skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Webrtc websockets implementations (and spec!) are corrupted too. They require TLS even for localhost. But at least you can still use self-signed certs so it's not as bad as HTTP/3.

It's kind of crazy to think that smartphones' inability to hold open a TCP connection (and thus the desire for UDP) are managing to ruin the entire (non-commercial) web.
>- price points are still a problem

Really? An Echo Dot is $25 on Amazon right now. Which, if you use it at all, is pretty reasonable. (To be sure, if I were using it for music to any degree, I'd probably get a model with better speakers.)

For music, I have an old phone connected to a stereo receiver. So it has voice control although I mostly pick a playlist or album manually.
Does this formula applied to fortified wines e.g. Porto?
We use standard hardware, with some special attention paid to making sure we maximally leverage AVX2/AVX512. The computation is naively parallel and very simple, so better hardware doesn't seem terribly likely to decrease costs. If anything would work, our bet is on GPU's, which seem to offer better memory bandwidth and are widely commercially available.

FHE for ML is indeed not super practical yet. There are some recent works that get quite close: CryptGPU (https://arxiv.org/pdf/2104.10949.pdf) and Piranha (https://www.usenix.org/system/files/sec22-watson.pdf) both leverage GPU's for private ML (and even some MPC!).
I wonder if all these negative impacts of COVID-19 could also have been associated to seasonal flus in the past, had they been under the same level of scrutiny.
I agree with this. I think there are two sides of EA - the futurist utilitarian viewpoint and the rational QALY/$ viewpoint. I'm a believer of the latter, but do worry because this is boring (malaria nets and deworming) the former is the only one people hear of or see even if it's a minority group.
I was marveling at my new Garmin watch yesterday that has topographical street maps for the entire world in only eight gigabytes.

A watch having more than enough space for that is amazing in itself but really that's quite the compression for a seriously intense dataset.

Technically everyone could have that already pre-installed on their PC or phone these days, the problem of course that is a commercial dataset buut openstreetmap solves that part.
> I don't entirely understand Apple's approach here.

They've just decided they don't want to be in the business of supporting Linux on Apple hardware.

Short of fully supporting Linux, the "Whoops! Have fun!" part would happen somewhere, no matter where the line was drawn.

Of course they could do more. But you and I shouldn't really expect to be able to tell Apple how to spend their money.
What do you think about the Forth-as-language vs. Forth-as-OS distinction?
You mention code generation as a problem, but it is actually a solution as well for this particular problem, I have really grown on mapstruct, where you create an interface declaratively specifying what field maps to what, and it will generate at compile time fast, efficient, correct code you might write by hand.
For real?! I don’t find it trustworthy enough to let it make decisions with how I spend my money, but for the little things, it’s great.
FTX was deliberately set up to enable this by insiders and to make it hard to immediately attribute to any single actor. From the bankruptcy filing by the CEO brought in when SBF was moved out, their practices included “the use of an unsecured group email account as the root user to access confidential private keys and critically sensitive data for the FTX Group companies around the world,”
Utilitarianism is fine with doing bad to some for the betterment of all. EA is re-skinned utilitarianism. It's really as simple as that and suffers no reduction to see that -- talking about how its not good to do harm to others is a noble point that ignores that utilitarianism is fine with harm done to some (versus only seeking Pareto-improving outcomes).
The only way to get rich with a clean conscience is to use your money to buy social status at cool charities (like the MIT media lab) while keeping most of it for yourself. There's no way that starving kids in Africa can offer the kind of status that semicharitable PR foundations do. For one thing, they can't write articles like this
> But I think the OS should try to reserve more space for the swap file before it starts returning ENOMEM to the "commit memory" system calls like Windows seems to be doing (judging from the blog post)...

One could just as easily argue similarly with respect to Unix and needing to loop over write watching for EINTR et al.
I just scrolled through the man page at a speed of 15 pages per second. Aside from that, curl is an extremely important and impressive piece of software that I use daily.
The short answer is that you can't.

The longer answer is that maintaining your current standard of living is not something you can do. You would need to make some sacrifices to get off the ground (roughly 18 months), even if you have a windfall of cash to take the time off you'd be sacrificing that windfall.

