skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
We just use the openai freemium layer like everybody else. So, cost for this is so far zero and we are definitely saving time and effort. We'd probably end up paying for this if this starts showing up in mainstream products for creating content. Our CEO actually pays for midjourney, which he uses for mockups and other things. I expect this will start happening pretty soon as there probably are a lot of clued in business people discovering just how useful this is.
Count yourself downvoted for disguising your own combativeness as didactic neutrality, not being pinpoint-factual and on-topic and for actually being out to get me with your downvote for disagreeing with people who you think were right.
You expect the same people who don't even read the error popups they get to follow step-by-step instructions to install an alternative OS on their phone?

I love your optimism :)
Get a Leetcode t-shirt
I thought he went deep in with the far left crazies. Must have happened after that.
I am also curious about this. I would sometimes look up while walking my dog and wonder if by chance I woukd see a sudden addition to the night sky.
One thing I learned about HN that I don't even think about anymore is that upvotes are only weakly correlated with the quality of the submission itself - they usually reflect the interest in the topic revealed by the headline, or signify there's good HN commentary, or both.

IIRC, back before the "favorite" feature was introduced, people would use - and some still use - upvotes to bookmark interesting threads.

Second thing I learned is to always at least skim the comments before opening the submission itself, to gauge whether the latter is even worth it. Quite often it isn't. Here I thought it is, but the text was so long and... off somehow, that I got back to comment thread and read it more carefully, and now I know why it's off and that it's not worth it (for me personally) to read it more carefully.
I would really like the defence to be based on our rights as human beings, rather than 'placing undue burdain on a corporation'.

Suppose next time NSA writes the code for Apple and Apple just has to sign it, will the defence stand uo in court?
What did Mojang pay for though? That appears to be the point of contention.

It sounds like Mojang threw £20k at the author without understanding or articulating what that payment entitled them to.

At a later point they realised they didn't own the actual work itself and tried to strong-arm the author into giving them that ownership for effectively nothing.

At the time Mojang appears to believe that this could be an issue during due diligence. With the amount of money on the table, even offering a life changing sum to the author would have had a nearly imperceptible affect on the overall balance of the acquisition.
There are certain tools available online like Adobe Acrobat or PDF2Go.
and they'll be sentenced to live out the rest of their days in parasailing from the golden chute. Such accountable!
It is not dead because it is still a good exercise to help you how to think in a structured way
Sounds like there was no exclusivity agreement.
"Ends justify the means, even when the means include significant harm" has never been within mainstream EA. For example, Will MacAskill's post on the FTX collapse includes lots of examples from his book where he said not to do this: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/WdeiPrwgqW2wHAxgT/...
Tell HN: Travis CI is seemingly compromised (once again)
A number of Travis CI users appear to have had Travis CI tokens revoked by Github in response to suspicious activity surrounding token.

Travis themselves have still not issued any notice or acknowledged this incident so it's worth letting the community know if they weren't already aware.

From memory, this will be the second breach in 2022 (https://blog.aquasec.com/travis-ci-security) in addition to last year's secret exposure (https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/09/travi...)

---

A sampling of users on Twitter who have run into this issue:

https://twitter.com/peter_szilagyi/status/160059327410805555...

https://twitter.com/yaqwsx_cz/status/1600599797118996491

https://twitter.com/samonchain/status/1600611567606775808

https://twitter.com/dzarda_cz/status/1600613369408634886

https://twitter.com/samonchain/status/1600611567606775808

---

An example notice being sent out by Github (in lieu of Travis themselves taking any action):

> Hi {username}

> We're writing to let you know that we observed suspicious activity that suggests a threat actor used a Personal Access Token (PAT) associated with your account to access private repository metadata.

> Out of an abundance of caution, we reset your account password and revoked all of your Personal Access Tokens (classic), OAuth App tokens, and GitHub App tokens to protect your account, {username}.
は(wa) is a case marker which makes something the topic of the sentence. Topic isn't strictly analogous to subject in English.

The verb is "not eat". If the topic was "children", then the topic would be the subject when translated ('Children は not eat' -> "Children [must] not eat"). But if the topic was, say, "candy", it would instead map onto object in English ('Candy は not eat' -> "[Someone must] not eat candy").

