skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> let me moderate it myself

More like "let us moderate it ourselves". Reddit users already do this - there are extensions you can install that allow you to subscribe to another group of user's ban list. So you find a "hivemind" that you mostly agree with, join their collective moderation, and allow that to customize the content you like. The beauty is that you get to pick the group you find most reasonable.
I posted some additional ideas in a reply to another comment that I think addresses some of your points, but actually I think you bring up a good point of another thing that is broken with both offline and online communities: reputation is transferrable across communities far more than it should be.

You see this anytime e.g. a high profile athlete "weighs in" on complicated geopolitical matters, when in reality their opinion on that matter should count next to nothing in most cases, unless in addition to being a great athlete they have also established a track record (reputation) of being expert or insightful in international affairs.

A free-for-all community like Twitter could continue to exist, where there are basically no waiting periods before posting and your reputation from other areas counts a lot. But then other communities could set their own standards that say you can't post for N days and that your incoming reputation factor is 0.001 or something like that.

So the person could stay in character but they couldn't post for awhile, and even when they did, their posts would initially have very low visibility because their reputation in this new community would be abysmally low. Only by really engaging in the community over time would their reputation rise to the point of their posts having much visibility, and even if they were playing the long game and faking being good for a long time and then decided to go rogue, their reputation would drop quickly so that the damage they could do would be pretty limited in that one community, while also potentially harming their overall reputation in other communities too.

As noted in the other post, there is lots of vagueness here because it's just thinking out loud, but I believe the concepts are worth exploring.
Spammers are also using a public space for their own selfish gain, which makes them freeloaders.
Duplicate: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33449600
It's very similar to strong trips on psychedelics.
I've been taking photos for 35 years and I would say that the camera is the LEAST important part of photography.

Composition and lighting are far more important. For film cameras the lens is far more important than the camera which is mostly just a light tight box. An experienced photographer can still produce amazing images from cheap cameras.

All that said I have thousands of dollars of camera gear. It absolutely helps but if I give it all to a random person on the street they aren't going to instantly become a better photographer.
It is a little different. The first patent troll that blazed the trail gets both more credit (for ingenuity) and blame (for the deleterious impact) in my opinion. I'll give the same internet points to these guys.
Based on that logic, Windows is the superior operating system and always has been, because it's always been used by more people on their desktop than anything else.

There are a lot more factors involved in OS choice that could drive popularity other than the speed of the network stack. And BTW, Hotmail runs on BSD. MacOS is a fork of BSD. And Yahoo ran on BSD (and may still).
Free and Open Source Software Energy Efficiency Project (FEEP)
the economy runs itself, mostly. rates are one of the very few direct knobs anyone has that are sort of predictable.

well you can also commit fiscal suicide like the recent has-been-a-PM of UK showed, but in that case the economy runs you quite explicitly.
Well, for thousands of years we lived in small homogenous communities with only a handful of names. We also had very rigid gender norms. As times change we now live in more open communities with thousands of different names and looser gender norms. I oftentimes cannot easily guess the pronoun from a name.
Hydra is a plain oidc and south implementation.

It doesn't provide a login screen, you need to implement your own flow user interface and use their their api to interface with the auth server.

This is great for the flexibility you have.

Keyckoak covers the basics outh of the box and have a login page implementation ready.
Sounds like healthcare
How come? When people contributed code publicly they attached a license how the code may be used. Is training an AI model on this allowed? I think there's a fair, important and novel legal question to be examined here.

Patent trolls usually file lawsuits that are just unmerited, but rely simply on the fact that mounting a defence is more expensive than settling.
We lived a long time without having to use honorifics yet we do now and are even publicly shamed for not doing so. Humanity and the language we use is a constantly evolving thing.
I do believe my quote is:

> Is Twitter even paying for this? And if so, who would think that Twitter could possibly benefit from a bunch of programmers who don't even know the codebase?
I fail to see the positive effect here.

Just like Google’s noble but misguided attempt to make all the world’s books searchable a few years back, what we have here is IP law getting in the way of a societal goodness.

Copyright and patent are not natural; they’re granted by law “to promote progress in the useful arts”. At first glance here it appears that GitHub is promoting progress and the plaintiffs are just rent-seeking.
Tech jobs are somewhat decoupled from true demand. They are usually inherently an indirect investment, not a direct cost. But when they and their activities go away, you lose the B2B demand that they had to accomplish their jobs and the B2C demand they had from spending their salaries.

For example, my last 3 product jobs have been a business travel offering, an HR learning management tool, and a Predictive analytics tool for data scientists working in marketing. A lot of the users who paid the bills were some form of tech worker that were executing on projects that were future investments.

