skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The truths of mathematics would be the same, because they're true by definition. Ditto for the truths of physics

These are pretty strong statements for which there’s no arguments provided for but serve as assumptions for the rest of the article. I don’t think there’s consensus among mathematicians, philosophers, cognitive scientist, or biologists on this.

Mathematics is most definitely a human endeavor, and so we can’t really make claims about its existence in the universe independent of humans. I think alien analogs to mathematics are unlikely to match ours. If we are lucky, I think it could be the case that the various structures could be similar, but the likelihood the implementations resemble each other are slim. It’s even a stretch to assume the structures would relate. Even humans do not fully agree on mathematics. There is no “one” mathematics because mathematics is the human exploration of idealized objects using a variety of human logical systems.

And then there’s the possibility that our mathematics and overall perception of reality is shaped by our biology in far deeper ways than we imagine and currently understand.
Meta will be forced to sell GIF platform Giphy after a ruling by UK regulators
National energy consumption figures should really include the embodied energy of imports, minus that of exports. Consumption is not the same as production. Consumption of goods (not just storage and passing-through) should also count.
You can also store them on YubiKeys, accessible on the command line with ykman.
It's funny that digital billboard space is the main reason they cite.

To me the much bigger threat was that Giphy had integrations into many other chat and messaging apps which Facebook also competes with. Buying Giphy gave them new insight into competitor usage. Facebook could see which chat apps you were using and who you were talking to on them. All they had to do was fingerprint the gifs you sent to your friends
Yes? I never said otherwise.

I just don't think non-poor people need subsidised Uber-rides nor any other handouts from the local council.

For clarity: the context was for local councils to give money to Uber instead of running a bus service. Which is plausible idea. I just don't think you need to be so specific: give people money, so they can buy goods and services they deem most beneficial (including Uber rides).

Now going one step further: only give the money to poor people. Welfare for rich people is a bit silly.
I have to say I feel a bit guilty I am about to upgrade a couple machines at the house - My ancient i3 Linux laptop, my almost as ancient Windows desktop and my slightly less ancient i5 Mac Mini are all going to be remissioned in 2023. The Mac can't get macOS Ventura, the PC can't have Windows 11, and the laptop is showing some signs of wear (but still going strong, if slow, and doing what I need from it).
Thanks for the article? You are not still hiring per chance..?
>I wonder why, doing Windows programming with OWL in 1993 was quite delightful,

For me, it's because memories are not trustworthy (rose-colored glasses). Also, I had less experience back then. And we as an industry didn't know any better.

I got started in programming in Borland Pascal and Borland C++. Because of nostalgy, I've tried using them for fun again ten years ago and boy is there a reason I stopped using them in the first place. Sheesh.

Example OWL snippets:

for (int index = 0; index < count-1; index++) {
int len = GetStringLen(index);
TAPointer<tchar> buf(new tchar[len+1]);
GetString((tchar*)buf, index);
*outStream << (tchar*)buf << _T('\n');
//delete buf;
}
...

TClipboard cb(*this, false);
if (cb.EmptyClipboard()) {
int len = GetStringLen(index);
HANDLE cbhdl = ::GlobalAlloc(GHND,len+1);
LPTSTR buf = (LPTSTR)::GlobalLock(cbhdl);
GetString(buf, index);
::GlobalUnlock(cbhdl);
...

class tGastValid : public TEdit {
public:
tGastValid(TWindow *Win, short ID) : TEdit(Win, ID) {}
void EvKillFocus(HWND);
DECLARE_RESPONSE_TABLE(tGastValid);
};
DEFINE_RESPONSE_TABLE1(tGastValid, TEdit)
EV_WM_KILLFOCUS,
END_RESPONSE_TABLE;
void tGastValid::EvKillFocus(HWND hWnd) {
GetParentO()->SendMessage(WM_COMMAND, DB_BTGAST, 0);
TEdit::EvKillFocus(hWnd);
}

^-- I liked THAT? What was wrong with me ;)

That said, Borland had really good class libraries. If I had those libraries in a modern language, hey that wouldn't be so bad. But these languages? No, thank you.
I double-space because 99% of the time i’m writing in a monospace font and the visual separation is useful.

adjusting the kerning of the final result is what my typesetter is for, so I don’t fret much about it during composition.
Except for the maybe simplest variable initialization, I always assume that if it exists, it may error. “Won’t error ever” doesn’t exist in the real physical world.

