skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I decided I wanted to use M365 and the domain to use it with simultaneously, so GoDaddy was the path of least resistance. I'd have avoided them if I realized it could be avoided.

Later I found out that the URL they used to forward you to GoDaddy's website happened to include the content of the records needed in DNS. Others were successful with other DNS providers. You just clicked the link, added the DNS records from the link manually, and eventually it'd validate.

Glad to see this won't affect current users.
By hiring only the like-minded, top-down decisions can appear organic. In the words of Chomsky:

I don't say you're self-censoring. I'm sure you believe everything you're saying. But what I'm saying is if you believed something different, you wouldn't be sitting where you're sitting. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nBx-37c3c8
Tangentially, I've been using my own domain with Gmail for years, but as of ~1y ago, it's been causing me problems. Emails sent from such custom addresses to my domain (which forwards back to my gmail) get a "This might be phishing" banner.

See, Gmail lets you configure it so that you can send emails as another address. This required a bit of verification via a DNS check, but trivial if you controlled your domain.

However, with the advent of SPF/DKIM/DMARC enforcing, this doesn't work well anymore. My main problem is that my domain is configured to forward select emails back to gmail. This breaks SPF, and I haven't yet found a way to fix this with Gmail.

I guess I need to wade through some SPF/DKIM/DMARC documentation. Google's own has not been useful.
To my understanding the shell will truncate the redirect target even if the command fails.

Using -o makes failure nondestructive.
This take is really not crediting the different threat models motivating SSH versus HTTPS. In both cases the network is considered untrusted, but beyond this the analogy largely fails - almost every application of telnet risks leaking authentication credentials to an eavesdropper (in addition to allowing them to subsequently surveil your session), whereas the classical HTTP use case is to retrieve information anonymously. I cheered the widespread move toward HTTPS as a response to outrageous behavior by certain ISPs and their modifying/injecting content into sessions, which arguably should be criminalized, yet if the forces of abusive service providers and unaccountable state security agencies is becoming so omnipresent that we can only retreat beyond a veil of encryption, we are living in very dark times.

I'd be more optimistic if not for the (cynical?) fear that those most in need of encryption will be the first to be denied it by the force of the state, a day only accelerated by its increasing ubiquity. Your government can force you to install a state-sanctioned CA cert, almost entirely undermining TLS from that perspective, which Google can/will do nothing to resist, and their parallel desire to deprecate plaintext HTTP is entirely orthogonal to this.
You can't take a person's name off their work and sell it.

People who work hard to produce open source software expect credit and acknowledgement for their work. That's why almost every license has an attribution clause.

If you don't want credit for your work, you use the MIT No Attribution License:

https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT-0

Not widely used, as you might expect.
He's a rather famous "nob" who worked at Google for years making much beloved cartoons and then went to Twitter. So a well-known (and apparently quite pleasant and smart) person in the industry.

That Musk couldn't interpret this right, and acted in his usual rash and vindictive way says more about him than it does about Manu. Also consistent with the way he lashed back at Gary Kasparov, clearly unaware who he was speaking to ("what have you ever done" indeed).

Any person truly laying claim to the crown of king of nerds would be respectful to both of these people and it says a lot about Musk that he wasn't. Taking over a Silicon Valley company without recognizing its culture and then firing someone who helped build it -- because they made jokes -- is beyond crass, it shows complete obliviousness to what he just bought.

FWIW Google used to have his cartoons mounted on walls around campus. Including ones that were (gently) critical of leadership and culture. How come Larry&Sergey&Eric could handle his gentle critique, but Musk cannot?

Leaders don't behave this way.
It wasn't my intention to litigate this story here. I was simply citing it as an example of the difficulty of identifying misinformation.

Also, I think a fair discussion of Twitter moderation should include a post-mortem of one of their most famous mistakes, discussing what Twitter did and what should they have done differently, and not so much the story itself.

(Of course, the substance is also important, but this isn't the right place for that discussion.)
Microsoft already has their way. Any time you boot an alternate OS, it's only because Microsoft deigns to allow it. They're the CA for Secure Boot, and at any time they can forbid disabling Secure Boot in order to qualify for Windows.
What about the solar north (to the left from where the sun emerges in the morning)?
I’m surprised to hear you feel mentally miserable on longer fasts. I (and many others) report intense mental clarity. For me, everything slows down and becomes bright and clear. It’s really pleasant. Are you taking magnesium and sodium?

I’m tempted to comment on your seasonal health swings, but to each their own.
I like Arch’s pacman the best.
Making your Tailscale experience a little more eventful with webhooks
I use some shared hosting and prices there increasing also for new pricing model of cPanel.
There are no "general principles of free speech," there are conflicting principles over which people constantly disagree.
I don't see how this Manu fellow is a "free speech loudmouth" or where he contradicts himself. He certainly is quite protective and assertive about his rights to publish these tools, and his cartoons commenting on and sometimes satirizing his workplace... but I think that's uncharitable to call him a loudmouth who contradicts himself. He seemed to be quite accepting of the fact that his speech is not without consequences and unsurprised that it may have got him fired. Maybe I'm not reading between the lines or missing other context?