Perhaps the translator was not aware that this flexibility does not exist in English.
...15 gliders, apparently. https://btm.qva.mybluehost.me/building-arbitrary-life-patter...
hide might be generous as fingerprinting devices based on their characteristics is pretty well understood nowadays.
try to escape abject poverty
On the subjectivity of "beauty" in modern architecture:
- if you average the "subjectivity" of most people (in the USA at least), you get "we prefer traditional architecture": https://www.civicart.org/americans-preferred-architecture-fo...
- when you study "composition" in painting or photography, it's obvious that there are some "rules" to make some pictures better than others. Of course there is intent, but there's also this aspect of making things pleasant to look at. Maybe it's the intent of harmony, I don't know. What these rules would be is subject to debate, but it's not unusual to think there aren't natural aesthetics rules in architecture. It ultimately stems from our interaction with the world and the patterns we see in nature. To me this untold magic is best shown in one of the most famous greek sculpture "Laocoon and His Sons". An upside down Chrysler Building would look incredibly off.

On survivorship bias: look at the buildings in this painting: https://fineartamerica.com/featured/view-of-washington-dc-ed... . Do they look exceptionally ugly? To be fair they look almost exactly like the ones in the "old town" part of the city where I live (just more red and less orange), which is the most-visited part of my city (because it's pretty and also walkable).

"It was WWI/WWII" -- Modern art debuted before WWI even happened. Marcel Duchamp's first oeuvre was in 1912, his famous Fountain is from 1917. The fracture didn't happen with WWI/WII even though people keep hammering these points. What started however at the start of the century was the rise of global ideologies: Communism mainly. This is not to say it's communism's fault, it's simply to say that the idea of a bright egalitarian future seem to have coincided with a general renounciation to beauty. And as the brilliant (communist) essayist Lukacz puts it, artistic expressions are reflections of the consciousness of a people at any given time. Modern aesthetics is modern ideology.

"Modern architecture is cheaper" -- It's really not. There's plenty of projects everywhere that were built "classically" and are still comparatively cheaper to their modern counterparts.

Some of you have mentioned Scott Alexander's piece (https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/whither-tartaria and the very important follow-up https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/highlights-from-the-co...). The only comment who did argue at length for an opposite case was from... an architect. (Yes I've read all of the comments on both articles, yes this topic is my pet-peeve). Of course, he argues that beauty is subjective ("that's your opinion man") and when challenged on the fact that most people seem to find the buildings he champions as frankly repulsive, he defers to the usual "well you have to understand the point of view of the architect"... And no, no I really don't, and in fact nobody ever needed to do that for any building, ever. Except a certain class of architects when it comes to modern buildings.

I could write an essay on this topic, but I've got to stop here.
I believe that info was in one of these links:

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/configure/windows-...

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/configure/basic-le...

They both 404 now. I had saved a copy of both at the time, but those files must be on another drive. I'll keep looking though!

There were several articles about it at the time
https://www.extremetech.com/computing/247311-microsoft-final...

https://www.ghacks.net/2017/04/06/windows-10-full-and-basic-...

These documents were massive and filled with lots of information buried in places that seemed odd and scattered across different sections so that you couldn't get all the information about what an app collected in one section/table of the document.

Another thing I remember from those pages was that in some circumstances short clips (less than 1 minute) of the videos you played using window's default player would be sent to MS as well, but they said that would only happen in the event of crashes.
> just skimming the contract, that all seems bog-standard, too.

It is, and that's the problem. From way down the post:

BEGIN QUOTE

Copyright law was originally brought in to help artists make a living. But over the past century, corporations like Disney, Sony, Universal, and Microsoft, have lobbied hard to twist those laws out of shape. Now, the vast power imbalance between rich corporations and poor artists (particularly when negotiating) allows the corporations to stripmine the copyrights from artists, and keep the artists poor. To see how, just look again at the contract I refused to sign. It’s astonishing that such a mafia-shakedown, you-will-never-see-your-kid-again contract is legal; that it is considered a standard way to treat an artist, rather than greeted with gasps of horror, and treated as a crime. This is why none of your favourite comic book writers and artists own any of their creations. This is why Alan Moore, who created Watchmen, cannot use his own characters in his own work. This is why the original blues musicians, whose talent transformed global culture while creating a hugely profitable industry, died broke. This is why, even today, for every $1,000 of sales in the modern music industry, the average individual musician gets $23.40.

END QUOTE
If FTX had been doing what they were widely believed to be doing, providing a place where people could trade cryptocurrencies and taking a cut on the trades, I wouldn't have any problem with that: there wouldn't have been harmful means that needed justifying. Which is why all the condemnation is coming out after we learned that they were actually doing something much much worse.
Performance (c-like is stretching it, but not by much) and existing libraries for everything I can imagine.
I did notice this too. I tried to transcribe part of a movie and in the intro section in spitted out "The translations have been done by www.??.com".
They clearly trained these on public SRTs
It had been discontinued a while ago, in favour of a flavour of CentOS (at the time CentOS 7 was released, instead of Scientific Linux 7).
I'd like to pivot in the opposite direction as you, from DevOps to software engineering.