(See also: halting problem.)

The “invisibility” of errors in languages that have first-class exceptions usually means that exceptions are being somehow swallowed without being handled properly. Shit happens, and the program happily chugs along regardless, sowing destruction.

If you get down to reading the code, you can usually see if it is likely to error out or not. At the point where you get down to reading the code, it’s usually quite clear unless intentionally obfuscated.

A better question is, can a machine show you if the code may error and how, given language X? In statically compiled languages, IDEs have been wickedly good at inferring the possible exception types on any line of code for the last decade, even if you don’t annotate them in the signature.
No, it's because the world has drastically changed and people have updated their views given the advent of significant new information. Namely, the invention of social media was the paradigm shifting catalyst.
Also need to mention totp.app

It allows export import feature of keys
There are several, to be honest, but my favourite by far is that it cleanly separates, like all BSDs, the base system and the external packages. You can have a stable or bleeding edge base system depending on what suits your tastes, and on it install the lastest extra packages you need. They completely reside under /usr/local and are installed through different channels (the ports), cleanly separating the system from the user software, like it happens on Windows or macOS but arguably less clunky.

This is something is sincerely miss in Linux, where more often than not you have to either decide between having bleeding edge packages on a bleeding edge system (like Linux, or Debian Sid) or having to deal with old packages and third party repositories (like on Debian or Red Hat).

Also, the fact the whole system is shipped, tested and built by a closely knit group of developers is a huge bonus to me - the overall experience feels polished and well integrated, something Linux distros often seriously lack. At times on Linux it just feels as if some packages have just been bundled haphazardly together with zero care about documenting their interactions or how they are supposed to work, or that the packagers do not agree with upstream and do random modifications that just complicate things (like on Debian or Red Hat). Lots of stuff in FreeBSD has no upstream - FreeBSD and the other BSDs write and maintain their own kernel, libc, core utils, init system, bootloader, ...
> The regulator said Meta would be able to increase its “already significant market power” by cutting off the supply of gifs to rivals, or demand more user data from them in order to keep using Giphy.

I’m imagining a future in which Meta cuts off the winter supply of GIFs to the European Union, setting the populace into a restive period of incoherent communication.

Perhaps the EU, UK, and US should establish strategic (inter)national GIF reserves?
I call Alien Truth "What Is". It must form a common reality that each individual can point to and share.

More at:
https://corinth.kardianos.com/
If they can rant and gatekeep about double spaces, I’ll throw my rant into to ring regarding “/s”.

Once you drop a “/s” I to your writing or post, it actually cancels out the sarcasm you worked to craft.

And for you folks who can’t detect sarcasm unless there is a “/s” in the post, bless your heart. (Go look that “bless your heart” bit up to get a sense of what I mean by that)

And you people who reply to sarcasm properly posted without the “/s”…with an “/s” in an attempt to be helpful to all other readers, screw you the most.
Credit where credit is due, Meta / FB identified early on that people are moving on to mobile and acquired WhatsApp and Instagram at the right time (WhatsApp and Instagram are extremely popular with the young).
Well, it depends. Public transport only really makes sense when you have enough density.

If you have the typical North American rules that make density illegal, even the best public transport won't safe you. In fact, it might be throwing good money after bad money.
> Asterisks are an invention of WEB. Operating systems usually don't use them at all.

Asterisks aren't an invention of the web, they're a hold over from paper forms. It is/was common to have an asterisk beside required fields. Because that was already a convention it was adopted by designers & ported over to digital.

