skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Recruiters are dodgy[0] I will agree but how does one “sign away” their GI Bill benefits?

IIRC I had to pay $100/month for the first year or something along those lines. Probably wrong as that was over 30 years ago and it was the old pre-perpetual war GI Bill.

On the subject of TFA, if you sign up for a job with something like a 98% washout rate I don’t know what to tell you. When I was on active duty to get into Special Forces you had to be on at least your second enlistment and knew if you washed out you would just go back to being a grunt whenever they needed you. Or a medic, think they were a feeder MOS too. Honestly can’t imagine someone coming from a ranger battalion or an 82nd line company washing out though…

[0] my recruiter when I signed up for the reserves told me there were no aviation units (I wanted to be a door gunner) in Arizona and on my first drill there were Blackhawks stationed literally next door to our reserve center. When I called him out on it he’s like “oh, that’s the national guard”. Probably a good thing because they were the most deployed unit because they would get called up for forest fires and such.

—edit—

Just remembered “Captain Cutaway”… This dude passed the Delta Force selection course three times and was never accepted because they’d start with something like 120 people, two or three would pass and there was only one slot. He was just frickin’ crazy which couldn’t have helped — we called him that because he would literally cut away from his parachute about 20 feet above the ground because, well, nobody knew.
>violate the second law of thermodynamics

This is directionally correct, in that coal emissions sequestration is unlikely to be economical, but with two caveats:

1) Most coals are not actually pure carbon, they do contain a small percentage of hydrogen. If you don't capture the resulting water vapor† then that gives you some combustion energy for free.

2) If you had to spend energy to split the carbon off CO2 and sequester the carbon, then yes, it would be a pointless round trip. Which is why most "clean coal" schemes just compress the CO2 and sequester it underground.

---

†: Water vapor is itself a powerful greenhouse gas, but it varies between 4,000 and 25,000 ppm, so clean coal, which is intended to be a short term stopgap measure operated only for a few decades until the global PV solar infrastructure is built out, shouldn't have time to affect global gas balances.
oh, okay. thanks for clarifying!
> Still the thing you said could never possibly happen

No, it didn't. Fish stocks are not showing bioaccumulation. Water radiation levels show less than a fraction of one percent of hazardous levels of radiation. What's happening is exactly what I said was happening: safe levels of radiation, barely above background levels, are being detected and activist groups are trying to baselessly portray this as an ecological disaster.

Never have you found ocean tests finding concentrations of radiation at unsafe levels. Never have we found fish contaminated with radiation above background levels. All you've been doing is posting studies finding radiation nowhere near hazardous levels. The only one of us that actually posted tests results on fish is me, and they were no different from background radiation levels.

> And looks like you just proved that those overreacting greens don't have power to do anything after all. Must have been the abysmal economics and the fact that various nuclear programs achieved their goal of having enough plutonium that ended the growth.

Or maybe there's no international conspiracy, maybe the lawsuit failed because there's no contamination? If radiation rises from 0.01% of the level capable of causing any health impacts to 0.1% of the level capable of adverse impact there is no basis to the lawsuit. If it rose to a concentration capable of health impacts then there'd be grounds for a lawsuit. If they could actually find fish that are getting contaminated there would be grounds for a lawsuit. Neither of these have been shown. What's your evidence for this conspiracy besides the fact that the outcome is not what you wanted?

At this point you've repeatedly demanded that I prove the negative that bioaccumulation and ocean hotspots aren't occurring. You keep posting sources that don't support the claims you're making, due to an inability to distinguish between speculation and observations. And this is twice now you've referenced belief in a conspiracy to cover up waste releases. I don't think there's much more this conversation can add except more and more back and forth of you positing tests showing safe levels of radioisotopes and making unsubstantiated claims about fish contamination, followed by me explaining that an order of magnitude increase from a millionth of the safe levels of radioisotopes to one hundred thousandths the safe concentration isn't contamination and that for all the talk about bioaccumulation nobody is able to find radioactive fish stocks.
Page 9 shows Haskell scoring very well for development time when compared
against Ada. C++ development time was unfortunately not reported.
It lifted my country as well as dozens of others out of developing world status. There's a huge delta in national wealth between post soviet nations who joined the EU and those that didn't for example. A rising tide raises all boats.
It's not perpetual--it's 100 years--but check out Listerine royalties.

https://thehustle.co/the-people-making-millions-off-listerin...
My speculation, as with others, is that Alzheimer's disease (as well as many other slow progressing diseases) is just a metabolic disease, inline with the "type 3 diabetes" comments.

Look into supporting mitochondria health [0] and the glymphatic system [1]: good diet (with fasting), light to moderate exercise, sleep and wake at the same time each day for circadian rhythm training, reduce unnecessary stress.

