skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Agreed.

Aside from the processor, there really isn't anything particularly compelling to me about the hardware. Apple's forte is how they integrate the whole hardware package with good software. The build quality is better than most but not especially great. That's not really saying much when you consider the low quality of so many others out there. The keyboards are terrible and I had serious reliability issues with the last couple Macs I used. The battery life probably comes as much from the OS as it does from the hardware. Support is generally acceptable if you pay for AppleCare, although you can sometimes end up waiting a couple weeks for certain repairs.

The Asahi team is doing great work, but I can't help but feel like Linux will always be a second class citizen on Apple hardware. I understand it still appeals to some people. It's not for me, though.

I'm using a ThinkPad now. It's ok. It's well supported in Linux and Lenovo still provides good support. I think the plan I paid for includes next day repairs. I like that it actually has a variety of ports unlike some of the others that cheap out. It's more repairable than most laptops out there. I will probably get a Framework next time or maybe System76. If I was into MacOS, I'd get a MacBook without a doubt, but I just don't like the OS very much anymore.
I’m doing this now, built our first company completely on the side maintaining another job.

Only quit once was making significantly more ($20k/mo) than my other job

Wife, mortgage, and newborn
Not sure what the end-game is in this line of thinking but the consistent narratives against both charitable giving or government intervention to produce institutions of social assistance can not be good for the unfortunate and marginalized.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0#Web_2.0

>The term "Web 2.0" was coined by Darcy DiNucci, an information architecture consultant, in her January 1999 article "Fragmented Future": [...]

Then Web 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, 9.0, 10.0, and 11.0 immediately followed in a quick succession over a few short years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_3.0

My web goes to 11, so I stopped paying attention after that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMSV4OteqBE

Web 3.0 sounds antique!
The irony of this post criticizing DeFi and blockchain in the wake of FTX is that those decentralized applications are working just fine in this downturn. Aave and Uniswap aren’t failing, they are thriving.
Ever? Even worse than the /r/jailbait and others from the past?
How common of a use case do you think this is?
How common do you think it needs to be for Amazon to invest in special logistics for this pattern (I.e. for it to be a net positive)?
If that happens, there would be language level nullability types that may supersede Optional if they indeed end up solving a strictly more general problem. It's not unheard of to have more general solutions supersede older, more specific ones. For example, the newly added pattern-matching features largely obviate the need for visitors, which are a pretty common pattern in libraries; or virtual threads, which largely obviate the need for many asynchronous APIs (and there are opposite examples, such as j.u.c locks, which followed the language's locks). That's the nature of evolution: sometimes there are surviving vestiges of the past.
I don't know to what extent "mainstream" EA can rest on Singer's plaudits: I got a decent amount of pushback from EAs (or EA-sympathetic people) on this site just last week for pointing out that they've diverged significantly from Singer's original altruistic positions.

It seems a little hypocritical to use him as ethical cover without adhering more closely to his specific ethical proscriptions (which don't, to my knowledge, include Internet Rationalist stuff like AGI and colonizing the galaxy).
I don't know what that means since all ethics must account for consequences of their choices.

The idea of doing bad to do some good seems to be a theoretical concept, but not likely to hold up in reality.
Drink Madeira! It cuts the space down considerably.

https://enofylzwineblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Madei...
also Trillium and Zettlr
Zendesk goes private in $10B deal
If you reject appeals to intuition there is really nothing to base your argument for ethics on since at their core they all rely on one. Made that college ethics class I took a bit unsatisfying.
Slickedit. Great product, has vi and emacs editing modes.

https://www.slickedit.com/
EA is not the same as Utilitarianism. This is the butchered message without nuance that people are reading in relatively shallow posts like the one we're commenting about.

https://www.effectivealtruism.org/faqs-criticism-objections has a small paragraph on the differences. Having been involved with EA since 2017 in my own small way I can absolutely say with confidence it is not the same. Ends do not justify the means. It is simply meant to be a guiding philosophy to how you donate; treat all lives equally and donate focusing on lives saved per dollar. This should be backed by research proving it's effectiveness and can be unintuitive. There is a vocal longtermist view point that lives in the future should be valued the same resulting in some pretty weird ideas but I ignore most of that.
> So an older browser that doesn't support HSTS is good, because it means you can browse a page even when your browser has valid reason to believe a downgrade attack could be occurring?

Well I mean false positives are bad because they are false. That much doesn't require further justification or someone to embrace false negatives instead or whatever. This policy of "treat everyone as stupid and gullible and ditch them if they won't upgrade" makes sense for giant tech companies, but not necessarily for everyone. Some of us have to be able to work with old technology.
> that involved practicing arcane rituals worshiping an ancient deity

Adding this seems to betray your intent. While worship of a deity might be a practice of some cults, not every cult worships a deity. Conversely, not every religion that worships a deity could be a called a cult. You including it makes it the defining factor in your example above, beyond the standard common features present in many communities and organizations of people.
Me neither! How are they paying rent?
From your tone, were you caught up in this? If so my condolences.

