprietor of some GPLed program is on the same level as any other player?

And how can you write a lengthy article on these topics without even mentioning what is probably the biggest issue to free software: it is not some "bait and switch" where open source projects get relicensed. It's that much software people use is now a service. The user has no control whatsoever; they are not even getting to install a binary executable on their own machine. The licensing is irrelevant to the end user.

This entire article is about the bickering among developers: who gets what kinds of rights to which infrastructural pieces, with it being understood that everyone's shared goal is cobbing something together with those pieces in order to hold hostage the hapless users of some god forsaken SaaS application.

OK, so sure; if we put developer blinders on, open source is the default. My compiler is open source; my editor is open source; the OS is open source; the browser is open source; the database is open source. Hey open source is the default!

Meanwhile, Average Joe: social network isn't open source; webmail isn't open source; crap running in Joe's automobile isn't open source; Joe's phone isn't open source; Joe's TV streaming box isn't open source. Neither are the half dozen apps Joe relies on for this and that, or services like online banking. Almost not a single everyday use case or solution for the average user is open source. How can you talk about a default with a straight face. And this is just the consumer-facing stuff I'm talking about. For instance, let's switch to business. What enterprise runs their finances, operations and logistics on open source?
In Denmark something similar happened a few years back. Sundhedsplatformen is also an implementation of Epic. But I don't think there was a big demonstration like this. There was a lot of bad press when this happened, but today we don't hear a lot about it, probably because the system in the end proved to be better than what it replaced. Also, a lot of bugs was closed.
Training AI on copyrighted works is literally what Google always did.

Look how Google News enraged news orgs.

Now they come for the programmers. So now it’s a problem.
Anyone can say that, but that doesn’t make it real, especially with regards to European consumer protection.
I’ll add one thing missing so far: nurture your professional network of old colleagues, clients, classmates, and friends. This should be SOP, whenever he or she crosses your mind, and especially not only when you need help.

Remember it’s a two-way street: someone who gives you a referral today could be employee n at your startup tomorrow.

Stick around an industry long enough and most, if not all, your jobs and clients will come pre-filtered from your professional contacts. Make the investments in them now.
The first company that came to mind was Wipro, which led me to this:

W- Wipro I- Infosys T- TCS C- Cognizant H- HCL A- Accenture India.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27571707
Source for hydrogen conversion cost
> If you found this vulnerability, odds are someone else will run into it too sooner or later.

worse is someone is already extracting data from it, continuously scraping day after day, week after week. it happens.
IIRC they discontinued them in favor of the sentero, which just straps onto your arm with velcro (but it looks like they also aren't selling that at the moment).
> Nobody is being forced to participate.

The $52/year tax is forcing people to participate.
Instant GraphQL backend with Hasura and Neon in under 100 seconds
It's easy when you have chunks.

But really all large worlds need chunking.

The real reason AAA never got into user generated content, is they have staff to create linear worlds.

After this economic crisis, linear content will more or less disappear.

Why listen to a hardcoded story when you can make your own just like in real life?

Scarcity is the key, one UGC networked world will make time valuable.
Spending 30+ minutes not including added drive time to go to a supercharger everytime I want to go to the city or on a hike is not even close to a "very, very minor inconvenience." Speak for yourself, as I would bet money that the majority of EV owners find significant value and benefit from at-home L2 charging.
You can run headphones without any battery what-so-ever when wired to an external amp via an audio jack, and the amount of power sent over that is small. Also it's deceptive to include the amp and speaker drivers as separate items in your list because it is the amp that powers the speakers. Maybe you mean DAC? But DACs are really cheap to power these days so I'm really not concerned about their power draw.

There's no mention in the article of automatic noise cancelling. "noise suppression" is an acoustic design rather than electronic one. Eg the way the hardware cups your ears to dampen external sounds. So noise suppression costs nothing in terms of power draw. Whereas "noise cancelling" is what requires a mic and some onboard computation to inverse the sound wave, which will obviously have a power draw. But noise cancelling isn't an "always on" piece of technology, it's something the wearer can enable or disable. So it might be that when running low battery power and thus more dependent on solar, noise cancelling needs to be disabled (assuming this device even ships with it, not all headphones do) and as a wearer you're more dependent on the acoustic properties of the headphones to reduce external noises.

So we just have bluetooth and an amp left to power. It may well be that to run the device "fully solar" (ie with zero reserve in the battery) the device has to be wired to the music player via a traditional TRS audio jack. This is already a pretty common thing for bluetooth headphones to support when low on power. Thus the solar cells would be designed to charge the battery when the headphones are off and supplement the battery while in heavy usage.

That still seems like a massive win to me because if you use your headphones sporadically or even just have a few hours in the day when you're not using them, you still end up not having to think about recharging your headphones every time you want to use it. And that's exactly how this device is reported by the BBC: not as something that never needs to be charged or is "fully solar" but instead as something that uses solar energy to reduce the need to charge.

(I've built speakers and other audio hardware. So while I'm far from an electrical engineer, I'm also not a total noob in this field)
Moreover, Grimms' copyright has been expired while Disney's copyright is set to never expire.
> These radiation turned out to have almost no health consequences in the population.

Thousands died of thyroid cancer but for the population that is easily described as "almost no consequences" due to scale.

https://unis.unvienna.org/unis/en/pressrels/2018/unisous395....

The death of a man is a catastrophe. A thousand deaths is a statistic!