I have kids/wife/mortgages (plural), have started three companies, and worked in FAANG companies. I've never had a stellar exit but made some sustainable businesses. The cycle is basically feast and famine; 5 years at corporate job building up reserves and getting ideas, then 5 years of cutting back and getting a company off the ground. My wife doesn't really like the lean times, but she knows that is who I am (and dreams of big exits)
I developed a faster Ruby interpreter
Offering to help a stranger that seems to be in need.
It's not a successor. Agree on the doomed part.
Defining what is really good and bad is a very hard thing to do, and has been the subject of philosophical debate for millennia. It gets really hard when we try to construct a reasonable logical foundation for ethics, but then we always check it by comparing it to the intuitive ethics in our evolved/cultured meat brains. Of course, the intuitive ethics always "wins" and we conclude that the problem must not be there, but any conflicts must be problems with the ethical framework!

So you can conclude that you should just do whatever makes you feel good and all ethics are nonsense as you seem to prefer, but I'm not sure that you've really refuted the basic premise that you should try to maximize the amount of good you can accomplish.
Anyone who knows how this is different from Sinatra and Roda?

They seem to be the other two "micro frameworks" (with Rails obviously being the primary Ruby framework).
Reminds me of how Firefox removed the ability to set a URL for new tabs (the better to display advertising on them) but justified it by saying "Users can trust and install a third-party extension to enable that functionality."
If the US stops sending endless weapons and money to Ukraine, the war ends. If Ukraine agrees to concede the predominately ethnic Russian areas that Russia has occupied, the war ends. If Russia surrenders said territories to Ukraine, the war ends.

But nobody wants to concede anything. So the war will continue, undoubtedly with plentiful more opportunities to find ourselves in WW3.
The idea that you can excuse your poor behavior by donating to charity to effective altruism is a poor take on the concept.

How you got rich is important, because damages as well contributions must be accounted for.

The notion of 'end justify the mean' probably just means you end up being a docuhebag instead of contributing anything meaningful.
I tried Kotlin, and while I liked it, iterop was still somewhat annoying, Java's lambdas are better, using the Java 8 stream API is ugly, and the code ends up being similar enough that I'd rather use Java and avoid tooling hassles.
You can avoid this issue (which pretty much only ever happens on Linux, mind you) by installing the package directly from their website instead of from your distro's package manager. If you'd like to help improve stability or use try features before they're fully stable, try the beta, dev, or nightly channels.
isn't @NonNull just a syntactic sugar for adding checkNonNull() call as first statement to the function declaration in compile time, or am I mistaken? Just like lombok, it is supposed to generate code that checks null arguments, from what I know.
That's because they're not the same thing and all the press EA has recently received is completely butchering the much more nuanced message.

It's covered briefly here https://www.effectivealtruism.org/faqs-criticism-objections
I mean the authorities had no trouble getting a federal search warrant against me merely because a LEO fabricated a story that a dog alerted on me. They woke up a federal judge, in the middle of the night, within several hours and even convinced the judge to waive normal hours for serving the warrant. Yet they can't quickly get one for SBF?

Definitely some people are more equal than others. And I realize he is in the Bahamas.

----------

re: premise below

There is plenty of non-fabricated probable cause for SBF, pretty much all of below is a false premise.
For someone who claims to read a lot it's odd that he would use a passage from an unrelated source to describe the motivation for EA. Why not just read some of the direct sources and their motivations? The Life You Can Save by Peter Singer is quite short and accessible. Maybe it's easier to attack straw men...

Having read Singer, I'd say that the motivation is to take the sense of "doing good in the world" and apply reason to it. There's a kid drowning in a pond in front of you and there's a kid drowning on the other side of the world. Why do we act differently, Singer asks? From there he goes on to build an ethical case that it's our _obligation_ to give significantly more to charity.

I don't recall Singer ever advocating for earning ever more money, nor certainly doing so at the expense of others. And I'm fairly certain Singer would strongly object to deferring giving to some uncertain future point.

Setting aside this article, where's all the hate for giving to charity coming from? Guilty consciences? Shouldn't we as a society celebrate and encourage giving? It seems the alternative more often then not is to accumulate.
Web 3.0 =/= Web3

please do not introduce anymore confusion by misnaming these concepts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web
Bartleby
The previous point is very reasonable, and I think your response is overly flippant and confrontational.

I've had coworkers hounded by managers from unrelated teams because my coworker wasn't working fast enough on a feature that was important to their team. They made assumptions about how many different tasks my coworker might have had assigned to them.

They were juggling like 3 or 4 fairly important features/fixes for various parts of the organization at the time because our team was (in my opinion) understaffed.

But of course, each of the relevant managers can only see "didn't satisfactorily complete my fix in the expected timeframe", and then perf review comes back and collates that info to "doesn't complete tasks on schedule" without taking a step back and recognizing that this is a failure mode of planning where one engineer was responsible for way too much stuff with no reasonable ability to push back.

