skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I too am not the best at maintaining relationships. My brain has issues with object permanence.

Funny that you mention this, because this concept of "permanence" is something I've just recently been able to attach a word to. I definitely struggle with both object and a sort of emotional permanence, where I have trouble relating to anything that isn't within my current time and space domain. In a way, I feel there is a deep truth here, that indeed nothing exists outside of the present moment. Everything is impermanent. The trouble is integrating this with a normal human existence with interpersonal connections, where we need to maintain some level of social consistency to form any kind of lasting relationship.

Interesting perspective of separating the biological system "you" from a kind of meta-management "you" though. I tend to identify my "self" with the biological body/brain system, and that might be why any kind of meta-programming seems unnatural/untrue in some way. Thank you for the insight.
No, as I've pointed out - even in your trivial example you're not testing for all correct behaviour. What's the correct behaviour when the function is called with invalid argument types?

> But if the tests verify that the output is correct, then it implicitly follows that the types are correct, so you get type checking for free.

Your unit test checks the correct behaviour for one out of infinite possible inputs. You don't 'get type checking for free' , what you get is no type checking at all.
That is a case where (as you note) you'd need to do some sort of destructive fix to eliminate the file from your local repo. Whether it's a rebase or something else, a person then needs to know "the advanced parts" that the blog post is advocating aren't really needed if "git is done correctly". Better to just not commit files/hunks accidentally in the first place - I know, it's not a perfect world, yada yada - just trying to provide the counter point to the counter point.
I can say that, at least for me, the timeline and lists load far slower than they used to, to the point I see spinners for each individual item in the trending topics list for a second or more before they finally load in. I don't remember the last time that happened to me pre-buyout.
I am guilty of that as well.

I somehow value my time more than the money. I think that I have some kind of stake/interest in things I dedicated my time to.

Though I am always thankful (as Eric is in this post) for the people and the income. I can't help but feel regretful as the product of my time and dedication is discarded.
I figure that was just cover for complying with some government mandate about deleting unacceptable material--I suspect China. They knew they couldn't hide it forever so they came up with a cover story instead.
Probably too much entropy with VIN numbers but could imagine brute forcing to activate as many vehicles as possible as fast as possible
I am also working on such a project. Any interesting resources you could point to that helps with the design of such tools?
I mean - great advice if you’re as big as the bully. As a kid who was often smaller than kids 2-3 younger than him all the way to his senior year in high school… Can’t say that advice would go over well.
kagi.com/pricing shows that the teams plans allows unlimited users for $19 monthly plus $0.025/search
ditto, thanks Eric!
What's the startup if you don't mind sharing?
The instructions generated make a big difference. Modern processor specifications commonly quote how many instructions of a type can be "retired" in a cycle. They can retire lots of conditional branches at once, or branches and other ops, when the branches are not taken.

So it matters whether the code generator produces dead branches that can be retired cheaply. Probably, optimizers take this into account for built-in operations, but they know less about the happy path in libraries.

This is a motivation for the "likely" annotations compilers support. The likely path can then be made the one where the branch is not taken. Code on the unhappy path can be stuck off in some other cache line, or even another MMU page, never fetched in normal operation.

The cost seen here is likely from something else, though. Keeping array size in a register costs register pressure, or comparing to a stack word uses up cache bandwidth. Doing the comparison burns an ALU unit, and propagating the result to a branch instruction via the status register constrains instruction order.

Even those might not be at fault, because they might not add any extra cycles. Modern processors spend most of their time waiting for words from memory: just a few cycles for L1 cache, many more for L2 or L3, an eternity for actual RAM. They can get a fair bit done when everything fits in registers and L1 cache, and loops fit in the micro-op cache. Blow any of those, and performance goes to hell. So depending how close your code is to such an edge, extra operations might have zero effect, or might tank you.

Results of measurements don't generalize. Change something that looks like it ought to make no difference, and your performance goes up or down by 25%. In that sense, the 10% seen here is noise just because it is hard to know what might earn or cost you 10%.
Correction: It’s unbanning accounts which should never have been banned in the first place, for simply having legal to hold opinions.

He’s banning child porn and bots though. Because that seemingly wasn’t banned before.

He’s clearly a nazi, eh?
For some of these it may be a quality issue. With less material to deposit in the cartridge it may not apply evenly. Lots of times this could be fine but it might not always be the case.
Simple, just define their beliefs as hateful/hate speech, then you can ban them for hate. reddit is also great at this.
1.) Read "Reflections on Trusting Trust": https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rdriley/487/papers/Thompson_1984_Ref...

2.) ???