> You can separate required and non required fields

I think this is good when its appropriate to the data. It's almost like you'd apply it at a fieldset level rather than field level. As in, asking for username/email/password and then in another section asking for what your interests are for the algo recommendations is great.

If you have something like fields for name — first name/last name are both mandatory; middle name is optional — it would really break the flow of the form if they weren't in conventional order.
Parent is talking about distributor stock and you are talking about sales.

If your comment was accurate it would seem like we should have had distributor stock coming online after the pandemic shortages as companies push to get their orders in the queue before capacity goes offline due to conflict.

I’m curious with parent — my guess is just that the humans behind the companies got used to the profits and not sitting on inventory, which was always risky.
If there were no copyright problems then why didn't Microsoft train Copilot on its own source code like windows, visual studio, sql server, etc?
If you have a "payroll lady", you're not working at a big-corp.
This is a comment of stunning ignorance.

Just because some alien societies will not mimic our rules of addition, we do know for certain it is possible that other societies can build abstract concepts that are isomorphic to those we have. And many of these concepts, such as addition, are very useful.

Does this guarantee that aliens come up with the same stuff? No. Does it guarantee that if they did, they would these concepts to the same esteem? No. Is there an element of 'truth' here that can be replicated by others? Absolutely
Fast food fever: how ultra-processed meals are unhealthier than you think
> The following is supposed to be OK: somebody reads your GPLed code, learns abstract concepts from it, teaches it to me, I write code that uses the same algorithm. But it's not OK to abbreviate the process and reach the same result directly with Copilot.

The trouble is that this apparently is not what Copilot is always doing. If it had only "learned abstract concepts" from GPL'd (or any other form of copyright) code, then that would not be a problem, and of course that is kind-of what Copilot purports to be doing, supposedly learning the association between concepts described in comments and corresponding forms of implementation.

However, apparently Copilot is sometimes NOT generating it's own code based on the concepts it has learned, but is instead just regurgitating chunks of potentially copyright-protected code verbatim. It'd be interesting to know if it is doing this deliberately (to maintain the coherence of what it is generating) or not - I guess the more of something it has already copied exactly the more it is likely to continue copying since that is the best "predict next word" continuation. Of course while it would be interesting to learn more about the mechanics of Copilot, that doesn't change the legality, or not, of what it is doing, another aspect of which (although IANAL) is how much of the original work is being copied.

At the end of the day it shouldn't matter whether it's you or Copilot either learning from or copying someone else's code - exact same copyright protections apply.
This is a mildly interesting observation/tool presented in the most overblown and irresponsible way.

WebAuthN is meaningfully phishing-safe. You can’t replay a login for attacker.com to example.com. What part 1 is demonstrating is that if you compromised the victim’s machine you can arbitrarily use a token for as long as it’s connected. What part 2 is demonstrating is that if you choose server-side to allow subdomains (it’s an option!) and then an attacker takes control of https://subdomain.example.com, they can replay a subdomain login against example.com.

Needless to say, your average phisher doesn’t have control over the victim’s machine or one of the target’s subdomains. It’s still interesting because you might encounter a combination of server-side misconfiguration and user controlled subdomains (like the deprecated user.github.com), but far from an indictment of WebAuthN.

Arguing that calling WebAuthN phishing-safe is a “scam” or that 100% phishable TOTP or MFA over Signal (??) is better is detached from reality and harmful. I wish InfoSec didn’t reward these antics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Other_Losses
Right. Systemic problems require systemic solutions, and "voting with your wallet" is capitalist bullshit. They love to trot that one out, to make real change impossible.
Wouldn't it depend entirely on which is more common in your form? If it's a medical form and 95% of the fields are required, mark the optional ones. If it's a social network sign-up page and most of the fields are optional, mark the required ones. I don't know what kind of slope-browed sadist wouldn't mark anything at all.
How? China doesn't possess the capability to build their own competitive chips. The chips they do manufacture do not require high precision. Everything I've read about China over the last few years has indicated it is, generally, unsustainable. From their disastrous fiscal policies of internal hyper-finance [0], their weakening navy [1], their aging population that's well on its way through decline [2] and the [3] continued climate issues that loom over China - it doesn't look all that great once you peel back the facade. China is in a big mess that started back then and continues to get worse under current leadership.