I will say though that I find authoritarians and their sycophants far worse, hypocritical and dangerous.
Good point! Replace folding@home with twitter@home…. AI tools provided structures for all those proteins do your machines have extra cpu cycles. Wonder whether running Twitter > bitcoin mining?

Didn’t Skype do that to some machines when it started?
"Has a lot of nazis"?? Do you have proof of this? (I mean I don't doubt that there is someone who does since the site has a pretty big user base and doesn't censor speech, let alone speakers for opinions but...)
Because probably 30% of my 1st year undergrad class did not understand recursion..
Sure, but another extinction event without humans is more or less inevitable - with humans it may be preventable.

So our choices appear to be wait for the bad thing to happen or continue to drive each other to improve and learn, which consumerism does in fact provide great motive and drive for humans to improve (although not the only mechanism, I'm sure, just a large one we understand today). Hopefully we strike the right balance and solve these problems.
Yeah layoffs impact not just the people that leave but also those that remain. The ones that leave at least have the opportunity to move on.

The people left have to worry both about the layoffs and also need to work harder. Its a bad situation but at least the people laid off can move on.
400ft Tall Halloween Light and Drone Show
Imagine being ok with trillion dollar companies using opensource code you wrote, for free.

Imagine if the people who work at those companies aren't your enemy. But instead are potential customers and potential collaborators, who see value in your work and want it to succeed.

Imagine if there was a good implementation of some idea, expressed as code. And we can all share and contribute to that single good implementation to avoid pointless work and avoid fragmentation. Imagine people from all across the world contributing both financially and via bug reports and pull requests to making that implementation succeed.

This fear of being exploited by big companies seems to motivate a lot of people in the free software world, and personally I find it pretty odious. Why shouldn't big businesses use my code? The better opensource companies (Google, new Microsoft, Facebook, etc) contribute back to the community in all sorts of ways; and I consider that a net positive on the world.

I've seen this fear show up for decades in all sorts of contexts, and I think I disagree with it every time. For example:

- A few years ago I was involved in a big argument over the licence for OpenStreetMaps. There were essentially two camps: the "Oh no what if (big evil corp) uses our community mapping data to make their map better" camp, who wanted a restrictive anti-company license. And people like me who just wanted to give a gift of mapping data to the world.

- This is the gap between GNU GPL (especially GPL3) and BSD/MIT licenses.

As an opensource maintainer, I do have a problem with people who work at big companies expecting me to volunteer my time responding to issues on github. I'd like big companies who file issues to contribute financially in exchange for my attention.

But if they don't pay, I'm more than happy for them to use my code. I made it for everyone. I'd really like it if fewer people needed to reinvent the wheel for silly licensing reasons.
That form sucked. The break was nice.
If you were to say "hey, we should all fight for foobardom, a new term I just made up" but didn't give a good definition for then, yes, you'd have a problem: talking about foobardom would be pointless since it's an ill-defined term and the discussion would serve no purpose.

However, this discussion about philosophy and freedom is the reverse: people are already fighting and in many cases dying for what they think is this thing called 'freedom', and yet it proves elusive to find a definition.

The real-world, societal impact is already there. So it's worth studying.

And if you study it and find that it's elusive and nearly impossible to pin down... well now that's interesting, and should make you think critically about anyone who uses the term as a low-nuance bludgeon in an argument.

(In the other article around Twitter here today - this thread - https://twitter.com/yishan/status/1586955288061452289 , I think this point is made pretty clear early on by the spam example: perfectly legal, yet "bots" are a self-professed problem for pro-whatever-speech-is-legal,don't-get-involved-further Musk...)
I think the idea is that the platform has the power to prevent people from saying these things you find (extremely) objectionable, and so you feel compelled not to use said platform if they refuse to do so (and thereby appear to be passively endorsing the behavior).
Devcom – U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command
You paint us as petty and simpleminded. I have complicated feelings about Microsoft; I think they've done a lot of good and bad over my lifetime. My issues with copilot are principled. I have the exact same issue with non-Microsoft efforts to ingest copyrighted works and emit derivative works to the detriment of artists. Argue against that, not a pathetic strawman.
I disagree. Abstractions are leaky, and I think that demystifying the computer is important. You may spend more time with high level abstractions, but under that is hardware that has registers, memory, jump instructions, etc... it is not magic, and if you expect your computer to do magic, it won't work.

