skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I've been trying out various models for summarization and I have to say, on first glance, this davinci-003 doesn't impress compared to davinci-002 or facebook/bart-large-cnn. If you throw in "summarize the following text:" and copy in the contents of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_News you get the following (temperature 0.0 max tokens 100)[0]:

davinci-003

Hacker News is a social news website focusing on computer science and entrepreneurship, run by Y Combinator. It was created by Paul Graham in 2007 and is moderated by Daniel Gackle. It is intended to recreate a community similar to the early days of Reddit, but with a karma system that requires users to accumulate 501 points before they can downvote content. It also has automated flame and spam detectors and active human moderation, as well as a "voting rings" detector. It

davinci-002

Hacker News is a social news website focusing on computer science and entrepreneurship. It is run by the investment fund and startup incubator Y Combinator. The site was created by Paul Graham in February 2007. Initially called Startup News or occasionally News.YC., it became known by its current name on August 14, 2007.

facebook/bart-large-cnn

Hacker News is a social news website focusing on computer science and entrepreneurship. It is run by the investment fund and startup incubator Y Combinator. In general, content that can be submitted is defined as anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity. The site has a proactive attitude in moderating content, including automated flame and spam detectors and active human moderation.

Curious if anyone knows any good alternatives or tricks to improve the summaries? For now I'm using the bart one as it has the advantage of being downloadable from huggingface so you can run it yourself [1].

[0]: https://beta.openai.com/playground?model=text-davinci-003

[1]: https://huggingface.co/facebook/bart-large-cnn
Musk teases details of Twitter suppression of Post’s Hunter Biden scoop
I love the article, and the experiment. He is clearly way ahead at 17 than I am at > 40, which amazes me. I have had a lot of bad experience with friends, so that has hampered me since and put me off and made me weary of having friends. I also don't do friend things well - I don't find the energy to reply to messages and emails. I do like "going out for a drink / coffee" type things, as well as doing something together, like going to he gym. I might try this out though, as it sounds good.
Will you adopt the singer interfaces? That's what Meltano does, and it's chefs kiss.
They were just making a housing change at the government's demand.
> You quickly start getting compile errors if your method bodies are deemed too complex ("The compiler is unable to type-check this expression in reasonable time; try breaking up the expression into distinct sub-expressions").

I had no idea that was a thing! I'm honestly confused on why it would need you to do that manually. I'd think that splitting things into separate variables and then merging them together would be essentially identical to just inlining as long as you don't mutate anything or change scopes. Does the Swift compiler not optimize expressions to remove locals when they're unchanged since they were declared?
> If you don't want it to rely on it insert a check into the program and tell it what to do if the addition overflows. It's not hard.

Given that even experts routinely fail to write C code that doesn't have UB, available evidence is that it's practically impossible.
I currently work at an organization that has a lot of very flaky applications that are spread across a handful (5, 10, 20) servers using zookeeper, ignite and a few other frameworks that attempt to provide "clustering".

It all ads a lot of overhead and isn't particularly reliable - frankly, I think it would make mor sense to run it on a mainframe, and have simple application code because the fault tolerance is on the hardware/OS layer.

If you are a big tech company, then the massive scale means the cost advantage of x86 is worth dealing with node failures and it's not like any single mainframe for handle it, but for a lot of internal applications that are too big for any single x86 machine, but don't require thousands of nodes, I can totally see where it makes sense.
Quest does offer it, don't know if you'll need a doctor's order or not because that's not an issue for me - I can order it myself or have my wife (also a physician) order it. You want a nucleocapsid antibody test to find out if you've had the disease - the spike antibody test will tell you whether or not your vaccine "took".
Selling a printer that keeps on printing doesn't sustain sales.
Oh... boring
https://archive.today/W7cbQ

Edit: What a letdown, TFA is devoid of content beyond the headline. Here is the full article text:

> Snap Inc. Chief Executive Officer Evan Spiegel told employees that he expects them to be in the social media company’s offices in person 80% of the time starting in February.

