skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Mandatory helmet laws do not prevent people from riding bikes. Just like mandatory seat belt laws did not prevent anyone from driving cars!

That's a straw man. Nowhere in the article does it use the word "prevent". What the article cites are studies indicating that the behavioural effect of the laws was a reduction in bike riding.

> "Lastly, we know these “quality of life” laws are disproportionately enforced in communities of color and in lower income communities." - what the hell?! Yes, helmet and safety laws are the reason why police officers disproportionately enforce various laws against communities of color.

Again, that's a straw man argument. The laws aren't the reason why police officers disproportionately enforce said laws against communities of colour, but an observable effect of said laws is that they are disproportionately enforced on communities of colour. Sure, you can work on police enforcement reform, but until you get that problem fixed, the disproportionate enforcement is an observable effect.

> To deal with bike safety, we need to make everyone wear bike helmets until we reach critical mass in cycling adoption. /Some/ protection is better than nothing at all.

That contains the kind of poor logic you're critical of. There's a presumption that to reach critical mass in cycling adoption we need to "make everyone wear bike helmets", despite evidence cited in the article that the blunt instrument of legal mandates appears to reduce cycling adoption.

The article agrees with you (as does most everyone else) that "some protection is better than nothing at all". It's not a question of whether wearing a bicycle helmet is a good idea or not. Just because something is a good idea doesn't mean that a legal mandate for it is also a good idea.

> In the meantime, we need to implement better traffic calming and separation of automobile and cycling/pedestrian traffic. Kids die every year because in many areas, they have no choice but to bike on the side of a road that has cars whizzing past 60+ mph with less than 12 inches of separation in between.

Again, the article agrees with you on this point: "Right now, with nearly 40,000 people killed on American roads every year, that means we need to keep our leaders’ attention focused on structural reforms like complete street redesigns, which are proven to make our public spaces safe for everybody, whether they are walking, biking, taking transit, and yes, driving too."
Same as we do now. Nobody currently goes around reading random books or articles. We use link aggregators from communities we trust, reviews from reputable establishments, or recommendations from our friends.

These mechanisms are certainly going to have to adjust (I estimate at least 10% of links posted on HN are already GPT-generated, for example, and who knows how many comments -- it's much harder to tell when thinks are shorter.) StackOverflow is already in the midst of a ChatGPT-induced moderation crisis.

Being judicious about the communities you take recommendations from, the content you spend time consuming and thinking about things critically is already an intellectual survival trait. It's just going to become that much more important.
We use logical timestamps instead of datetime.

So each "event" has three properties that allow us to resolve to a sensible order across clients: session (integer), device_id (uuid), order (integer). The `session` number is set by the highest `order` that your device has seen from the server and the `order` gets incremented on each new event.

So an example you might have a sequence of events like this.
[session] [order]
0 1
0 2
0 3
---sync ---
3 4
3 5
3 6

We can then sort all events by (session, device_id, order) and we'll get any events that happen on a device to be sorted in a row even if some other device created a bunch of concurrent events at the same time.
"Plümo" is definitely used in other cities on the west side of the Rhein. At least in Koblenz and Mainz.
No, guilty after proven guilty, which he has been (he has also admitted to it)
> If this were a test question, the response given would be marked wrong, likely with no partial credit awarded.

Probably. So, don't use ChatGPT unsupervised to take tests.
I hope you've heard of GiveWell and their more-than-a-decade of research trying to find the most cost-effective organizations - ones that try to do as much good per dollar given ;)

https://www.givewell.org/charities/top-charities
This is definitely a thing. In our current car even the rear view mirror is difficult to use because it's looking out of such a small rear window with a head rest for the middle seat in the way.
Is there any output ChatGPT could produce that would convince you it feels emotion?
You've been misled about GMO causing an allergic reaction death: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/gmoverdose/.