At the same time, of course, engineers were getting promotions for doing exactly one thing well, which is as it should be.

There are lots of lessons in here, one of which is very likely "push back on work that causes you to overburden yourself", but I'd argue another important lesson is that you just don't see what others are working on. I'd be surprised if there were more than one or two people in your org who knew every task you've completed in the last 30 days, and to me it seems unreasonable to expect that you can make that assessment of more than 5ish people in your immediate radius.

But while we're throwing ad hominems for the fun of it; I'd rather have a bunch of "bloaters" on my team than the one person who is convinced that they are one of the golden few producing value, and everyone else is a lazy freeloader. I've worked with that type of person before and it's awful. It is rarely the case that they are _actually_ producing an 2-3x the value of other engineers, it's much more likely that they're just reducing morale and causing internal conflict while building some small piece of the pie and assuming that's the majority of the work.

Like someone who builds a button that says "delete my account" and says "I built the delete account feature" while not recognizing that there are a ton of people on the database teams that made the feature possible without performance hiccups or leaving dangling foreign keys.
I use it on a mac. The only time I restart the browser are to install a browser update (I'm no the Beta channel) or when my laptop restarts. Crashes are very rare for me.
> You signed up for a bunch of responsibilities. You are always going to be your kids parent. You are only going to have this one opportunity to get this marriage and this family right.

I think this is a bit of a depressing take. Even committed parents and spouses take alone time for themselves and have hobbies. Just treat your side project as your hobby and you can still have a healthy family.

Also, think about how much time the average person wastes day-to-day. Total up all the time watching television, reading articles, browsing online. Outsource your chores and improve the efficiency of your day job (e.g., work remotely to eliminate a commute) and you'll have plenty of time left over for a side project.

You might say — how can a side project be successful on 5 hours a day in the early morning? — but consider that someone pursuing a startup for 10 hours a day isn't going to have a significantly higher probability of success relative to other factors that make a larger difference (ability to interact well with other people, product-market fit, etc.) Sure, you might reduce your probability of success a bit, but you are essentially buying a lottery ticket anyway when you decide to start your own company, so would it really bother you much if your already small odds of success are 60% of what they would have been if you committed to the startup full-time?
Fair, but there's lots of other things that get missed when trying to give short feedback.

I have a degree from a prestigious university and I've built relationships in the area I'm now trying to do business. I joined a golf club and a yacht club, I made friends with a former CEO of an NYSE listed company, I watched all the start-up school curriculum videos, I've been repeatedly rejected by YC (though we got an interview one time) which means I think through what we're doing every 6 months. I made friends with a journalist.

There are a lot of things I've done that wouldn't be available to someone with low social or financial capital.
I'll always take another.
300k-600k is basically all leetcode

on the marketing topic yeah, but for SWE you dont need a good school/social skills/a ton of experience. you just need raw algorithmic skills
there is a subset of web3 that is a pretty unique evolution of web 2.0 which is great for developers and product marketing

specifically it comes to the stack

web 3 application: free static frontend website, 3 variables in a smart contract deployed for 50 cents, a funnel consisting of a single call to action which is a payment, where the profit is immediately fungible and not blocked anywhere

this is applying web 2.0 principles but simplifying them to such convenient extremes that its pretty obvious why developers keep choosing it and bringing their whole communities over there

have you seen a backend interview stack for any web 2.0 organization. have you seen the funnels for any web 2.0 organization, any SaaS product? have you seen what accepting payment is like, and actually having money you can use elsewhere? its all so much more complicated for less upside
Common quote, doesn't have much to do with reality. Last 3 bottoms (2009, 2018, 2020) were manufactured because of regulatory changes.
The folks who work for the federal government really do fret over how their work is perceived by the public. It's definitely on their minds, for good reason. In the absence of information, one tends to assume the worst. If we want to move forward as a society, some baseline level of trust must be established. This is one way to effect that change, through constructive communication.
And you probably are going to hit a wall, because human desires expand. Your program does X? That was great, when you wrote it. But now, can you make it do Y? How about Z? Can you integrate it with system W? What do you mean, your little language doesn't support that?

While they are arguably "little languages", shells don't have this problem, because they allow you to invoke any program written in any language, which is an infinite-sized escape hatch for this issue. SQL kind of doesn't have this problem, because it has stored procedures (and also because people don't usually expect general computation from SQL). So SQL and shells are both "little" in some sense, but very much not little in others. Any other small language must also have some similar escape hatch, or it will trap you.