> “I believe that spending more time together in person will help us to achieve our full potential,” he wrote, according to a memo reviewed by Bloomberg. That means four or more days per week in the office, he said -- with some flexibility allowed for work-related tasks such as client meetings to count as in-office time. “What each of us may sacrifice in terms of our individual convenience, I believe we will reap in terms of our collective success.”

Stupid nothing burger headlines.
Is this the way Microsoft and LinkedIn are going to version their public Web APIs in the future? I know Microsoft has a team that helps different groups unify the way they develop services, but wonder if that teams works with GitHub as well.
A constellation for SMS-like service need not be as large as a constellation designed for general purpose internet or telephony. The former just requires one (or a small number) of satellites in a Sun-synchronous orbit while the latter may require a large number of satellites in a variety of inclination and "orbital planes".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun-synchronous_orbit
As a kid I remember ordering free MSP430 samples from TI (in DIP format)

SOIC would have been completely inaccessible for me as I mostly relied on breadboards and a radio shack soldering iron with a half-corroded tip that would probably be better suited for plumbing than placing SOICs
Strong disagree - defense in depth is a thing.

I once had my phone, which I had turned off, loudly ring during a moment of silence I was attending. It was extremely embarrassing, and until I replaced that phone whenever I was in a similar situation where it was critical to be quiet, I removed the battery. It wasn't that I didn't trust the phone or it's software, but mistakes and accidents happen, and for some critical situations it's better to be safe than sorry.

Same thing applies to phones with hardware switches.
They have a bland palate because they grew up eating bland food.

Either that or they think that food that tastes good is somehow bad/sinful or makes them feel out of control. Orthorexia is an example of this.
Hah! This reminds me of an old adage when teaching people how to use the mouse. Don't ever mention the right mouse button until the absolute last moment, if ever. Because from the second you mention it, every time you say, "OK, now click the [window, button, menu, etc.]" they will instantly ask, "Right or left button?".

Every. Single. Time.
primates aren't the only placental mammals though
No, it was on a local harddrive.
> Then the phone, then TV…

doesn’t the FCC heavily limit broadcast television and radio who and what behaviors are tolerated? like very heavily, no?

and aren’t there limitations on what you can and can’t do with a telephone?
Capability Based Security[2] is what IBM and other Mainframe systems offer. When you have a job, in the setup, you specify exactly what resources and runtimes are to be made available, which virtual disks, etc. The code running in that constrained environment can't affect anything else. This is, effectively capability based security. It's the thing that didn't get built into Multics in time, and Unix made fun of ignoring.

It's the same thing that Linus thought wasn't important at all, ignoring the advice of his teacher, Andrew Tannenbaum who was trying to teach him about microkernels, and why they were better[3].

In the PC world, we don't even have ECC memory in most desktops, etc. That's why Rowhammer[1] and all the other things like it work, because it's substandard RAM that we've grown to accept in the name of cost savings.

We keep finding Ersatz versions of Capabilities, first in Virtualization such as VMware, then in Docker and containers, and now in WASM/WASI. We'll eventually learn the lesson, likely in 5-10 years now. If we can keep WASM from getting corrupted, it might make it.

Sure, mainframes aren't cost competitive, because the cost of computing is no where near as important as the business it makes possible.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Row_hammer

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capability-based_security

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanenbaum%E2%80%93Torvalds_deb...
At the CPU level, division by zero can behave in a number of ways. It can trap and raise an exception. It can silently return 0 or leave a register unchanged. It might hang and crash the whole system. The C language standard acknowledges that different CPUs may behave differently, and chose to categorize division-by-zero under "undefined behavior", not "implementation-defined behavior" or "must trap".

I wrote:

> Integer division is a slow operation, and under the rules of C, it has no side effects.