And what you call bottom-up approaches have value too. You talk about "how to express in numpy?", as if you were dead set on using numpy. But it numpy the right choice? It is highly optimized, sure, but is it highly optimized for your use case? A "bottom-upper" will start to think "how will I solve this problem" and then look for something that will make their task easier. It may be numpy, it may be "from scratch" or it may be something else. Ideally both approaches will lead to the same conclusion. The numpy guy may realize that his favorite library is not the right choice in the same way that the ASM guy may realize that his solution is already implemented in a library.

Anyways, a good programmer needs to have an idea of the whole spectrum, from hardware architecture to assembly to low level languages like C to high level languages like Python. Start where you want.
Pirate Bay couldn't be used to do anything but infringe copyright, practically. That's not true for Copilot.
Those mean very different things, which is why quantum mechanics wouldn’t work for him and he was arguing for new physics.

As to the specifics, let’s just say there’s a reason he was publishing books rather than peer reviewed papers.
Hmm. Are you sure that's true?
WSL on my office laptop takes 10s to boot and if you CTRL+C before it gives the prompt it shows a python stacktrace. I can only hope that by the time the people who have only ever used windows retire, windows will become as relevant as what cobol is today which is probably an insult to cobol as it's not known to make blue death screen on ATM and airport screen
Please write that article, I want to read it and I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one.
Quote: "John and I are fully responsible".

Analyzing the semantics of a phrase and then stating it implies "person A is saying/doing X", when right there person A is explicitly saying/doing Not X, is nonsensical.

My favorite color is blue. I like coffee => "his favorite color is brown!".
Note: spoiler/shibboleth at the end.

Kinda tangential, but the wording of the title (“reciprocal”) made me look for “quadratic funding” in the post. After all, maintainers are that kind of almost public good aren’t they.

That said, I can’t tell which one of the NYPL lions it is, without having to look it up.
It was fine tuning, so the process was a lot faster than I originally anticipated. I'd say it was between 36 and 72 hours for each voice. I have been working on a gradient notebook provided by Paperspace, which guaranteed me A6000 instances (48GB GPU RAM) at a reasonable flat rate. I discovered them after being repeatedly frustrated by the random allocation of GPUs on colabs pro+ plan.
yeah I noticed that. Quite a reversal from their previous position, which was incredibly clear. I wonder if they'll extend this policy to other groups that have previously been shut down for doing the same thing (F-Droid being the obvious one here).
This point he made aligns with non-specific features of user behavior:

> "In fact, once again, I challenge you to think about it this way: could you make your content moderation decisions even if you didnʻt understand the language they were being spoken in?"

However, I think discussions of controversial subjects often fall under 'this content is a problem' type of thinking. I was banned from all the major Reddit Covid subreddits for politely noting that a lab leak was entirely plausible, even likely. I was banned from their major news subreddits for regularly discussing the economic agendas behind the vast majority of military invasions in both the present day and historically - for example, I'd note that the USA-Russia split seems to have got started in 2003 when Putin rejected an Exxon bid for majority control of Russia oil production, and then started jailing the Wall Street-linked oligarchs like Khodorkovsky. I was also banned from the Ukraine subreddit for noting that a negotiated settlement to the regional war was inevitable, even if Ukraine had to relinquish some territory inhabited mainly by Russia-speaking citizens. Banned from Neoliberal, for pointing out failures of neoliberalism. Etc.

In none of those cases did I start hurling nasty insults, spam-posting, etc. Clearly those subreddits and their mods have a particular 'keep the conversation on our preferred message' agenda, i.e. 'align with the hive mind or be excommunicated'. (Eventually I tired of this and deleted my account at Reddit).

Now, if Elon can change Twitter such that polite, even-tempered but off-desired-message content isn't actively suppressed, it will be a much better platform. However, will advertisers and other sources of revenue be pleased with such changes? That may be a major factor in how it all plays out.
... and once you can get within that mindset and understand the limitations of the tool and how to play with it...

You can find people like Ted Orland.

I'm still in awe of his Dawn at Mono Lake in Winter ( https://shop.anseladams.com/collections/ted-orland/products/... ) and Tree in Snowstorm ( https://shop.anseladams.com/collections/ted-orland/products/... ). Some others - https://web.archive.org/web/20070302193018/http://www.tedorl...

These photos where shot and then reassembled afterwards. One of the neat things with them is that you can see the outside the frame information on the print - and so seeing an "11" in one spot followed with a bit of rotation on another square with a "12" - you can feel how the photograph was taken - its like seeing the brush strokes on a painting.