Investors have been handed a truly mind-boggling amount of cash since 2008, but there hasn't been a lot of stimulus to the actual day-to-day economy. Valuations had to go up to accommodate this cash, and without a corresponding increase in consumer spending there's really only one lever in the financial model that drastically impacts valuation without seriously changing the core business: year-on-year growth.

Most growth stories are laughably improbable, and the investors need plausibility to play the game. Fundraising turned into a story-telling competition of who could spin the most plausible growth story that is hard to verify and hasn't been disproved. That story is some form of "we will completely dominate market X, by building software that enables hyper-scaling with minimal unit costs, and that also includes AI/ML/Optimization (to be developed) that solves the inherently hard problems in this industry."

That story is used for both VC-style external fundraising and internal project pitches, and it has crowded out most other approaches. A side-effect of that story has been a massive bubble in the jobs that can deliver on it - software engineers, designers, data scientists, product managers, etc. The game at most firms has been to keep kicking the outcomes down the road and claim that the hockey stick growth is right around the corner.

That worked until interest rates went up and far-future cash became much less valuable. The CFO and the Fund now need to show results in the very near term, and the knives are being sharpened for departments and companies who can't deliver on that. Those departments and companies remove demand when they fold, and there isn't a clear immediate activity that returns quick cash to replace them.
Hasura is awesome!
Just like running is not all about the shoes an programming is not all about the text editor.

I would think few people had the view that anything is mostly about the tools involved
No thank you.
I put a license to be followed, not to just be disregarded by an AI as "Learning material".
No human perfectly reproduces their learning material no matter what, but Copilot does.
I don’t understand this argument… if image AI gets good enough then generating exact copies of its training model seems trivial.
Vendr uses Elm as its main front-end tech. It's valued 1B I hear.

https://elm-radio.com/episode/elm-at-a-billion-dollar-compan...

PS: they are hiring Elm developers https://www.vendr.com/job?gh_jid=4539989004
I’d argue that 1) isn’t even a good way to take “great” photos. I have been to very interesting places and my pictures are still terrible and not “great”.
I already said that meta has an incentive to snarf up your data.

There is credibility to the notion that signal is designed to ensure that people who are paranoid would prefer it.

The fact that it exists and is convenient prevents more secure messengers from existing as the lions share simply goes to signal, and this is what I mean by marketing. It is conventional wisdom that signal is the bees knees and looking further or scrutinising it is folly.

A lot of funding comes from the government to signal too; and since it’s an American company it must comply to the best of its ability with US law. They tell us that they can only comply in small ways, but given that there is no independent verification of the server (that it even runs the FOSS code) and the hostility in having unofficial clients on the network I am left pondering.
I think it can be a failure state, certainly, but sometimes it's unavoidable, and banning someone can also mean more people in the community, rather than less.

Would HN be bigger if it had always had looser moderation that involved less banning of people? I'm guessing not.

edit: I guess what I was thinking was that often in a community conflict where one party is 'targeted' by another party, banning one of those parties is inevitable. Not always, but often people just cannot be turned away from doing some toxic thing, they feel that they're justified in some way and would rather leave/get banned than stop.
There are a ton of levers (not all under the Fed's purview). This is just how capitalism works though, others must suffer at the expense of capital. It's bad enough when the government doing the bare minimum, like trying to put a bunch of people to work to replace our crumbling infrastructure, gets decried as "socialism". Those voters must not understand (or simply not care) that voting for the same corporate interests over and over again will just lead to the working man sacrificing more to big business.
Truly, what the hell? First, the guy in question is from India and isn't an Anglo/European white man who "benefited" from centuries of exploitation of blacks in the United States. Secondly, many white people in the United States today also managed to build a life for themselves without having done so. Your notion of historical guilt really is more like the absurd religious idea of original sin than a realistic or genuinely fair minded concept of justice and blame.

Furthermore, nothing I said is about continuing to exploit black people or advocating racism. It's specifically about redressing past wrongs against African Americans and other minorities without creating new ones against other arbitrarily assigned groups, particularly if they're immigrants who have also had to suffer for their forward movement and have no personal fault in the past racial tensions and injustices of a country they're not originally from.

Why would you completely misinterpret a fairly straightforward argument in the most emotionally charged, simplistic and negative way possible?
> But our bugs aren't sacred and special.