This statement is correct because if the divisor is not zero, then division truly has no side effects and can be reordered anywhere, otherwise if the divisor is zero, the C standard says it's undefined behavior so this case is irrelevant and can be disregarded, so we can assume that division always has no side effects. It doesn't matter if the underlying CPU has a side effect for div-zero or not; the C standard permits the compiler to completely ignore this case.
There's really nothing stopping a UA from doing this, and in bygone eras "document trees" used to be part of browser UIs.

Gemini clients still keep that dream alive, although there's plenty of disagreement as to exactly how it should function: https://gitlab.com/gemini-specification/gemini-text/-/issues...
Wait, they are 17?

Oh god.
Dont worry - they're just marked up
I get it, it sucks, and it feels like you could have made better decisions. Hindsight is awesome that way. Don't beat yourself up over it; at least you were smart enough to make it a small percentage!
Normally it would be several months of work, but if it was a top level company directive (e.g. from the CEO) it would probably take 3-4 weeks at minimum. Note that protests have been going on sporadically for this entire year.

See this article about a protest from Peking university from May 2022: https://apnews.com/article/covid-health-shanghai-china-cbcac...

and Shanghai in April 2022: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/shanghai-videos-residents...

And in Henan in June 2022: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-61793149
Those "three books" help apps were so good. It is infuriating nowadays to be forwarded to some unsearchable web mess somewhere that might or might not exist.
The parent comment implied that a particular political faction engages in silencing and perhaps its extremer form: cancellations. The reaction to the statement is to soft-silence that remark.

This means it hit a nerve, presumably for the exact demographic mentioned, whom then proceeded with (mild) censorship. That's perfect irony.

Just like it's irony when Singapore authorities banned any newspapers stating that the authorities are authoritarian. That's irony by its very definition.

I'm just saying it's irony. I don't care if one agrees with the statement or not, or what is allowed/popular to say on HN. I'm well aware this is a California forum. I now expect downvotes to confirm that it is.
> Which isn't something anyone actually wants when reaching for C/C++.

Disagree. I think a lot of people want some kind of "cross-platform assembler" (i.e. they want e.g. null deref to trap on architectures where it traps, and silently succeed on architectures where it succeeds), and get told C is this, which it very much isn't.
CDC – Week 46 – U.S. Influenza Surveillance Report
Layoffs Have Gutted Twitter’s Child Safety Team
Arrest made in gruesome 1983 murders of 2 Toronto women
What is given to others is out of your control. What is put on line is given to others. We willingly use and fund companies that collect data. Some might argue the wisdom of this. Most obviously don’t care.
Learning "delayed gratification" is actually learning to appreciate dreams.

The dream of the cake vs the actual cake.

It's a really freaky shift of consciousness when you think about it. A whole culture trained to prefer dreamcakes over realcakes. To prefer dreams over reality.
depends on how you define "version" here. seems that github took "version changes when backwards compatibility is broken" version which can mean that you can deploy 20 new features but if those are new then "version" does not change.

that would be my guess
> If you decide to invest $100,000 into the stock market because you agree with my reasoning in this post, then it would make a lot more sense to invest $10,000 a month over the next ten months than invest all of the $100,000 this month.

Depending on the equity, you are essentially sampling from a skewnorm & summing over 10 variates. eg. if you invest in the broad market, ^GSPC (your s&p 500) has a skew of +0.4 and a variance of 2.8, so your five number summary works out to

summary(mapply(function(x){sum(rsn(10, dp = cp2dp(c(0,1.67,0.4), "SN"))[1:10])},1:10000))

[-18.3, -3.7, -0.2,3.4,18.8]. While the median scenario is net neutral, you do end up underpaying 3-4 times if you fall below the first quartile.

otoh, if you are feeling frisky and want to dump 100k into robinhood over the next 10 months, $hood has a skew of -0.88 & a variance of 26.3, so 10k realizations of this scenario -

summary(res<-mapply(function(x){sum(rsn(10, dp = cp2dp(c(0,5.1,-0.88), "SN"))[1:10])},1:10000))

yields [-70.8, -10.6, 0.7,11.4,47.5] - much more interesting set of circumstances!