Digression: Reading the comments, SQL and shells keep coming up as the examples of "little languages". But SQL, for all its power, is not "the future". It's going to be part of the future, but it's sure not going to replace everything else. Neither are shells. And I don't see many other examples coming up. This doesn't sell me on the article's claim.
Emacs with vim emulation. A blessed combo
I agree with a lot of the sentiment of your comment, particularly about introspecting and understanding what your reason for doing a startup is. I think that's very good advice.

However I don't feel that "being a solid professional making a solid wage, and be a good parent and partner" amounts to "sit around and do nothing, give up on your goals." I feel like the advice I gave is "wait until the time is right", which is different from fatalist nothing-doing!
I... don't think it will. There's a pretty big difference between writing a driver for a GPU and actually emulating that GPU, much less with reasonable performance.

And I do think that's what you'd have to do, because unlike on Intel, macOS on Apple Silicon does not support software rendering.
> Most people only use the voice assistants for a few simple tasks, which is perfect for an open source project like mycroft.

I'll certainly grant that... but the price point where Mycroft is, is certainly not near what I'd pay for doing those few simple tasks.

Apple is at the upper end of what I'd spend for such a device (the HomePod mini is $99) - and that's because I'm fairly invested into the Apple ecosystem and thus it can make use of the iTunes library, home automation, calendar items, etc...

If I wasn't invested in Apple, then none of the home assistants other than Amazon (because of the price point for the echo) would be particularly interesting.

I've got a echo show - because its a very nice simple clock/weather interface (that's got Alexa behind it) too (I really liked the Ambient 7 day weather clock when it was available). I've got an echo wall clock that is paired with the echo in the kitchen - it makes timers nicely visible (a sibling of mine has an echo wall clock because its an analog dial that doesn't have any sound with it).

The problems with Alexa of suggesting by the way ("Alexa, stop by the way" - give it a try and yes, it is routineable) are tolerable for how much I'm paying for them and the functionality that I use it for.
Thinking about the counterfactual for a bit: if EAs weren't EAs, who would they be?

* Finance professionals who gave less to charity?

* altruistic folks who gave to poorly validated charities?

* Changemakers who decided instead to go for the money and thereby reify the social structures of their lives?

* Regular people who thought less hard about ethics, e.g. giving vegetarianism or veganism a go?

* Regular people who never considered becoming megalomaniac crypto scammers?

And whether EA is good or bad as a whole depends on the characteristics and composition of this counterfactual group. IMO, that's pretty hard to get a good grip on.
In almost any religion, there are true believers and cynical exploiters. An important question to ask is, who are the "leaders" (formally or informally) of the movement? There's no doubt that thousands of "EA" people really do donate sacrificially for the greater good. But if the movement directing those donations is run by operators or delusive narcissists, that makes the movement worse.

(It says nothing about the believers sacrificing for the greater good; that's a moral good in and of itself).
Why would it be wrong to get rich without doing things which you should be ashamed of later, and helping people that need it?

I think it's normal charity that should be considered conscience laundering. You give money to the Red Cross and feel good about yourself, and ignore the fact that the money is embezzled or squandered without helping anyone. It's people that don't care where the charity money goes or the long term consequences of it when it does at least go to someone in need that should be criticized.
A lot of charity is performative. I have been forced to attend absolutely disgusting gala events where rich people sell one another discounted items, donated as tax deductions via the companies they run, and give speeches about how important it is to help the poor. Beyond the base gluttony, the feeling of being a "good person" is the point of all of it, and to absolve themselves of the fact that much of the wealth there is built on the backs of working people via usury, swindle and vice. Infuriating.

This is why Jesus said:

> Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
Binary options are only thought to be bad because they traditionally have been run by scammers like bucket shops. The binary part is a distraction - it's just because they were easier to describe to the victims.

As a type of investment though, there's nothing wrong with it - if risk-mitigation is what you need.

If the binary nature was a problem they could easily structure these to be non-binary, such as bet on a game and don't return 1/0 but the actual game score 21/15.
Can Cobalt be driven by Puppeteer, Playwright or Selenium?
> You could try [T, T-1], but that's a bit clunky and it won't work if T is a decimal number.

Huh? What do they mean by "decimal number"?
Agree that detecting it might be hard and that it might actually as is be beneficial, but that said, there huge difference in my opinion between knowingly breaking promises based on a heuristic and having no memory of past promises and simply basing current tactics on the present. Imagine if real world literally had no memory of the past or a single actor within it, it would lose out to opposing players as soon as they realized it had no memory, you could make any promise you wanted and it would literally forget it. Might be wrong though, just know it’s major issue with current chat bots and an easy tactic to tell if you’re chatting with a bot or not.