I'd agree about sacred, but I have a hunch they may indeed be special… or at least useful. Current AI requires far more examples than we do to learn from, and I suspect all our biases are how evolution managed to do that.
> To be sure the 2001 crash was also mixed in with 9/11 and its aftereffects

The dot-com crash was in the Spring of 2000.
You can "launder" away the license of any source code you have copied simply by deleting it! No snazzy neural network needed.. The litigants argument is that this is what GitHub CoPilot does. It allows others to publish derivative works of copyrighted works with the license deleted. Given that it apparently is trivial to get CoPilot to spit out nearly verbatim copies of the code that it was trained on, I don't think it satisfies the "transformative" requisite of the (American) Fair use doctrine.
"Ooh... burn!"
Is there an article describing how does it work?
This is not how most views occur, please don't hurt yourself to produce content regularly just to satisfy this edge case.
LOL, I first read that as you would always try to hit the crow.

Guess I'm not as smart as one...
> Since 22.04, zsys (the tool that did the snapshoting) is not installed by default.

Er, are they not snapshotting the root filesystem or ex. /home by default then?
It can be and is both what you describe and a necessary feature of our adversarial legal system.

Github can't really go to a court by themselves and ask "is this legal?". There is the concept declaratory relief but you need to be at least threatened with a lawsuit before that's on the table.

So Github kinda just has to try releasing CoPilot and get sued to find out. The legal system is setup to reward the lawyer who will go to bat against them to find out if it is legal. The plantiff (and maybe lawyer, depending on how the case is financed) take the risk they are wrong just as Github had to.

It is setup this way to incentivize lawyers to protect everyone's rights.
This is a classic example of the ad hominem fallacy. Stating that "they are no angels" doesn't detract from whether they're right or capable of effecting positive legal change.

Frankly, I don't care if anyone makes a name for themselves for doing this. In fact, I applaud them and would happily give them recognition should they be successful.

Similarly, I'd hope that there are opportunties for profit in this space, given that I don't want cheap lawyers botching this case and setting terrible legal precedent for the rest of us. Microsoft has a billion dollar legal team and they will do everything they can to protect their bottom line.
> But it doesn't make sense to criticize the plaintiff looking for a profit…

I don’t know man, I can simultaneously see the systemic issue that needs to be solved and also critique someone for subcoming to base needs like greed when they don’t have the need.
He's not saying that they shouldn't be subject to coverage "with an investigative lens." He's talking about the adversarial, negative tone of the coverage, relating to the tech industry primarily as full of bad actors rather than a power center worthy of investigation that also does some good things, say. I don't think Yglesias would say we shouldn't investigate these companies, but rather that we should paint a more wholistic picture about both the good and bad contributions of these companies that better matches reality.
Why? You can copy and paste the entire section, and use multiple cursors to add in the brackets.

going from

a: 'one',

to

a['one'],

just requires you to add two brackets and remove the colon. With multiple cursors you can do that exact same operation for all lines in a few keystrokes.
But the difference between the original post and the revised post often is malice (or so I suspect). The ideas are the same, though they may be developed a bit more in the second post. The difference is the anger/hostility/bitterness coloring the first post, that got filtered out to make the second post.

I think that maybe the observable "bad effects" and the unobservable "malice" may be almost exactly the same thing.
Most introductory deep learning courses are very clear about how far the analogy goes, if people are interpreting it as something more I don't think it's the fault of practitioners/educators and more the fault of people's imagination and selective hearing.
The one thing we can say with complete certainty is that most programmers who had their code used without permission will not receive very much money at all if this class action lawsuit is decided in their favor.
ok but, at least historically nn as discussed were interesting because of their resemblence to naturally networked systems.
This is monumentally stupid, but I wonder if you should just leave the last year of Clojure off of your resume.
Planet Fitness is a steal.
China GDP/person 1/5 that of U.S. Don’t confuse the Chinese urban elite, who indeed have a Western level of income and wealth, with “China.”
When I'm working in Git, Go, or Linux code, Vim (and NeoVim) uses `expandtab` in conjunction with `softtabstop` and converts any `tabstop` spaces into a tab (with `noexpandtab`) regardless of whether or not it is "alignment".

I've not done lots of development with other editors, but Kate didn't do it and the few times I used Visual Studio, it also had similar behaviors (I'm assuming VSCode inherited that stuff).
I guess I'd describe repeatedly posting the same emoji to a chat as flooding rather than spamming. Even then, your mention of cheering further divides it into two categories of behavior:

1. Cheering. That's as good a description as any. This is intended to express excitement or approval and rally the in-group. It temporarily makes the chat useless for anything else, but that isn't its purpose.

2. Flooding. This is an intentional denial of service attack intended to make the chat useless for as long as possible, or until some demand made by the attacker is met.
If you'd ever read even a single one of the licenses to the software I'm sure you use everyday, you'd understand.
This is such an obvious and pathetic strawman.

I notice often on hackernews that people don't seem to understand anything about free or open-source software outside of the pragmatics of whether they can abuse the work for free.
If the USB drives were bought formatted as FAT, which is always true for those smaller than 32 GB, they already have the required partition.