I suggest you do more research on the benefits and risks of GMOs from more reputable sources. From my understanding, the primary risks of GMOs are less to do with human health and more about environmental risks, such as creating superweeds that can outcompete native plants or negeative effects on soil microbes.
I think what’s worth mentioning is that for people who grew up with google, schools already were having a bit of a panic with resources like wolfram alpha and Wikipedia. For this cohort of users, myself included, the idea of fact checking ”found” material and weaving it into a proper answer is very familiar.

With this view, I think chatGPT is less of a novel UX shift than an accelerant on an existing one.

I think it proves the age old belief that as technology reaches maturity it loses its fancy monikers and we will probably just look at this as “very good, very specific, google” one day
Asana needs document support. Nothing complicated, just a simple wiki or doc editor that lets us capture and link notes, findings, requirements, etc.

We ended up moving to ClickUp over this.
If Hans cheated once in an event for money, he should be banned from competing in chess. It's absolutely astounding to me that he has admitted to cheating multiple times and yet he's still playing in tournaments.
Is this actual thing or notional value of swaps? Cause scary numbers are good for clicks but might be fairly meaningless.
Does opening and starting it with nothing but screwdriver counts as "hacking" ? If so it can lmao.

> Ah, megasquirt! If it wasn't for budget, and my utter inability to work with, or get to work, anything electronic (PCs are plug and play and some drivers, that doesn't count) I would have it or something similar on my '82 Rover V8 by now.

Damn I thought that's a cheap option but I've looked at assembled ones and is near the price of Ecumaster...
I wasn't there protesting the event, nor did I visit Colorado. For better or worse, I'm not an isolated poster: https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2022/12/gypsies-tramps-.... I'll eat my words if wrong, but I believe the rhetoric that's been produced the last 4+ years. I agree with Maya Angelou. Opposing bigotry isn't bigoted.

Shooting up power stations would be, unfortunately, some of the less violent things that have been done.
Well, if we were talking about food, I'd say Gordon Ramsay, David Chang, Anthony Bourdain or The New York Times could be considered reputable, while a Yelp reviewer with a handful of reviews could be considered disreputable.

Ultimately you can boil it down to: Trust sources when they make statements that are later observed by me to be true, or are trusted by other sources that I trust. The negative feedback loop boils down to: If a source made a statement that I later found to be untrue, or extended trust to an untrustworthy source, reduce that source's trust.
> Not really? There may be slight reductions in some injuries as a result of helmet use,

Yes, actually, really!

Helmets provide a 63 to 88% reduction in the risk of head, brain and severe brain injury for all ages of bicyclists

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7025438/

There was a significantly higher crude 30-day mortality in un-helmeted cyclists 5.6% (4.8%–6.6%) versus helmeted cyclists 1.8% (1.4%–2.2%) (p<0.001). Cycle helmet use was also associated with a reduction in severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) 19.1% (780, 18.0%–20.4%) versus 47.6% (1211, 45.6%–49.5%) (p<0.001), intensive care unit requirement 19.6% (797, 18.4%–20.8%) versus 27.1% (691, 25.4%–28.9%) (p<0.001) and neurosurgical intervention 2.5% (103, 2.1%–3.1%) versus 8.5% (217, 7.5%–9.7%) (p<0.001).

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/9/9/e027845

“The evidence is clear: helmets save lives and significantly reduce the risks of severe injury,” said Lois K. Lee, MD, MPH, FAAP, lead author of the statement, written by the AAP Council on Injury, Violence, and Poison Prevention. “And yet sports-related injuries make up a substantial proportion of all traumatic brain injuries. As a pediatric emergency medicine physician, I advise all my patients – and their parents-- to wear helmets.”

https://www.aap.org/en/news-room/news-releases/aap/2022/amer...
>But a student which is supposed to learn something form that homework?

The student still had access to primary sources, textbooks, google and AI answers.