I, like many people, don't do crypto as I don't believe in the fundamental economics (no value creation). So we kind of want to see it fail as we would want a MLM business to fail.

But that's really not the same as having been burned. That really really sucks
> I find the amount of data they collect[1] to be borderline creepy.

What in that report is creepy? Surely knowing the percentage of people on 32- vs 64-bit isn't problematic. Maybe add-ons? I'm genuinely curious.
> Crash logs are a different beast.

I was under the impression that Firefox was written in Rust. Doesn't this eliminate crashes? Rust is a safe language after all. There should not be any crash logs with Rust.
The right time to work on a startup is any time when you have identified a real problem to solve through your overall work and personal experience. When something occurs to you that seems clearly obvious as a need, backed up hopefully by some data from potential customers.

The wrong time to work on a startup is when you just have a vague desire to work on a startup but don't have the passion for solving a specific problem but just feel a vague pull towards startups. In that case, you are much better off joining someone else's startup.

You can make long hours work out with family life and having kids, people do it all the time who are not involved with startups but work multiple jobs, lawyers who work long hours, etc.

Long hours per se is not the issue, spending those hours on the right, productive thing is the issue.
Well eventually you don't. It will hurt everybody involved if you have a day job and start something. Either your kids or your relationship until your wife leaves with the kids.

With some luck eventually you work out something at night times if you have the energy.

Skip TV. As soon as the kids are in bed go for it 2-4 hours, then watch a movie with your wife or have sex. Never forget: Happy wife happy life.
If read through nearly all comments but can’t see where you say « why » you want this?

To become a billionaire?
To leave your job that makes you sick?
To have a more exciting job?

I am mid-30s 2kids good, not crazy paying job (think 160-200k$ range TCO) and spend time with kids and travel 1-2x amazing trips a year with them. I decided not to give up that precious time and don’t regret it so far. But what I did is change companies until I could find that dynamic startup vibe with a good salary. I would even take the risk to go to a smaller company slightly less money but with shares/options. Up to you, but answer the « why » truly honest is my advice…
Most startup founders with families use one or more of the following:

* Already be wealthy, or at least well off.

* Be able to live of spouse's income.

* Live off your parents' money.
George Hotz hired to fix Twitter search – he’s got 12 weeks
VSCode with the vscode-neovim extension, which uses the full Neovim that's installed on your machine, unlike VSCodeVim which only emulates Vim. You get the best of both worlds this way, one-click editor extensions with the power of Vim.
Yeah I'm very happy with Firefox desktop no matter the OS. The Android version of Firefox is not nearly as polished or capable at the moment. It's a shame because I really do still use it a ton. It has great potential.
EA isn't limited to utilitarianism. A very substantial amount of people in EA would not consider themselves utilitarians. And of those who do, it's very rare to find a "pure" utilitarian with no deontological bent and thus willing to engage in fraud.

Even if you find a "pure" utilitarian (which is rare), it's considered "naive utilitarianism" to ignore the long-term and broad effects of creating harm, and it's also considered intellectually arrogant to think you know enough about the impacts of your decisions and moral philosophy that you can justify causing definite short-term harm for potential long-term gain against the moral frameworks of just about everyone else.

On the whole, I can't personally think of any one person involved in EA, or widely-read EA literature, that promote or support that type of thinking.
> If I want a function to restore certain registers, wouldn’t it be simpler if I was the one that save them on my memory, call the function, and then override the registers with whatever values the function set?

That's a waste if the callee doesn't use them.
It's worth noting that the title here confuses "web3" with "web 3.0". It means "web3".

Web3 is the crypto nonsense that the article talks about, which has almost nothing to do with the web. Web 3.0 is Tim Berners Lee's vision for a decentralized web:

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/04/web-inventor-tim-berners-lee...

I think it's an important distinction to make. Web 3.0 is noble in its vision and intentions, while web3 has been the crypto industry's attempt to get folks interested in their tech with a buzzword that sounds like it's the next hot thing.
From what I’ve seen, the main complaint from board game enthusiasts about Risk is that the dice rolling is too random (I don’t really agree with this, the whole point of the game is to control your level of risk, there it is right in the name, so if your plan hinges on good rolls it is just a bad plan. But I digress).

I think most people who are really into board games must have a general ability to separate in game behavior from normal behavior.