He took regular photos too - Ted Orland Black & White "Even Ansel Adams Has To Make A Living" 1972 https://www.1stdibs.com/furniture/wall-decorations/photograp... (I recall chatting with a photographer who had a gallery in Bishop - it wasn't Galen Rowell, but someone with one nearby - and the mundane aspect of being a professional photographer meant bidding against the other photographers who lived in the area for the school photo contract that year. This is what Ted Orland was hinting at in the title, even though I don't believe that was a regular school photo.)
I've been a Fidelity customer for 15+ years. Amazing customer service - very easy to reach humans and they were all experts at solving whatever problem I called them with.
Cloud magic was a nice story, now with an unhappy ending
This is all quite naive.

People flock to other people that make them feel the way they want to feel, and tell them what they want to do is okay.

People find these groups organically too, or form them themselves, through friend associations, not just by having them pushed.

A lot of people like to feel angry against someone (the other), as it gives them a sense of control and power. Joining others who are similarly aligned, also gives them the sense of belonging.

People who are in these states aren’t going to filter out their friends, or filter out the people telling them things they want to hear.

They’re going to filter out things that make them feel uncomfortable, or that they don’t agree with - like anyone who would stop them from going further down the rabbit hole!
You can cost dollar average without timing anything. Essentially you discover after the fact what was the best time to invest.

Which is surprisingly hard to pull off long term as most people are forced to take money out when they run into financial issues which then correlates with down markets.
As someone who went through the process at Stripe, I recommend giving managers more awareness ahead of time and perhaps some forewarning to the company at large ahead of time
Then for your education section, do you keep the dates there, or remove those dates?
HVM, the parallel runtime: a summary of its history and next steps
You haven’t actually thought through what kind of world it would be if there was no copyright law, have you? I don’t know what your political leanings are, but I’ve met some libertarians who are blissfully naive about the extent to which their world and worldview is buttressed by laws and the governments that enforce them, and your comment reminds me of that.
Too late, we already have some of those. They were there when we bought the house.

C. americana is resistant to juglone, btw.
Not sure "biases" gives the evolved structures in our brain enough credit. Maybe the functions of those structures could be emergent, in a large enough network, but that would be very different context to what a human sees in its extremely rapid development. The rapid learning could be from the unique architecture. The free running feedback loop (consciousness) that we have seems like a good example of how different our architecture is, with our ability to continuously prompt ourselves, and learn from those prompts.
The internet was a lot more fun 20 years ago. Not quite as useful for daily life, but definitely much more fun, and less depressing.
One of the dumbest Pebble rumours I heard after everything went down - 'Citizen was interested in buying us for $740m'. No one at the time noticed that this was more than Citizen's entire market cap https://twitter.com/ericmigi/status/1513737199287627779
Just because they're advanced in one domain doesn't mean they are also in an unrelated one.
Fidelity, Schwab and Vanguard in that order. All 3 offer ETFs at $0 fees, and all have comparable index funds. I've found Fidelity's website to be the most usable, followed by Schwab. Vanguard had a dated, but simple and functional interface that they've recently revamped to be more slick but less usable.
> The person operating the model is not violating the exclusive rights of the copyright author: they are not making copies or derivative works.

How do they not make copies? Do you know how a computer works? Ever heard of RAM? (At least the German Urheberrecht recognizes this clearly: You can't do any processing on any data with the help of a computer without at least making temporary local copies, so there are exceptions to some rules. I'm quite sure common law copyright also recognizes this!)

Also the claim that this is not a derivative work is actually one of the disputed claims here…

> Any other result means that all AI development based on training models is going to grind to a screeching halt, because essentially all training material—text, pictures, recordings—is copyrighted.

Exactly, it's all copyrighted! That's why you can't use it for whatever you like. That's the whole point of copyright.

As a result this means that whoever wants to exploit that work in said way needs to buy (or get otherwise) a license!

Nobody said that feeding AI with properly licensed work would be problematic. Only the original creators need to get their fair cut form the outcome of such process.
Now that Robinhood will let you send your crypto to a hardware wallet, it’s not a bad method for DCAing into a coin of your choice.
I just moved to iCloud and have the opposite problem. I forward my gmail emails to it, and most of them end up in the spam folder.
Stocks? Sure. But there is no reason crypto couldn’t go all the way to zero.
Yup. I was already paying for iCloud and already had my custom domain email on Google.

Happily switched and never went back.

Perhaps I get an extra one more junk every other three day or week, but I can definitely live with that without giving a single penny to Google.
Stocks don't lose value, they just go on sale ;)
Of course, that also raises the question of who they asked to rate the sites, and they don't provide that information either.
would you rather have -8.2% roi or ~-4%roi?
In California you can ask current or previous employers for this info (I don't know how far back it goes, for example if you left 20 years ago I don't think this applies).

https://mizrahilaw.com/california-personnel-file-request-lab...
I once watched a scrub jay (who had a feud with the local squirrel) very deliberately lay a peanut vertically in mulch, tap it into the ground, and lay a large square of bark over top. It was very pleasingly methodical bird.