In general I am a fan of homework which forces critical thinking. Rephrasing someone elses work is a far less valuable skill than the critical thinking which is demanded for that type of work. Unrelated of any AI, students should learn how to read a text and be able to investigate its contents.
No, he's been proven guilty and personally admitted on multiple occasions that he cheated.
I noted that the criticism in the article attempts to frame on safety grounds.
I once had my EA account hacked. I tried to find a way to contact support and get things sorted out. The EA website had a page to start the support process, but it just..... didn't work. The button that said "put me in the queue" caused and error and loaded a broken page. This was the case for MONTHS.

God, imagine if your business could ignore customers for months and still be stupidly successful.
I think they're arguing that children should be made to wear helmets because won't somebody think of the children.

The same argument applies to children of course - where do you put your helmet after you've cycled to school? Attach it to the bike loosely and someone will steal it, it's too big to carry in your rucksack all day, and you don't want to have to go back and forth to your locker potentially on the other side of school if you have one at all.
If you ask it about things which require deduction like Math, even simple Math questions like multiply binomials or solve a quadratic it gets it totally wrong, confidently, and even if you correct it, it often still gets it wrong.

It’s not even close to something like Wolfram Alpha.

I think we’re blown away more by its command of language and prose than by its reasoning ability. It’s fantastic at generation, but like stable diffusion, things can fit together and look beautiful yet still be not what you asked.
I see a future of the internet, and we're already 80% of the way there, where everything in the internet is fake generated and pretty much useless spam. It'll get to the point where going on the internet would be the equivalent of trying to find something useful in a trash dump, and it'll not even be worth the effort.
Is your child specifically sensitive to brains? If she sees me lying at the end of a long red smear in a pool of blood with my head intact, but with my leg ripped off and my other limbs contorted into absurd positions, is she likely to have no lasting effects.

Fascinating child.
The combined HBO and Discovery app will reportedly just be called ‘Max’
You are drawing a parallel implying that in the future one will behave like the other - close enough.
from a more generalist viewpoint, we must consider not only the business models, but the mindsets behind them

consider an example from another area. the assembly line and "k12 education".
a 'raw material' (but it's actually a child) enters an assembly line, every year they will be passed to the next part of the process, another professional worker will receive the product and will work on it/them for a year.

Also notice how modern elementary education treats the teachers; they far too much like factory workers! low wages, they haven't much of a choice about how to do their jobs.

Now consider the mindsets behind the successful GMO crops (+pesticide combos) that have been the money makers for these corporations.

And consider the mono-crop mentalities and the above mentioned feedback cycle: gmo+pesticide kill the soil leading to more gmo+pesticide; it's a vicious cycle. it's a vicious cycle that keeps making more money!
(the assembly line was a great way to really manufacture lots and lots of munition for the war, it is a very effective technique to make stuff that will be sent to get wrecked in a war, in this sense it 'made a killing' as in made lots of 'money')

and again, consider the mindsets involved. why are we educating children like they were cars in a production line?

these corporations are full of people educated like I described, lowering our collective education quality in a longer feedback cycle far too large to be easily noticed; it's a 20-40 year feedback cycle, which has been reducing the quality of the living beings involved.

we have a difficult problem, and no power to do anything about it
That is crawling data.
St Louis MO BBS scene was my start. Early days everyone wrote their own BBS software too…
> would also support mandating the use of helmets for all passengers in a car.

We do also do that too.

Every car is built with a fancy headrests and seatbelts and airbags -- the entire car is literally a helmet, and we require this on every new vehicle sold for decades. (And we require the seatbelt be worn too, legally enforceable by law in most areas)

We even check every single car sold to make sure the Helmet-worthiness of it is safe for the general public (see https://www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle/2019/CHEVROLET/VOLT/5%252520HB... as an example of a vehicle results)