Once the basics have been implemented, some supplements could help to further support cell function if needed: Longevity supplements that Dr David Sinclair takes [2], boosting cellular glutathione stores, with NACET, glycine, selenium [3]

[0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4684129/
[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7698404/
[2] https://novoslabs.com/best-anti-aging-supplements-that-harva...
[3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7889054/
I've only read (parts of) the Murphy book from 2012, I assume you're reading this one: https://probml.github.io/pml-book/toc1.pdf?

Almost all of the content that the new book covers, with the exception of the third part on deep learning, is about theory that was almost exclusively invented before 2012. Classical ML (non deep learning) is actually very rigorous compared to modern ML. There exist good theorems (statistical learning theory) for most of the classical models I'm aware of.
Curious about micro coaching - can you explain a bit more about how this works?
What if the government is tyrannical or arbitrarily seizes your funds?
For Australian's: the ACCC has been onto this, though is this a new attempt by HP?

https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/hp-to-compensate-print...

"Customers of HP PPS Australia Pty Ltd (HP) who bought certain models of HP printers without being informed non-HP ink cartridges may not work in them could be eligible for compensation, the ACCC announced today."

"HP has given the ACCC a court-enforceable undertaking to compensate customers who were unable to use non-HP ink cartridges due to an undisclosed technology in their printers."

...

"HP has undertaken to compensate consumers $50 who were prevented from using a non-HP cartridge."

"HP has since made available an automatic firmware update for download which removes the DSF from certain inkjet printer models and allows customers to use non-HP cartridges."

"The undertaking is available at HP PPS Australia Pty Ltd ."

https://www.accc.gov.au/public-registers/undertakings-regist...

"Details of how to claim compensation are on the HP website."

"Consumers can also contact HP via 1800 625 236 for more information."
Imo when it’s done well it doesn’t look like complexity at all and makes it simpler, not more complicated, even if there are more “layers”
That's not clear at all.
I think you've kind of already moved the goal posts. Your original comment spoke as if it were factual. But now you're saying "I think it can be done." But you don't know. And on top of that, there have been many greps written in a variety of languages: Go, Python, Perl, Ruby. All of them, that I've tested, are slower than most greps written in C, C++ and Rust. (In some cases, the greps written in Go can be quite fast, but they have very steep performance cliffs that are easy to trip over.)

There are very good reasons to explain this state of affairs.

C# is not something I have a lot of experience with. I don't spend time with Windows-only technologies. C# may technically work on Linux these days, but I don't know of any popular general purpose CLI tooling built with it that works on Unix systems. Why is that? My suspicion is that there are good reasons for it. But if there aren't, then there is a market opening waiting for folks to plow forward.

Basically, I think you are wrong on multiple levels. I think you both under-estimate the difficulty of writing a fast grep and what exactly it takes to do it, and I think you're completely wrong about when Rust is useful. You completely neglect the safety aspect of it, and seem to believe it is not on even footing with C or C++ when it comes to performance. But it most certainly is, in general.

> But I don't think it's the fault of C# and I think it's the fault of some poor coding on redmonds side

Making baseless assertions feels like a pattern that is forming in your comments. Where is Redmond's code? Can you read it and link to me the parts that are "poor"? If not, from whence comes the accusation?

And if you insist with your interpretation of reality, then it follows that I therefore must be a good coder. And if a good coder says to you, "I do not know how to write a fast grep in Go, Python, Perl or Ruby," then why don't you take them seriously?
exactly what a bot would say!
Fwiw, I've been using them since 2016 and have sent hundreds of invoices. Simple and functional tool.
I’ve been hesitant to read the discworld books? What makes them so good?
How does it work if I want to ensure that a certain volume must be mounted before a job runs?
I don’t think that is specifically a Java thing, you can find over-engineered code in any place and time. Maybe Java bringing OOP and a large standard library inspired more than its share of this.

Having said that, I just did a sting at a Java company with a 20 year old codebase and deleted over 100 useless classes like this in the first 6 months. My favorite was a class that was called “AbstractAbstraction”, I kid you not. It was at the end of a particularly ridiculous string of gratuitously added classes.

I don’t think some people realize that when you are at the top of the stack, writing apps, not frameworks, it’s a mistake to spend too much time engineering too much flexibility into the design.
Reading. It’s reading.
>This is different from pattern matching tokens

But is it different in essential ways? This is not so clear. Humans developed the capacity to learn, think, and communicate in service to optimizing an objective function, namely fitness in various environments. But there is an analogous process going on with LLMs; they are constructed such that they maximize an objective function, namely predict the next token. But it is plausible that "understanding" and/or "intelligence" is within the solution-space of such an optimization routine. After all, it's not like "intelligence" was explicitly trained for in the case of humans. Nature has already demonstrated emergent function as a side-effect of an unrelated optimizer.
Is there a reason you have loads of friends but still feel lonely? Do you think it stems from something you can control, such as having deeper conversations with them, and opening up more?
They were using Angular - enough said.
Stop breaking my god damn back button!
Quick summary: "Given sources of Carbon and Hydrogen plus massive energy inputs, you can synthesize hydrocarbons!"