[0]https://www.csis.org/analysis/chinas-slow-motion-financial-c...
[1] https://news.usni.org/2021/01/22/chinese-navy-faces-overseas...
[2] https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3157385/c...
[3] https://www.world-energy.org/article/20509.html
>Why care what the UK has to say about US matters?

Because the UK could ban Meta from operating there if it didn't comply.
Certainly it will be a smartphone with collar, then a smartphone with tighter collar, then may be a brain augmentation and finally a brain replacement with an ability of full remote control by some authorities.
Wouldn't it be better to get traffic directing AI for local spots?
It could specialize for a specific intersection, and assist cars passing through it.
Vanguard actually supports fido2/webauthn. I registered two keys and they sent me two confirmation letters in the mail, one for each key.
Researchers’ tests of lab-made version of Covid virus draw scrutiny
Some snippets:

The spike protein of an Omicron version of SARS-2 was fused to a virus of the Wuhan strain, the original version that emerged from China in 2020. The goal was to determine if the mutations in the Omicron spike protein were responsible for this variant’s increased ability to evade the immunity to SARS-2 that humans have built up, and whether the changes led to Omicron’s lower rate of severity. The testing actually showed, though, that the chimeric virus was more lethal to a type of lab mice than Omicron itself, killing 80% of the mice infected. Importantly, the original Wuhan strain killed 100% of mice it was tested in. The conclusion is that mutations in the spike protein of the Omicron variant are responsible for the strain’s ability to evade immunity people have built up via vaccination, infections, or both, but they are not responsible for the apparent decrease in severity of the Omicron viruses.
I have optimised my workflow, I am still productive, but the second monitor still brings me joys that nothing else can.
Indeed, the "learning". To my mind, the most simple (but still speculative) explanation of the "learning" phenomena - working examples and limitations / failures - we see is that the large models implicitly memorize the training inputs (or some derived features that can be used to approximately reconstruct the inputs) and then do something between interpolation and rather simple non-parametric learning.
The effect is outputs are basically a somewhat sensical agglomeration of copy-pasted" snippets.

That said I think the results are often useful and sometimes fascinating. We should not fool ourselves about the learning that these large neural nets do, though.
Those are totally dull, sorry...
It might not be fair to group the UX designers of Jetbrains with every other UX designer.

But it is a giant problem that the industry has been "simplifying" everything so mindlessly for so many years that today my iOS device gave me a legitimate prompt that just didn't contain enough information to decide about at all.

Something along the lines of "Change in app administration [...] will you allow [...] to administer Gmail [...] Your data will be administered."

Now tell me: is this thing going to administer my private mails? 2 factor verification? (Yes, Google often use their mail app for that.) etc etc.

At this point it is utterly meaningless: the only correct thing to do with such a vague prompt is to say no until an explanation has been given.

But I can surely imagine UX developers patting themselves and each others on the back for such a brilliant simple design.

To be fair, good UX designers exist, but everytime I hear about ux-designers near any of my products I get a little scared :-)
In the implementations I’ve designed - both parties to the transaction control the content of the transaction payload,so it’s hash is not determined by either party (the attacker, in particular).

The subset of hosts is determined by the hash of the transaction.
Still sad Electric Objects ended up selling to Giphy
> I wouldn't want to bet that all intelligent beings would understand the concept of justice, but I wouldn't want to bet against it either.