When an occupant of the car is small enough such that the built-in helmet-worthiness of the car might be rendered insufficient, we also require they get extra helmet-like protections wrapped around their head/neck/body - see https://www.dmv.com/car-seats for specifics -- and even these are also legally enforceable by law in most areas
Does the receipt show the donation so I can claim it on my tax return? Perhaps next time I’m asked I’ll make the donation and then ask for a receipt for the donation if the store receipt doesn’t show it.
Sure, but I wouldn't describe the situation as:

"Hans beat the world champion; the world champion then accused him of cheating and forfeited from the tournament. ... No evidence of his cheating has been found. chess.com later released a report which did nothing to substantiate claims of cheating"

I think closer is:

"... Hans defended himself from accusations of cheating by admitting he has cheated online a few times, but never for money. chess.com later reported he has cheated prolifically, including for prize money. Despite this, no evidence of cheating during the tournament was found".

I think the main tension is to what extent having cheated online should affect regard treatment during over the board games. It's not really a situation of 'sore loser suspects cheating'.
You can mitigate some of this by reducing the number of accounts you have to deal with as you age, even if it costs a bit more.

For example, while it may make sense to bank with a big national firm that doesn't even have branches nearby, perhaps moving things to a credit union with local branches at some point is worthwhile, because at least then the next of kin can walk in and hash things out. After all, it's been done before.

Many accounts can just cease - no real need to post a "I'm dead now" to hacker news, for example.
> can you trust an entity in one context when they have proven themselves untrustworthy in another

We do that all the time. If, rather than TrustCor being associated with a company making malware we'd instead found out the company's CEO had cheated on his wife, would that be grounds for removing them from the root certificate store? Context matters.
We basically have that as well! We use CRDTs on the client to allow for optimistic updates and fast replication of events directly to other clients but we also do exactly what you describe on the server so that a user loading the data for the first time just gets the "snapshot" and then plays events on top of it.
> statistical mean of everything uploaded

Half true. Yes, there is a mean of something, but no, it's not the content that is averaged, it's the gradients.
I'm not following this story, so I don't know the details. Is the reason he's ostracized because he beat Magnus in a game he did not cheat in, or because of wider allegations of cheating? Did people say "we don't trust you" or "we're blacklisting you because you beat Magnus?". That feels relevant to the law suit.
I think you are right, AI content will not be distinguishable from human content.
What we really need to figure out is the direction that we are going as humanity. This planet must quickly become too small for us, human beings will not be needed anymore which means we need to find bigger challenges or we will self destruct out of pure laziness and self indulgence.
Personally I don't think AI will only destroy creative and cognitive sectors, it will destroy absolutely every single sector in existence. There won't be a single job left that a human can do better than a robot. And humans will also pick the robot worker over the human worker every time. This is what happened during the industrialization, it's not like a few factories said: "hey you know what guys, let's be a bit quirky and still use 100% humans for this factory just because we can.". No, nobody is going the human route. It would be objectively slower and worse and therefore you go with the robot. There isn't a single area in life where you wouldn't pick the robot over the human and the question is solely how fast we can get to implant some good AI into mechanical bodies.
I signed up to DO about 2 years ago. They didn't ask me for Twitter or GitHub. As I recall, it was a normal setup process.
This is nonsense, and sounds like the same kind of opposition to motorcycle helmets, i.e., a series of platitudes and excuses that are thinly or not-at-all supported by any actual data.

Basic protective gear has a high frequency of converting a life-changing or life-ending event into a "drat, I scratched my helmet/glasses/gear" event. When I was a teenager a guy in my town was getting known as a motocross racer. Until one Friday he was tuning his bike, went around the block to check something about the tune, slid on a patch of sand, hit his head and died. If he'd just spend 5sec to toss his helmet on, he'd have had to get another one for that race. Instead, he is no more.

Their entire argument here is that 'fewer cyclists come out with helmet laws because it is mandatory'. Aside form no data, I'd say that it is better that there are fewer cyclists but they have their helmets on. Sure, there's less of a 'safety in numbers' effect, but the effect of many more injuries in the news/scuttlebut will also reduce numbers of cyclists.
One of the greatest strengths that both China and India have is that the West will never understand them.