3.) Wallow in despair?
“Elon Musk should pay taxes” now considered by Twitter TOS to be hate speech
Crypto bots are also out of control.
The same could thing could be said of almost any experience.
Yeah, according to Shopify.

According to a German court, a US parent company being able to access your data - which is the case both for Shopify and here - automatically disqualifies you from being GDPR-compliant: https://gdprhub.eu/index.php?title=VK_Baden-W%C3%BCrttemberg...
No, he said "more than meets the eye" because of contradicting news reports in the medias early on when the story broke, with many unknowns and incoherencies remaining today.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/miguel-almaguer-remains...
I can think of hundreds of “exceptions” to the category theoretic approach.

So for example anything you can do to “string” type that isn’t based on human language you should be able to do to an array of bytes, integers, or “well-behaved” objects. (Also “escaped” strings or strings in various encodings such as UTF-16 or MBCS.)

Show me a language that implements all of those functions with interchangeable and uniform syntax!

What does it even mean when I say “well behaved”? It means that those objects need to have some traits in common with characters, such as: copyable, comparable, etc…

To implement regex for objects would also require a “range” trait and perhaps others. Category Theory lets us talk about these traits with a formal language with mathematically proven strict rules.

With C++ template meta programming it’s possible to get most of the above, but not all, and it’s not used that way in most code. It’s also weakly typed in a sense that C++ can’t express the required trait bounds properly. Rust and Haskell try as well but still fall short.

Category Theory shows us what we should aspire to. Unfortunately the tooling hasn’t matured enough yet, but now that GATs have made it into Rust I’m hopeful there will be some progress!
And this is sadly true about almost every good A/B testing system out there. They always involve tooling that has to exactly fit your stack, and it's really tough to make a general purpose product that would offer anywhere near the same value.

To some extent, you grow your company and codebase around your A/B testing system, not the other way around, because it has to slot into so many places: deployment, testing, front-end, back-end, analytics, monitoring, etc. Almost no two companies share the same stacks across all of those dimensions, and an A/B testing system that doesn't hook in tightly to every one of those systems is not complete. This is why I always get a bit scared when people think they can just use one of those "drop-in" services and be done with it: yeah, great, you can now fiddle your JavaScript from some third-party website, but you're going to have a big project ahead of you passing group assignments out to all of the different systems that will need to know about them, and almost guaranteed some part of your stack will not have a library available from the service you picked so you're going to be writing your own REST wrapper, and dammit they don't document that API very well and it seems to be responding differently since the last update, and man it'd be a lot easier if I could just pipe results straight from my own service into Big query rather than running a daily user export, and damn, their dashboard doesn't let me set exclusion criteria on my own metrics, I have to send activation events now, and etc, etc. By the end you've basically built your own A/B test system from scratch, you've just paid someone else to do the "int myGroup = Random.next()" call, which is the easiest part to build.
Sorry, but no. I'm currently disgusted with Twitter's new management and their treatment of developers. It's the fediverse for me, thanks.
It's almost like the fundamental basis of crypto is fraud. Like they're not actually selling anything, besides "british south sea company" ~~stock shares~~ coins.
But I can't wear those goggles for even 2 hours. Are there people who can wear them for 12?

As someone who has never seen or held a pair (I don't have a facebook account), what is the long term barrier?

Weight? Size? Such as, if they were sunglass sized, would they be longer term wear?

Or is it still the resolution/disconnected feeling/etc?
What specific communities have gotten more fun for you since Elon took over and what is making them more fun? Genuinely curious.
Ignoring the "you should never run unsupported versions, due to security..." choir - I agree that it'd be awesome if they'd just tell us a bit about older versions.

From a couple quick 'diff' comparison between the oldest supported ping.c source code (12.3-RELEASE) and the source code from an older version (10.3-RELEASE) that I had convenient...ping.c has seen far more changes than I expected. (I'm not a c / networking guru, to very quickly tell if the older stuff shares the vulnerability. Nor do I have the time to dig into this. So my non-answer amounts to "Better Assume the Worst"):
I'd throw out that if attempting to make analogies to crypto - as I understand it - the standard US bank has pretty specific rules, reporting and audits w.r.t. how high the ratio of L2 to L1 can go and to whom/how/what uses the L2 money can be the loaned out.

The crypto exchanges do not have any such rules, reporting or auditing requirements and can self-report as L2 but in fact be some custom self-defined push the boundaries of acceptability Layer (a la FTX advertised as L2 but loaning the customer balances to its Alameda Research "hedge fund" partner).
I sometimes feel like I'm in some alternate universe when I read stuff like this:

> These new findings indicate that interventions should also focus on supporting victims of bullying and helping them build resilience;

...

> These studies suggest that public health interventions could aim at preventing children from becoming the target of bullying behaviours from an early age.