I guess he's betting on prices generally headed down over the next 10 months, so he significantly underpays if things go per plan.
This is the work of Jeri Ellsworth who's a fairly well known experimenter, tinkerer and inventor in hacker circles:

https://www.youtube.com/@jeriellsworth/videos

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZ9a78USRIk (skip to 2:30)
I feel like this stokes imagination and/or fear by adding more confusion than clarification… am I alone?

It’s unclear that illegal numbers exist outside of intent to communicate the illegal idea. Otherwise all irrationals including pi and e are illegal. And it’s probably possible to view/interpret any data you have in some way that happens to coincide with an illegal number. If anyone was going to have legal trouble for coincidental unintentional hashes, then everyone has a problem, which is exactly why it’s unlikely to go there, it’s clearly absurd.

> Decoded into ASCII, that spells I hate the queen

This is an example of what I mean - while this hash is theoretically possible, note that hashes are not typically ever displayed as ASCII, so why ASCII? That was a narrative choice in this article. Hashes are almost unanimously displayed as hex, or base64, which have no spaces for good reasons. Side note, it’s extremely rare for a hash to ever make sense when interpreted as ASCII due to needing zero entropy in the first bit of every byte for that to happen (observe they are all zero).
> The deal is known and fair.

It often isn't. C is often falsely advertised as a cross-platform assembly language, that will compile to the assembly that the author would expect. Some writers may be used to pre-standardization compilers that are much less hostile than modern GCC/Clang.
This is a good example of why the mean is often unhelpful.
Unfortunately, I cannot read the article in full because of the paywall, but before I entered into the tech-sphere, I had a brief stint in vulnerable persons hospice.

It was a nightmare fueled by the $15/hour wage in 2011 wages. While the price was right for my needs, ethically I could not sleep at night.

My first night involved:

- Persons unable to cleanse themselves after normal bodily functions

- Several dead persons

- Said dead persons and many others who took the time to edit their living will to reflect me because for the few nights I kept this job, I treated them like human beings needing help

I walked away from this job after a week and lawsuits followed from the bereaved and the business itself because I was named in the living will. From my perspective, these were persons who had no business signing a contract and by any medical definition were not fit to determine a reward in their living will. I am not here to pretend I understand the nuances of law and why such an action was allowed, but after quitting and outright telling my boss I was not up to the mental stress of seeing people die on a nightly basis and waiting for (US) medical services to arrive and literally kick a body around, I ended up with very little faith in the hospice system.

My coworkers openly bragged about the "opportunities" they found for themselves with persons who couldn't even figure out the current date without someone holding their hand and writing the date for them. This was abhorrent to me in ways I don't know how to put into words, but I have images of the nearby dog kennel and such persons taking advantage of the patients.

US hospice is absolutely an under-studied and over-abused factor in US life. To make matters worse, as I understood it from discussions with colleagues, far too many people see the abuses as a necessity or "fair trade" with the alternative being that persons who need hospice rotting in the street.

The irony kills me at a core point that so many people in the training accepted this as a sensible truth instead of being upset that those in need have the choice of total abuse or rotting in the gutter.

I will write that I am sickened by this environment, but sickened doesn't come close to describing the filth and awfulness I felt in such an environment.
> "Opiates are dangerous and they are anesthetics; therefore ketamine is dangerous because it's an anesthetic" is, literally, a textbook logical fallacy.