I feel like the headlines always try to pretend you're getting energy out of the CO₂ rather than putting energy into a hydrocarbon energy storage chemical.

Question of course is economics of converting some (hopefully clean-ish) energy into stored hydrocarbon chemical bond energy and then combusting it in a vehicle vs. just digging up hydrocarbons and combusting them.
“Structuring”
> I really don't see any reason why you would need 10k€ cash payments if not for tax evasion.

To avoid banking fees?
Node.js Release Working Group
It’s not that simple. A ‘bent line circle’ can be crossed from one ‘end’ to the other much faster than with a line by going through the middle.
People wash out of training all the time.

You don't join to be a SEAL, you join to be a Sailor.

The AF is full of Security Police that though they were going to be Para-Rescue, and washed out of the training pipeline.

Don't buy the ticket, you won't have to take the ride.
Modern medical tech and practices are keeping us alive healthier and longer. Being disheartened by the fact you still need to eat right, sleep, etc. is like being disheartened that you still need to do regular maintenance on your car and treat it well.

The simple fact is that if you sabotage your body, you'll have more issues cropping up sooner and with greater severity, and if you keep it strong all that medical advancement actually has an opportunity to help you in the cases where your body can't help itself. It doesn't discredit medical advancement, only reminds us that many people's lifestyles can often be more destructive than we realize.
> So what's the distinction between JPEG XL and AVIF? On a tecnical level, it's hard to find a way that AVIF is preferrable.

AVIF support comes nearly for free with AV1 already supported for video.
Disagree - even if 'dollar shave club' happen to be the ideal razor company for you, once you purchase their product you are still subjected to their advertisements ad nauseam. Frankly I have zero sympathy for companies who can no longer track my data without my explicit consent.
The tax-man and the police state are the oppressors, not the taxed and the prosecuted.
It's quite simple really.

Because the vast majority of people that want to do those things, are wanting to get away with doing bad things and/or not paying their way correctly in society.

You may be a rare outlier but there has to be precautions.
Perhaps that should have been worded more precisely: "The fact that some new image formats can't be added"? Code maintenance costs are the stated justification for not adding JXL. We can assume any other new image format that isn't AVIF would hit the same barrier. What if tomorrow someone comes out with e.g. a new binary vector format? Same thing. Apple may well be the real issue, but that just moves the question around (why doesn't Apple add JXL, well, probably code maintenance costs too).

It's good that they're adding AVIF, but it will presumably be the last image codec added for a very long time, especially as we face the question of who will bother researching new such codecs now. And IIUC the primary reason they like AVIF is that it's basically a video codec in image form, so again - the choice is being dominated by code maintenance costs.

So I think the wider point stands. There is already a big issue with Chrome adding features that Safari and Firefox never match. Now this. It suggests the architecture is not scalable. Why shouldn't we have as many image formats as people want to create? It's due to the desire by browser makers for everything to be in HTML5 rather than bringing back a plugin architecture.
Uhh. Cheap shot, very constructive…
By definition you can't want something you're unaware of.
I think you have missed that a IP4.4 packet would be a valid IP4 packet. The first 4 octets of the 4.4 address are where IP4 expects them to be. The router at this IP4 address needs to understand IP4.4, but routers before do not. The additional octets are smuggled within the IP4 options header.
The rules used to prohibit deliberate misgendering, which any reasonable person would regard as cruelty to a marginalized group. The right (such as the Babylon Bee) disproportionately engages in this action, so it used to get banned more for this.

This is also why anti-trans actions by right-wing state governments in the US have been consistently shut down by the courts (e.g. [1]). There is no evidence to support their actions -- they're driven by sheer animosity.

Nothing "nonsense" about this.

The way the right plays the refs is by claiming that the fact that the right gets banned disproportionately ipso facto means that the rules are biased. That's what's "nonsense" here.

[1] https://www.aclu.org/legal-document/bongo-productions-llc-et...