I'd like to get more personal project done. I started many this year, but never finished most. (Friends have told me to seek ADHD diagnosis and treatment.)

I find myself wanting to do something entrepreneurial, but I very consistently talk myself out of any ideas I have for for moral/ethical reasons. I'd like to find something that doesn't involve some race to the bottom and also promotes some kind of, idk how to put this, rejuvenation of the commons. I used to daydream about starting a WISP and bootstrapping it into a FTTH provider, but I find I was mostly interested in the fiddling with and improving administrative/management software suites for WISPs and traditional ISPs. (I worked my way into tech from being a wisp/fttx technician for a summer job.)
I wrote a short story about trying to mine a diamond asteroid
unfortunately they only allow adding new text, among other features, none of which is very helpful for my need
I might be missing something, but I think that the handling of the sleeper state is wrong.

mutex is unlocked (state: unlocked)
A locks mutex (state: locked -> locked)
B attempts to lock mutex (state: locked -> sleeper)
C attempts to lock mutex (no changes)
A unlock mutex (state: sleeper -> unlocked), state was sleeper so notify_one B
B locks the mutex (state: unlocked ->locked)
B unlocks mutex (state: locked -> unlocked), state was locked, so do not notify

C hangs forever. To use notify_one you need to either guarantee at most one waiter (making notify_one pointless) or you need a wait count. If you use only one bit (or when your count saturates, which is the same thing), you either need to notify_all (and deal with the thundering herd) or unconditionally call notify_one (and do away with the fast path). IIRC the original futex paper had a discussion of this.

Incidentally, I love the atomic::wait in c++20, although it is not without issues https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2022/p26...).
When I first learned about these I was interviewing with a company that was an early entrant/innovator. Their box was sales oriented but came up when you showed sales interest and told you if a salesperson was available.

I thought it was a really clever idea, especially for those interactions where someone is browsing at 9:30pm and wouldn't call but would feel fine texting with a salesperson who was just up watching TV.

Fast forward to the future and it's become dystopian like everything else on the web. It's an excuse to remove phone numbers and email addresses, it replaces support with bots, it's not truly async because you can't easily do other things while waiting for a response or they close the connection and you start over with another person and no history.
I suppose someone had to be running servers, payment systems and so on as well. It is not exactly trivial to distribute and process as many copies as they sold.
You are wrong.

They downloaded the CSAM hash database from iCloud (iCloud _HAD_ to be enabled). After that every photo was matched with the DB using their algorithm.

If enough confirmed matches were found, "reduced quality images" would be sent to a human to double-check if the matches are correct and not false positives.

Only after that the authorities would've been contacted.

Compare this with Google's approach of "our AI just scans everything and if it sees something, it'll directly contact the police and shuts down your account with no way to recover it". (This actually happened).

Which is worse?
Hmm, the HuggingFace detector seems to identify notes from my personal notebook as being about 80% fake. Passages from Wikipedia, between 72% and 96% fake. I think this is actually detecting "grammatically correct well-punctuated prose" rather than "from GPT-2".
I thought the comparison with a synthesizer was quite apt. A synthesizer can make any tone you want, but on its own won't create music.
I don't like the idea that we discuss this as a law of nature.

I am an iPhone user since three years ago but if at some point I get a better deal elsewhere, I'm off.

And with Apple I pay extra for premium, and there is only so many ads[1] one can shove in before the premium feel is gone.

As for the targeted ads, I share your feeling that the targeting is badly over hyped, except you are lucky compared to me:

Ads for products I bought 3 days ago would be wildly relevant compared to most of the ads I can remember from Google. It was almost always scammy-looking dating sites. For a decade. Don't know what I did wrong but it seems there was a fluke with my account. Or they just god more money from scammy-looking dating sites than from anyone else.

Oh, and when it wasn't ads for scammy-looking dating sites it was pay-to-win games, and based on the ads you could be forgiven for thinking they were made by the same folks.

[1]: I'm no hardliner here: contrary to many on HN I actually see value in some ads and think I have sometimes made better purchases/been reminded to do things I wanted to do anyway.
> The overwhelming majority of newly written Java code is targeting Java8 still - which doesn't use any of these new features anyway.

Java 8 users are now a minority. Some libraries still target it (although Spring 6 targets 17 as the baseline), but most Java code is in applications.