Have we considered ways to make bullies not want to bully? That seems way more productive to me. I'm mean, I'm all for teaching kids resilience and self-reliance, but at some point, we have to get to the root of the problem, which is the bullies and why they want to bully other kids and stop trying to just fix the kids who get bullied.
Eric, my best wishes to you, I've also enjoyed reading your texts, at these older times when you were allowed to write about your work.

Having had some similar experiences to yours now, I don't believe there has to be strict logic behind the managerial decisions leading to big changes. That's not how they are made, and that happens more often and with more impact than we typically register in our own environment, as we are busy doing our specific tasks. I know that it can sound cynical but I think it correctly reflects the reality.

In one specific case from my previous work, I know from those present where the decisions were made, that a decision about hundreds of people working further of not on many running projects was made after one high manager left and the few remaining who were the only one deciding literally had a short talk: "OK, who wants to take over these, I won't, do you?", "no", "no", "me neither." "OK, then let's dismount all that." And so it went. And similarly, it's not that it was not profitable for the company, it was clearly documented. The decision of each of those involved was then explainable with "it didn't match our vision of where we want to concentrate our company's effort." It is sometimes as simple as that. The "high managers" so often score additional points whenever they decide that the company makes less of different stuff.

Steve Jobs was, of course, famous for abandoning different projects in Apple on his comeback, and it provably gave the results. But I also see the companies overnight losing the proficiency in some fields based on managerial decisions impulsively made, performing even worse later. I don't have any grand narrative based on these experiences to push, except to state my belief that sometimes the "reasons" are extremely simple and very, very mundane, to the point of causing huge disappointment to those who heard so many decisions presented as strictly a result of precise measurements and deliberations, who knew they did their best and were aware that "nothing was wrong."

It does leave one questioning why they correctly invested as much energy in what they did, and if they made right decisions during these times, from a newly obtained perspective.
"LOL no...no not those views"

pure gold
What does that have to do with my statement ?
EU and US turn up the heat on Elon Musk over Twitter
It's the primary source and much more detailed, so I think it would be.

I'm curious about the company that seems to have built the frameworks, and they didn't seem to speculate or include much information about who they are and if they are a legitimate company or some sort of shell.
> Hardware, algorithms, attention to details like blend key-based lip syncing, markerless tracking algorithms, low latency posture correction, mocap compression and keyframing, fresnel optics, thin layer physics...

Microsoft R&D built and patented many of those things and already pushed things through the entire loop from R&D to practical "fun" hardware (Kinect) to boring Enterprise hardware ("Azure Kinect" and HoloLens) and allegedly back to plenty of closed doors R&D again.

It's easy to ignore Microsoft because they "failed" in the consumer space a few times in that loop already, but since no one has proven yet that there is a long-term consumer space (and don't forget the Kinect actually was a very successful consumer item for a brief Wii-epoch moment) and their "unsexy" Enterprise tech has found comfortable niches to serve it is still very possible to see them as the easy "leader" in this space, even if they've never been crazy enough to rename the whole company after it.
Climate change is an arm of the modern leftist religion.

I would like to see more a analysis of all the problems we have, how they rank in urgency and rank solutions with how effective they are.

From what I see we will rapidly transition to solar/wind/battery/ev way before climate become a real problem.
This is literally a tool for children to use in classrooms to learn about how to respond to their emotions reasonably
Because they wouldn't comply with CCCP requirements. They chose being kicked out rather than compliance.
Sounds noble, but how would you earn their trust?

Why would someone choose you over Musk?

How would you ensure that in 5 years you will not sell out for big $$$

Not trying to be a troll, just genuinely asking as the answers may help someone who actually has the resources/time
Are your developers forced to use laptops?
I tried Tidal and couldn't tell enough of a difference in audio quality with lossless in the car (very capable sound system) or in headphones (beyer dynamics). It's just one of those things that people will convince themselves is worth it sometimes when most of the time it's not, really.

Eventually there were enough things missing on Tidal that I gave up and cancelled the sub and went back to Spotify.

Spotify does everything well enough for me that it's still the best streaming service. The fact they listened to Adele and changed the functionality of how album playback works has a good side too!

For me what would be awesome would be if they paid artists more. But that's true of any and all platforms like this.
This crowd may not want to hear this, but as a former mathematician, the DS/Algorithms knowledge I gleaned from Leetcode grinding has been far more useful in my day-to-day work than any of the category theory I once used on a regular basis.
> functor

Google search first result:

Functor - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Functor
In mathematics, specifically category theory, a functor is a

> monoid

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monoid_(category_theory)
I don't think that top-tier academic talent thinks like that. Yes, there is usually a conscious element of "I am grateful to the people who have supported my work", but the obsequious mentality you're describing is one that I've never, ever observed in high-performing academic leaders working in corporations. Please provide counter-examples if any come to mind!
Then right to free speech only protects you from government consequences.
If you have 24 minutes, George Wilson's talk about propagators is really interesting and demonstrates how we can find solutions to problems by looking at math.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY1BCv3xn24
Sure, there's arguments to be made both ways. But it's a far cry from "there must be a native app because 100 offline songs isn't enough."