> Although at least one key supporter of the Act in the
General Assembly justified its requirements in relation to supposed risks of sexual assault and
rape, there is (1) no evidence, in either the legislative record or the record of this case, that there
is any significant problem of individuals’ abusing trans-inclusive restroom policies for that
purpose and (2) no reason to think that, if such a problem existed, the mandated signs would
address it.
Be sure to note that, like gridfinity, this is not open source by commonly accepted definitions, as it is CC-BY-NC-SA. In this case, it's even less appropriate, because it is code with a licence both specifically not intended for code and is not at all compatible with open source licences.
You are being incredibly inarticulate, or you are just arguing in bad faith.

What is a closed standard?

Also the world run on those documents with little to no relevance, no matter how much people dislike how you need to pay to view them. It is a sad state of affairs.

If you actually wanted to make changes you would lobby for it, you are just saying they don't exist which is of little help to change the status quo.
I grew up in Indiana, in the interior of the US. I'm female, if that helps. It was never acceptable for me to wear the same thing for days in a row. This is so pervasive that I used to have a system to make sure I avoided that while not having to launder things if they weren't dirty. The first person I met that did that was an exchange student from Germany - we were both 17 at the time. I've since moved to Norway and really don't know anymore if folks notice: I always just wear black and usually buy multiples of the same item. Even if I wear something different, it looks the same. Plus, half of my social group is other immigrants and might not represent society really well.
Check out "geometry nodes" in Blender (which is open source).
My wife (a physician) asked it multiple medical questions and the majority of the time they were dangerously wrong, but looked perfectly fine to me.

I asked it a series of questions about my area of expertise and they were wrong but looked perfectly fine to my wife.

It even confidently “solved” the 2 generals problem with a solution that looks completely plausible if you don’t already know that it won’t work.
I’m reminded of a similar blunder made by IBM with their PS/2 series of computers. The initial IBM PC, PC XT and PC AT models were very popular, because they could be cloned by third-party manufacturers, which in turn created an enormous market for third-party software and hardware accessories and peripherals. But IBM wanted a bigger piece of that pie than just the few sales of genuine (and very expensive) IBM hardware, so they created the IBM PS/2 line: Heavily locked down, with its own new proprietary bus (MCA), connectors and peripherals; all heavily patented, so only IBM could produce them. It was a disaster. The only thing which endured was the PS/2 style connectors for mouse and keyboards, and those were made obsolete with USB. Nothing beside remains.
Yes it is true that any process will have degrees of contamination. I was just contesting that the distribution is “the same”, entirely process/substance dependent!
For understanding the correspondence it's useful to know that Welsh "pump" sounds more or less (more in the south and less in the north) like "pimp". "Un" sounds like "een".
Can you share a link going into this? My college roommate dissessembled the ROM and examined it extensively. We played on Level 10 constantly and had friends over (with the machine set to Level 10 - default was 3, 'normal' arcade difficulty was 5). The level never seemed to be easier when we had non-'pros' over (we routinly exceed 2.5 million even on Level 10).

My roommate went on to work at Bally Williams directly under Eugene Jarvis (who wrote Defender, Stargate and Robotron, amoung others), who I met at my buddies wedding. Anyway, this is news to me, and likely my buddy that dissembled the rom off the arcade machine.

My friend went on to write the engine for World Crusin; if you hold down the view 1 and 3 button at the same time it will bring up the thank you page on the arcade machine; my name is the second on the page.

Funny side note: the reason my room-mate got onto Eugene's team was because Eugene saw him playing Robotron at lunch on the company machine. After watching him he approached him and they became fast friends. Eugene told him he'd never seen anyone play at the level my roommate demonstrated; that's when he mentioned we played on Level 10 and typically exceed 2million. He was shocked.
I'm Czech, though somewhat disconnected from local situation/politics.

> Most ridiculous is that our power plants make enough energy for entire country and 15% are sold abroad, but... All energy is auctioned on the Leipzig Stock Exchange for 600% higher price than it is actually made (1 kWh cost around 1 CZK to made, it's sold for 6-7 CZK and rising.

Why is that ridiculous? We make something cheap, and sell it abroad for profit. Isn't it a good thing we're exporting? (I'd get it if your argument was against the coal power plants, I don't get why selling abroad for a profit is bad in general.)
New York city is like a really antiquated legacy codebase with tons of redundant checks that were added with good intentions and impossible to remove because you don't know what's truly holding the system together. It's far too complex for an individual to see the big picture well enough to slash the right things, and there's certainly an expectation that lawmakers to continue adding complexity in the name of simplicity but that obviously fails because they're overspecialized to the point where they are so far removed from the problem and without any kind of skin in the game they have no incentive to get their hands dirty and understand the plight of the regulated. Sometimes I wonder if the best course of action is to rewrite, but as with a codebase that's usually a mistake.
In case anyone is missing the reference the title is based on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champagne_for_my_real_friends,...

Also, here is a great takedown by Scott Aaronson: https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=6871