Actually I think there is a different phenomenon with Risk, for many years it was one of the few board games with any aspect of strategy or conflict that would be played by people who weren’t totally into board games (I mean excluding the super serious games like Chess and friends). So there are some people out there who aren’t really into boardgames generally (some of whom don’t have the requisite ability to detach their ego from a game), but are “into” Risk specifically and can get uncomfortably intense about it.

Catan is pretty good IMO. There’s a general disagreement I think between rules-purists and people who want to play fast-and-loose with the rules. The problem is that technically you always have to exchange cards to trade — so, technically it is allowable to extort people with your soldiers and the robber, but you have to at least set up a sham trade for it which adds some annoying friction; it is more fun if you say “giving cards away for free is fine” and allow an economy of extortion to flourish. And anyway if somebody doesn’t say “I’ll give you a sheep if you go get me a beer” is it really Catan? If you played it with some rules sticklers, give it another try IMO.
I'm sorry, is there a problem with my browser? Did I miss 90% of the "article"? Or is it just an assertion and a quote from a book? Because I see a grand total of 0 arguments for or against the thesis that is being made, just "I think EA is this. Here's a quote by Douglas Adams."
As someone who is not rich (as in I need to keep working to live, though I'm quite comfortable), I don't feel any animosity towards those that are. Am I doing it wrong?

The headline seems to imply that gaining wealth is inherently a slimy thing to do. I just don't buy it. And if those people choose to donate some of that wealth, that seems strictly better than just being wealthy on its own.

Maybe it's just so difficult for people to get ahead these days that they start to focus more on what other people have and become bitter?
1. You're wrong. You have no idea the value I place on both my direct reports and other engineers at my current and previous companies.

2. I should have looked at your comment history before my first response. I really would like to assume good intent. I don't think I'm going to find it.
Yes, apparently there is such an animal: https://aws.amazon.com/energy/solutions/refinery-monitoring-...
Any pointers on how it's simple to start a lifestyle company? I've always been venture backed so breaking into a market for a lifestyle business seems just as hard to me
Pretty cool! I really like how responsive it is. I'd remove the ":p" from the landing page, and an FAQ might be good?

Is there a limit to the number of participants? I can seemingly click 'add' endlessly...
And when there are lots of participants, its very slow to settle on someone. My test with 92 people is still looping through the options a minute after I clicked test.
At a former workplace, someone had a great idea to collect and aggregate the logs of our software from across our test labs. At the time, the idea was a bit novel for a bunch of programmers and testers who shipped and didn't run their own software. The plan was to drive elimination of commonly logged errors through bug fixes or reducing the severity of the messages.

I was a lowly programmer, invited to a meeting of distinguished engineers and senior staff to review some of the findings from the log collections. When NPEs came up, their comment was that 'there should be zero NPEs' and that they would handle them punitively through reports to managers. So, I asked, "What's your recommendation to the developers to prevent the NPEs?". Silence, nothing. Findbugs existed at the time, and I believe JSR303 was in draft. Happy to report they decided to treat it the same as any other error or bug.
But it is true for other leaders in the movement, like Nick Beckstead, who wrote a PhD dissertation that argued that wealthy people in developed countries deserved aid more than poor people in developing countries, because the wealthy were more likely to make a further positive impact.
Market timing both works and is bad advice for the average person by definition (it takes being way better than average to be a successful market timer).

Also you're competing with people who have access to insider information (even though they're "not supposed to"), so it's kind of tilted against the average person; though not impossible to still come out ahead.

It's similar to poker. For the average person playing poker is a -EV game because of rake, but if you're skilled, poker can be very much +EV.
Many of the TradFi HFT firms were in support of FTX's proposal. The people that ran FTX were generally reasonably competent at finance (ex Jane Street), but extremely cavalier about risk with other people's money, and extremely poor at operational management.

This is not a defense of them in any sense, other than to say that they were perfectly capable of being scumbags while also producing a good alternative to CME's futures products.

You can read about all of the people that thought FTX's proposal was good here:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-15/ftx-once-...
>because a lot of democrats are implicated as well

Who are implicated?
Accelerate Customer Review Classification with Sparse Transformers
Language models have a limit on the length of text they can process.
For instance, 512 for BERT and 4096 for models such as Longformer and Big Bird.

However, documents in the real world can be arbitrarily long. For instance, reviews from customers.

Classifying these reviews fast can help a business in engaging with its customers quickly. Fort instance, flagging negative reviews to reduce churn and customer complaints.

The problem?

Language models are usually very large making them slow at inference and difficult to deploy. These models are usually overprecise and over-parameterized. You can drop some of the weight connections in these networks to achieve a small model while maintaining accuracy. This is known as sparsification. Furthermore, you can reduce the precision of the floating points in the network to reduce its size further.