The West will think they understand them. They will assume they understand them. They will be sure they understand them. But they will never understand them.

Hence the implication in the headline (well-written headline, by the way), that if nobody else uses it, India is wasting its time.

The same people said about UPI (Modi's digital payments push):

- hardly anyone has cellphones in India

- it'll take years to train India's illiterate masses how to use an app on a phone

India now has 850 million cellphone users. And the government is creating incentives to put one in every hand.

UPI now conducts more digital payments than China or USA (I've heard that it handles more than both combined, but I don't want to make that claim without a reference, and am feeling too lazy to look for one right now).
There are not really any clients for XMPP or Matrix that work as well as irssi or weechat for IRC. I also have more issues with servers for XMPP and Matrix (delayed messages, uptime, encryption weirdness). I use things besides IRC, but IRC still gets daily use and is my favorite. I suspect everyone who knows how to make a good client is still using IRC, so they aren't available to make good ones for the newer protocols.
"Poachers cause evolutionary benefit for tusk-less elephants"
DHL is buying 2,000 electric Ford E-Transits as delivery vans
Another reason chains do this is to see if customers have extra disposable income in that locale so they can raise prices on items there.

This is the same reason you’ll see this at grocery stores.
La Gazza Ladra.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_gazza_ladra
I think the most common outside of gaming is collaboration software. Think whiteboards, docs (e.g. Google Docs) and other collaborative tools.
> what happens when all of the content on the Internet (or at least the vast majority of it) is generated by AI?

I don't find it credible that all content on the Internet is ever going to be generated by AI, and the two scenarios are wildly different.

What happens is you pick and choose, in the same way the fact that 99% of the books in any bookstore aren't worth the paper they're printed on doesn't make reading worthless.

To make an example many developers are painfully familiar with, if you google something about the C++ standard library, chances are the top results are pure and utter w3cschools-style garbage. What happens is I go on cppreference.com.

How do you figure out what are the good sources of information? You study. For real. With books.
If it actually matters, hire a lawyer, because legal precedent is established by courts not by online opinions.

If it doesn’t actually matter, it doesn’t actually matter.

The easiest way to make it not matter is avoiding the gray area by creating images by established means with clear legal precedent.

Good luck.
Right, unfortunately the grant funding model is deeply embedded in university research. Some folks get some startup funds on hiring (usually for lab construction/setup), but the rest is dependent on outside resources via grants. There are a few exceptions, e.g. Janelia, NIH intramural, Allen Institute, but they are unfortunately rare.
> In practice what our mothers and grandmothers did

Wait, people don't ventilate their home anymore?
> and found that cars tend to be more dangerous with cyclists if the cyclists are wearing a helmet

I know that when I'm driving a car, I specifically behave differently when I see a bicyclist with a helmet vs without. /s

This just sounds so preposterous. First off, I doubt the average driver notices bicyclists at all. Of those that do, I'd seriously doubt if they even consider that they are wearing a helmet or not and just express frustration at the bicycle being there in the first place. The suggestion that a driver notices a helmet and acts more aggressively towards the rider or that they give a wider berth to the rider when not wearing a helmet is just "trying too hard" for lack of better words to describe my incredulity.
I have never liked these donations at the register. The corporation will claim all credit for the donation and spend no money. (Note that I’m not talking about the tax treatment.)
Over the weekend Twitter was 30% ChatGPT screenshots and 20% engineers frothing about how ChatGPT would replace programming, article writing, even Google Search.

Such engineers must be juniors, or have persisted in their life with a totally wrong idea of how engineering is done and engineering is built. I can't imagine thinking that one could build software systems or essay arguments by trusting an AI system you don't understand to provide answers you don't understand.

Like you say, we very well could faceplant society with this misconception that regurgitation plausible code and prose is what education and understanding looks like.