> Java can never be Kotlin

Java doesn't want to be Kotlin because it aims at a much wider audience. Back in the nineties James Gosling laid out a strategy of an innovative runtime wrapped in a conservative language that only adds the most beneficial features, and only after they've been successfully tried in other languages, and this has worked very well.

Also, the Java language has the advantage of controlling the runtime, which allows us to add a smaller number of features, which are more powerful (e.g. compare records with data classes, or virtual threads with syntactic coroutines), while Kotlin can neither change the runtime nor have a significant impact on the ecosystem, and so is more limited in what it can achieve. Moreover, Kotlin's features are increasingly mismatches with the evolution of the platform.

Nevertheless, we are happy that the platform offers more feature rich languages to the minority of developers that do prefer them (or languages with radically different approaches, such as Clojure), so the platform can cater to programmers with different language preferences.
If you block LivePerson, you can eliminate a lot of these annoying chat agents. The appear to be one of the more prominent providers of this service (https://www.liveperson.com).
The author makes the same point, in more than once place.
impressive. they got forbes to cook one of their press releases
ShareGPT lets you easily share your ChatGPT conversations
I would assume he means this:
https://www.ue-germany.com/news-centre/blog/what-is-mint-any...

Careers and academic disciplines in the fields of:
Mathematik (Mathematics)
Informatik (Computer Science)
Naturwissenschaften (Natural Sciences)
Technik (Technology)

but it's honestly first time I'm seeing this too, might be just a German thing.
While the author says this in a few places, the picture he tries to paint is one of a grand misunderstanding. Both sides of the communication just weren't understanding each other.

But the reality is that _all_ of the misunderstanding comes from him. There is no "mutual misunderstanding", Mojang understood the conversation perfectly well.

The author asked for an offer, Mojang offered $20k, and the author accepted. It's not reasonable to expect Mojang to "understand" the author is going to hold some grudge about believing they deserve more than the offer they accepted without negotiation.

The correct response from the author would be something along the lines of "I am entirely at fault, all of the misunderstanding was on my side, Mojang/Notch/Carl did nothing wrong".

Instead the author reminds us at every turn about how Notch gave bonuses to all the Mojang employees but not him, how they're such a great guy for not getting lawyers involved, and how they're turning their work into a "priceless gift" (despite being paid $20000 for it).
Ok, thanks very much.

So what if the server just rebases the edit, and that results in the caption being set a second time? ie most recent wins. Don’t see how this would break a schema?

Encoding “adding a caption” as “add an additional child called caption” would be silly, as we know there can only be one caption. So the op would be “set the caption”.
If you really care about effective altruism, the only thing you should look at is the outcome, that is verifiable facts, not the verbiage.

It is way too easy to lie with language, this is why we have so many bullshit artists.

The proof is in the pudding, as they say.
> As a C# advocate I have to say, that the C# design team is doing an excellent job. The amount of syntax I see literally 1:1 taken over by dozen other languages is really impressive and evidence for that.

That would be the case for pretty much any language that has lots of features (provided that most of those features aren't completely terrible). A good design (at least for a mainstream language) also strives to minimise the number of features, not adding everything you can but only adding things you absolutely need. In the case of C#, many of its features are not widely adopted, and Java in particular will never adopt them.

Java's philosophy has always been to wrap an innovative runtime in a conservative language that only adds features late, after they've proven their worth elsewhere and when most mainstream programmers are ready for them, with the realisation that every added feature adds a cost to learning the language. That strategy has worked very well for Java, but .NET has a different strategy (a more adventurous language built on top of a less adventurous runtime). We'd rather spend two years thinking about how to avoid adding a new language feature than spend six months adding it. This "last-mover" strategy has helped us maintain our philosophy and keep the number of features small compared to C#. We strive to only add features that have a big bang-for-the buck and that, preferably, solve many problems at once, rather than add many features, each addressing a relatively small problem. For example, virtual threads have allowed us to avoid adopting async/await; records are allowing us to avoid adopting properties, and will likely help us avoid adding named and default parameters as a separate feature (which, in languages like C#, Swift, and Kotlin breaks binary compatibility/separate compilation).
It's posts like this that make appreciate that video game programmers aren't the only ones out there keeping it real. Good work Joseph G but also keep the ego in check...
- Get AWS certified

- Get a grad Cert in cyber security

- drop some Kgs
Scaling Agile Otto
An article about team structures at otto.de, being the second-largest online shop in Germany. About working in cross-functional, self-organizing product-development teams that do not have a traditional team lead, and why we think that three people are just right to lead a single team.