For booting with UEFI, you just need to create the directories with the names expected by the firmware. For legacy booting, you just need to install syslinux, which takes a second.

Then the USB drive can be used to boot any computer, without any other work, for many years.

When you change the kernel, you just mount the USB drive (which is not mounted otherwise), then you copy the new kernel to the USB drive (possibly together with an initrd file), renaming it during the copy, you unmount the USB drive and that is all.

You can keep around a few USB drives with different kernel versions, and if an update does not go well, you just replace the USB drive with one having an older version.

Configuring a DHCP/TFTP server for Ethernet booting is done only once.

Adding extra computers may need a directory copy in the directory of the TFTP server only when the new computers have a different hardware that requires different OS kernels.

Updating a kernel requires just a file copy towards the directory of the TFTP server, replacing the old kernel.

None of these operations requires more work than when using a boot partition on the root device.

There is less work because you make booting USB drives or a DHCP/TFTP server only once for many years or even decades, while you need to partition the SSD/HDD whenever you buy a new one that will be used as the root device.
The illusion of a soft-landing by the Fed, and the Bank of Canada, has never been archived. All central banks are pushing their respective economies into recession.
> I'm sad that I wasn't on the site during the time of the old guard.

It really was great - I probably wouldn't care how horrible it's become if not for the fact that I remember how it used to be.
Copilot includes all public repos on GitBub, so this includes source-available and Proprietary code too.
> If you're angry about it lobby for either no rules or properly funded government enforcement of rules.

No, there are plenty of other changes you might want to see.

For example, in the American system, judges are generally not allowed to be aware of anything not mentioned by a party to the case. There is no good reason for this.
Implementing SuperTokens is on my roadmap. I’ve read through the docs and been lurking on discord. The approach having your own layer in front of theirs to augment everything sits really well with me.

I wish you guys all the luck, I think it’s a really interesting product.
It's the two words, "government enforcement", that bothers me. If your party is in control the words sound fine, otherwise, they sound ominous.
I agree, but I'd go one step further: Even a lot of digital cameras have too many bells and whistles, so something like a Fujifilm X100 series or only shooting with a single prime on a mirrorless body can help.

A lot of "serious" [online] photography people dismiss or even mock automatic mode, but honestly subject, scene, and theme (and or story telling) is far more important than ISO/shutter speed/aperture/etc, yet every photography tutorial or guide is focused on the least important part (i.e. mastery of dry settings/specs/tech).

I'd point people to "toy camera challenge" on YouTube or elsewhere, where photographers are able to take an e.g. 1.4 megapixel Barbie Camera with no settings and produce better photos than you or I.

PS - While I'm saying photography heresy let me also say this: Shooting straight to JPG (instead of RAW) and picking a single color palette for longer periods will help you understand your photographic taste and really force you to capture the scene in front of you rather than creating the final product in post-production. Is it suboptimal? Absolutely. Is learning post-production tooling useful? Sure. But artificial restrictions often breed creativity, and post-production can become a crutch.
A rumor I heard somewhere - MS supposedly built x86 emulation for ARM a few years back, and created a demo on top of some vendor's ARM servers for transparent Azure x86 on ARM (in addition to regular ARM VM SKUs of course).
But rather than move forward with this as a public offering on Azure, they used it to put the squeeze on Intel/AMD, and they got rock-bottom price on hardware in return for holding-off on ARM adoption.

Sounds like someone may have gotten a massive bonus that year, but may have significantly delayed any ARM efforts on Azure...
I think you're probably missing a number of the important details. In the Penrose/Hammerof model, they're explicitly saying that humans are observed to generate problem solutions that could not have been generated by a purely classical computing process, therefore, the brain must exploit some specific quantum phenomenon.

When you talk about QM a a theory of how the world operates, there are wide ranges of QM. Everything from predicting the structure and energy states of a molecule, to how P/N junctions work, to quantum computers. Now, for the first one (molecules), the vast majority of QM is just giving ways to compute the electron density and internuclear distances using some fairly straightforward and noncontroversial approaches.

For the other ones (P/N junctions, QC computers, etc), those involve exploiting very specific and surprising aspects of quantum theory: one of quantum tunnelling, quantum coherence, or quantum entanglement (ordered from least counterintuitive to most). We have some evidence already that there are some biological processes that exploit tunnelling and coherence, but none that demonstrate entanglement.

Personally, I think most people think the alternative to Penrose- the brain does not compute non-computable functions, and does not exploit or need to exploit any quantum phenomena (expect perhaps tunnelling) to achieve its goals.

Now, if we were to have hard evidence supporting the idea that brains use entanglement to solve problems: well, that would be pretty amazing and would upend large parts of modern biology adn technology research.