Given that even people (loosely) in the same culture often disagree about what constitutes "justice" and use the term in mutually exclusive ways, we should definitely bet against the proposition that "all intelligent beings" understand it.
Society exists for the betterment of its constituents. Life expectancy is considered an important success metric because people generally like living long. While you're right that old people are less productive, the health of the economy is not the goal of a society. The economy is a tool we use to better our lives. We should never be beholden to the tool itself. The moment the economy stops making our lives better, it's time to make some changes.
Wow that swing from 1920 looks incredibly dangerous. From what I hear, swings in general are on the way out because they cause more injuries than other equipment.
This. I have no idea why people underestimate the conceptual power of ADTs. Every time I try to explain this concept they just disregard it as just a convenient wrapper over union...and union isn't THAT common right..?

Turns out that having a much better tagged union opens up so many possibilities. Software deals with states and what's better to represent states than an ADT? Last time I was fixing an issue where a mouse position is initialized to (0.0f,0.0f) and causes it to trigger a mouse event on startup. The fix was to simply turn it into an Option<(f64,f64)> which is so much better than initializing them as (-1.0f,-1.0f) because it forces you to check all the places where you do arithmetic operations on them.
Would injustice exist in an alien society if that society didn't recognise it as such?
Foundational Changes in Chip Architectures
This is cool. Are there similar websites for other languages?
Explain where you think he is wrong.
Steve Yegge: Should I get a CS degree or can I teach myself?
Not at all. That would only be true if there weren't nonlinearities between the layers.
I agree, I love that Go is simple but it is simply too...simple. It makes it hard to represent a much harder state transformations.
FB should call their bluff and tell them to spin up a version of China's great firewall and try to block people then.

I guess UK does already have a firewall with it's nanny-state porn filters though.

I can see it now, "All of UK blocked FB today because of meme gif service purchase" Great headline, wonderful use of regulation /s

Meanwhile you have actual problems going on and a crashing economy, but at least we prevented a meme service from being bought!
I've been happily paying for my own WebStorm license for 7 years—using it at home and at work. In the middle of that, I tried VS Code for a whole year at a new job, to really see how it compared (my new team was using it).

It wasn't better in any way. In fact, most days I just missed WebStorm, but I soldiered on to see if I could find anything that was truly an improvement. At the end of my self-imposed, one-year trial, I concluded that VS Code had just one "advantage": it was free. Its barrier to entry was zero, from a pricing perspective. But since I had really given VS Code a fair shake, I gladly went back to WebStorm at work.

Fast forward to this year, when I ran head on into a serious WebStorm performance problem: type checking a very large TypeScript code base. The WebStorm logs show that the TypeScript language server is crashing, and I filed a bug with JetBrains many months ago, but zero progress. VS Code, on the other hand, has no problem type checking this huge code base—it happens near instantly. For months I have now had WebStorm open for editing, and VS Code open for type checking, which is ridiculous, and I'd be embarrassed if my team knew I was doing this.

It pains me greatly to say it, but perhaps the time has come to cancel my WebStorm license and just switch to VS Code.

I mean, why not, if JetBrains is just set on copying VS Code anyway? I'll take better performance with a worse UI, and it seems like that's precisely what VS Code can give me at this point. How sad.
That's exactly right. And the article mentions that was the method (smooth locomotion) that they used in the study, but then the researcher made some kind of crazy claim that it shouldn't matter.
To produce 3nm and 5nm, you need to order fabs from ASML who has an enormous backlog..

On the other hand, 22nm and 28nm are almost 10 year old technologies and they are still used in cars, so much so that the industry is begging car manufacturers to get to newer nodes [1].

[1] https://www.theregister.com/2021/10/19/chip_manufacturer_chi...
Fully agreed.

These beliefs you quoted from the article, which unfortunately most people don't even recognize as beliefs, form the basis of the dominant religion of the western world (scientism).

The worrying thing is that the majority of people who believe in this religion don't even realize they are believers.
What is the alternative to not having a crate ecosystem? Everyone roll their own smallvec implementations? How is that any better?