Except that I never made that exact argument. Textbook strawman fallacy.
Yes, although they still evaluate to 0 and 1 and conditional logic is still defined in terms of 0 and 1. Maybe that will change at some point in the future as well!
It's fair to observe that meanings of words change in practice, and the dictionary is there to document what words "do" mean, not what they "should" mean. However, a dictionary also plays a part in legitimizing new definitions, particularly in the early stages of when a word is being used in new ways. Look up the word "peruse" and you'll find two definitions that are effective opposites. I personally think that a word's meaning serves a purpose of concisely conveying ideas, and when you dilute meanings so that you can shoehorn a term into any space you want, you wind up destroying pieces of language and communication in the process. I don't think that "gaslighting" has been misused long enough to justify having a new definition that effectively cements the new meaning and throws away the ideas it used to convey. My hope is that the use of "gaslighting" to accuse anybody with whom you disagree of malicious intent (which is how it's come to mean any kind of deception) will eventually fade away as people find other terms to try to re-appropriate.
Are you confusing "physics-based" with "non-turn-based"?

I don't really understand how the physics factors in anything you've described.
Figma’s Real-Time Editing of Ordered Sequences (2017)
Coffee sets a timer for me - if I had a decent amount of chili the night before, or at lunch with a coffee, the fun begins as they encourage each other.
An Oral History of the Time Six Doctors Swallowed Lego Heads
A circuit board is essentially a network of connections. If you've got components on it, you'll have to remove them first via desoldering. This process is generally reversible, provided sufficient equipment and training (or luck, in their absense)

You can them use an ohm meter to see what connects to what. Simple, laborious, but effective, and non-destructive. You might want to invest in a milli-ohm meter for serious work.
Proton will respond to law enforcement warrants, otherwise they seem pretty respectful of privacy. They send a marketing email inviting free customers to pay about once a month, that doesn't seem terrible.
If you publish it with some instructions it is illegal, but if you post something with such hash accidentally you have plausible deniability.

Also, try to not infringe where you live.

It's quite simple once you understand the basics of law.
It's even worse than you think: "Boring says it can improve tunneling speeds with fully electrified machines and by digging continuously, rather than stopping to assemble sections of the tunnel wall"

Boring Co has so few people who know what they're doing that they don't even know why tunnel walls are built continuously as the tunnel is bored. (Hint: it's done to avoid cave-ins!)

Boring Co's "speed improvements" are literally just from ignoring the safety considerations and logistics behind why their competitors all do things the way they do.

This is like crypto re-discovering financial history, except that Boring Co's mistakes could literally kill someone. And I hope Elon's in the tunnel when the walls finally collapse on this face.
Obviously YouTube is more equal than ‘LBRYcom odysee’. Just like when Firefox didn’t allow the use of Flash, except on youtube.com. It’s just common business sense, nobody wants to use a product that doesn’t allow access to YouTube.
No. You can inspect the hardware. If you can verify that the switch disables the radio, you don't have to worry about software do you?

... unless there is some other way to exfiltrate data, such as:

1. alternative antennae, chipsets?

2. some kind of filtering + buffer + delayed send

3. something else...?

Whatever the case, such techniques are not free of cost and increase the chance of exfil detection. So, killswitches provide a later of protection. Therefore, the claim that killswitches are of _no_ use is not adequately argued above.
"Feature creep" -- the universal problem of almost every piece of hardware OR software or standards doc or government budget. Saying "no" is the hardest thing a manager ever does, because he or she usually hurts someone's feelings and maybe even their career. I suppose it has some similarity to the Tragedy of the Commons.
Unless I'm wrong wouldn't a large concentration of mafic eruptions also be extremely (if slowly) dangerous? The Siberian traps apparently caused history's biggest known extinction event and they were mostly a huge concentration of slow magma outflows.
>It is baffling that Bartender has not been Sherlocked.

I don’t think so. It’s a niche feature; it’s not a tent pole thing that would make users “ooh and ah” when watching a WWDC keynote or something that users would upgrade their version of macOS to get.

Even if Apple did something, it would be pretty basic and not have many of Bartender’s features.
Bet he’s not in the office 80% of the time doing real work. “Do what I say not what I do”. Or else.