In my latest article, I explore how to perform text classification on long documents using sparse Hugging Face Transformers. I illustrate that it’s possible to use a 90% sparse transformer model— meaning that 90 percent of the model's weights are removed, and the rest of the parameters quantized— and still achieve accuracy similar to a dense model.

Using a sparse transformer achieves a 4.8X increase in performance over the dense baseline. It also results in a smaller model which is easy to deploy on commodity CPUs, hence no expensive accelerator hardware is required.

Try it yourself https://neuralmagic.com/blog/accelerate-customer-review-clas...
VSCode-Neovim: Use embedded Neovim in VSCode without emulation
[This has been moved to a top-level comment.]
If you're after good publicity, then EA is a spectacularly bad approach.

If you want to turn money into publicity, then giving locally to high profile causes is optimal. EA discourages both in favor of more global, more impactful causes.
This is a really interesting question. I feel like I see it with airlines all the time. The question that comes eventually though is do people notice and does a culture of penny-pinching trickle down into an inferior product that makes people resent the high price enough that sometimes they won't pay it.
What should Web 3.0 be?
> This is possible because, unlike on Linux where function names are global, on Windows function names are scoped to the DLL

This is also possible on Linux with linker scripts AFAIK.
> work 80 hour weeks

Hasn't really been my experience. There can be the odd extra evenings or even weekends, but nothing drastic.

The big difference in hours is probably how effective those 40 hours a week need to be compared to a big company.
I didn't say 0 faith, I just said I wasn't sure how much. :p

SpaceX is an interesting result, but it is starting to look more like a fluke than what we'd expect from him. Perhaps rocket scientists "get him" and understand the stakes better, after all, if you screw up a rocket you could die in the aftermath.

Tesla is certainly similar stakes -- except one mistake can kill every passenger on the road instead of your fellow employees. Twitter is basically 0-stakes, and is unlikely to take itself that seriously. If they screw up, maybe a bad government won't get overthrown somewhere, or trolls will take over the internet. But mostly, people will survive -- or rather, the outcomes are far more abstract.

He doesn't seem like a good fit for this kind of environment.
> You and I shouldn't really expect to be able to tell Apple how to spend their money.

I don't, I just think Apple chose to draw the line in a perplexing location. I'd love to know what they were thinking.
A lot of what you are saying is theoretical but doesn't hold up in the actual work place (at least in the US).

1. In the US at least we know a majority of the workers are hourly. (https://www.forbes.com/sites/johncaplan/2021/03/12/americas-...) So I would absolutely argue those people are paid for their time. I understand the scenario you laid out, but in a big corporation I do not think they would look at it like you are. They would simple look at who is costing the most. Both are costing 100k/yr so compare their output. Anytime their are massive layoffs, lots of important people are let go. This is because often times the people doing the firing, do not know the employees. They are simply lines on a spreadsheet to them. So in your situation above after a mass firing often times the candidate fresh out of school will be the one left.

2. I personally completely agree with you here. From my experience there is absolutely a burn out point. However major corporations do not see it this way at all. They absolutely believe throwing hours at problems brings about solutions. It doesn't matter to them if its making existing employees work 4 extra hours a day or hiring a new employee. It matters which is cheaper in the end. If the position is salaried its cheaper to have existing employees work more. Look at what musk is asking at twitter. If it is hourly, often times its easier to part ways with the burned out workers and hiring new ones. Look at amazons turn over rates.

3. I agree that Twitter gets to decide the expected compensation for work. But musk now owns twitter. He gets to decided what twitter does and doesn't expect from its employees. He made it clear he is very unhappy with how the arrangement was, and what he expects in the future.

4. I would disagree with you here. An employee can steal from a company many ways. For example, an employee could steal the source code from some twitter service that is considered a company secret. In this case, Twitter is paying an employee x amount for y work. Musk has decided what y work is. If an employee decides to not fulfill y work, and still take there whole pay, how is that not a form of stealing? If they're hourly employees they call it timesheet fraud. The idea that an employee can only steal if the are paid more than they bring in is pretty interesting but I think we would be hard pressed to find a single major corporation that views it that way. I think close to 100% of them would go after an employee spending 50% of their time working on non work related tasks.

A vast majority of the assumptions are based on them being the norm in corporate America which twitter is apart of.
It's interesting and I think significant that people are uncomfortable with positive values, such as honesty, doing good for others, responsibility to others, right (not wrong), etc. We shoot them down, similar to how people instinctively cut off a conversation going in an uncomfortable direction, often without even realizing it.

I can't attribute that the parent - I don't know the individual - but I expected a chorus of such responses. I feel like I can see them squirming in their seats ...

But I feel it too. There's societal pressure against doing good. It's often more socially comfortable to throw a cigarette butt on the ground than to pick one up and discard it. That's bizarre, it's perverse incentives, and we can and should change it.