This is kind of funny because you're describing the opposite of a ridiculously painful issue I've been dealing with: Signal on iOS eating up and refusing to free 20GB. I wish I could limit how much space an app is allowed to use.

Furthermore, this is actually kind of proving the point: Apple is the one who picked the limit for their browser. Probably because they don't want you just using web apps. They want you thinking blissfully that the browser is inferior and you must go get native apps.
> My partner runs a small business that spends a few million on ads each year.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think a company with an ad budget of a few million is a "small business" anymore.
Finally, some reporting by media that hasn't been bribed.
‘Tweeters’ should be renamed as ‘musketweeters’
For me is the opposite, almost half the value i get from Spotify is about discovery (the other half is convenience).

Specifically, I discovered amazing artists through the Discovery Weekly and the Artist's Radios. But also the "Fans also listen to" section in an artist profile. I found all sort of things, even obscure indies with a few thousands of listens and other "hidden gems". I'm really happy they now added the "Enhance" function to playlists.

What I noticed though, is that I have to be very careful with my interactions on the platform to "train" the algorithm in the right direction. I have to like only specific genres that I want recommendations about, use playlists for anything else and use a lot the "i don't like this" feature on the discovery weekly. There was a period where I listened to more casual genres than usual and it completely broke my profile. My Dicovery Weekly was terrible at that time, it was a bummer.

What I think would be great is if Spotify would be more open about this. I would love to be able to tweak the discovery by myself (like suggest specific genres or artists, blacklist others). Maybe even create different discovery profiles for different genres. Instead I have to play the game of interacting blindly with the platform and see the results next monday on the new discovery weekly.
Diverse virus-encoded CRISPR-Cas systems include streamlined genome editors
> his blog post comes across as whiny and evinces a completely unwarranted sense of entitlement.

You see, most of us actually care about our work and hate to see it thrown away.

> Instead of being "vexed" that he was fired instead of the people building toys for Mark Zuckerberg, perhaps he should be thankful for the two years he spent working on the PPL team.

Again, you don't understand how normal people work.

Normal people would be sad to see work they cared about passionately and had sunk thousands of hours into being thrown away, particularly when it's being done for no good reason.

---

Your post comes off as callous. You claim to be a "big fan" of this guy's work, and yet you mock him repeatedly for caring when that very same work is thrown into the garbage.

I suggest cultivating compassion for others, particularly people you are big fans of.
misinformed?
That's the thing that wasn't explicit in the article; that each time you "switch layers" you often incur fees - if you're going down or back.

You can deposit cash at a bank and get it back, but that's almost an exception.

Once you get into layer 3 it is harder and harder to get back to layer 1 or 2 without losing "some value" - gift cards being the most obvious example.
But big companies love these kind of barriers, it prevents small competitors from being able to exist. Besides, Google takes a cut of things in their store, Epic from theirs, and if facebook made the metaverse work, you can bet your ass they'd try and take a thirty percent cut. They would never fight against that, it's literally free money.
> I think a lot of people would probably look at my distaste of Spotify and recommend another, more suitable, streaming platform like Apple music or Pandora

Just go to YTM?

I stopped using Spotify when their client became slow and bloated. Then I went to GPM which was easy (didn't care for my library much).

Then onto YTM (which in the beginning sucked), but is now close to parity with GPM. Took them a while but they are close to there now.

I also found the recommendation algorithm of GPM better than Spotify and also YTM has better recommendations.
Of course Elm is closely related to Haskell, which is a playground for category theory. I think learning the why behind it all can be useful in subtle ways.
Finally a complaint about Twitter that isn't posted on Twitter!
> I limited the iterations to values of w between h and 5h (which still allows for really too oblong arrangements for higher values...) and listed only totals up to 200 stars, allowing for really aggressive Manifest Destiny scenarios and/or Balkanization within the current borders.

Unfortunately if we tried to achieve senatorial parity by giving all states an equivalent population to Wyoming, ~664 states would be necessary. Fortunately the author gives recurrence relations, so even unlisted numbers of stars are, as per the title, arrangeable.
"Boycotting", "cancelling", both seem to be democracy in action. And non-majority views is too ambiguous a definition. This would put vegans on the same side of the scale as extreme race purists.