skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>But they aren't going away

Why? And if not, why can't we apply your argument to other things, eg, coal power plants?

>Even if you could get rid of most cars, that wouldn't be enough, and it wouldn't be able to happen quickly enough to avoid electrification.

Estimates for the lifetime CO2 savings of EVs vary from 40% to 70%. Assuming the be best case (70%), the CO2 impact would only be the same as "getting rid of most cars", which you say isn't enough.
If they don't do that people goad the model into recommending we eat glass or similar ideas.
This is an extremely important point.

These are very large, very complex fuzzy language maps, and are best used like a crystal ball for autocompletion suggestions, not definitive answers.

I’m unsurprised but also very disappointed by people’s desire to give these fuzzy answers final word. The desire to cede final authority on truth to these machines just because they’re giant and impressive is incredibly misguided and a major step backwards.

These machines are literal embodiments of group think.

They can only add value if people understand their limitations. If people get carried away with them and start assuming they’re authoritative we’re in for serious trouble.
Philosophy can be interesting if it is not baseless navel gazing (i.e. it is founded on observation and fact, and derives from there). The fact that I find that interesting is subjective, but that's not the meat of the post.

Religion is fundamentally folks saying "No, I'm right!" and nothing else. Sometimes it's dressed up a little. What could be interesting about that? You can hear such arguments in any primary school playground during recess.
No. Stop and think about it. The moon rotates every 28 days with respect to L1/L2.
>If I have cash for MSRP why do I have to deal with "minimal haggle"?

Because I want to save money? It literally took about 5 minutes to ask them to add the ~$1500 price of some factory-installed options to my trade-in price and they had a deal.

It wasn't completely frictionless but far and away the main hassle was just car availability. Had I been willing to take a similar vehicle they had on the lot it would have been quicker.
I thumbed to 1939 in the "1001 Films to See Before You Die" and got these (three I believe are "foreign" films however):

Stagecoach, Zangiku Monogatari, Babes In Arms, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, The Wizard of Oz, Destry Rides Again, Only Angels Have Wings, Gone with The Wind, Le Jour Se Lève, Gunga Din, Ninotchka, La Règle Du Jeu, Wuthering Heights
I've never heard of a client taking equity in a consulting shop. In fact, I'm not sure if I'd want equity in a consulting shop or if I'd call a client with equity in a consulting shop a "client".

Consulting shops are not startups.

You can scale the revenue of a consulting shop 10 times... By hiring 10 times the salespeople and 10 times the devs. It's not impossible you could start the next Infosys but the usual cycle for a consulting shop is it has some success, makes some modest profit, accumulatse some "technical debt" and legacy technology, then get out-competed by hungrier and scrappier competitors that are not weighed down. Some variations are: (1) some ambitious salesperson strikes out, poaches some of your customers and some of your devs or (2) the company tries to develop a software product or product line (I worked at one place that made an e-commerce package for wineries) which I'm going to say fails 49% of the time, succeeds modestly 49% of the time, hits it big 2% of the time.

I am a technical person through and through but I am thinking that I am not hearing a story I believe about sales -- which is equally as important as being able to do the work. I think compensation in terms of equity makes more sense for salespeople than it does for devs for the same reason why salespeople frequently get a commission. It's not unusual for an offshore team to be fronted by somebody in a more developed country (e.g. I knew a Reddy who lived in L.A. and had a team in India) but it is a tricky relationship to figure out.
Fascism isn't a fad like bell bottom jeans. It forms under specific material conditions.
The Pirahã are off by one (2020)
2D printer, to be precise; there's already plenty of open-source 3D ones.

I'm fine with open firmware, since it can be adapted to whatever existing hardware is available.
I think many believe that. I still hear seemingly educated people defending mmt. Some even think widespread lockdowns were a free lunch and everything is hunky dory.
I might have used a certified bank check once in my entire life, maybe to make a down payment on something huge, certainly not during highschool. I have no idea how you think highschoolers are running around casually with bank checks.
It’s not even that, it was just an “Agreed-Upon Procedures” engagement. An assurance engagement would at least use a methodology the assessing firm would stand by on albeit with limitations. In this case, they don’t even claim the procedures are appropriate for how intended and unintended users might interpret the letter.
Spacecraft that require protection from re-entry are going far, far faster than first stages, so slowing them down using atmospheric friction creates a lot of heat. The Falcon first stage gets to about 8,000 kph and reaches over 100 km before it starts coming down, not high or fast enough to create the stresses an orbital re-rentry vehicle sees. The other key to reusability is having enough leftover fuel to land, control surfaces and restartable engines. Restartable engines weren't proven to work until the Gemini program in the mid-1960s, if I remember right; I'm sure the Saturn rockets was well into development by that time and the engineering costs to make major changes the lower stages were too great. Sometimes government gets set upon a course and it's very hard to redirect it; that's why innovators like Space-X are so valuable.
It’s better to not be an asshole. But it’s mostly okay to be an asshole too. The world needs more than just ultra-agreeable people. I reckon grudge-holding is way more destructive to teams than abrasiveness. There’s lots to be said in favor of the asshole who moves past a conflict as soon as it’s over.
>" quality of life / ergonomics."

Then just replicate Win98 desktop. good ergonomics has nothing to do with high resource usage.
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway.

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Andrew_S._Tanenbaum

https://what-if.xkcd.com/31/
The Challenges of Sanctioning the Internet
> Aluminum does not rust

While technically true, since rust is an iron oxide, the meaning behind the "metal rusts if wet" statement was more generic and less scientific. If you are a bit more forgiving in the interpretation of what was said, you could have acknowledge that aluminum does indeed oxidize over time. Aluminum just happens to have a nice property where the oxidation process creates a protective film that helps prevent further oxidation. Aluminum can be exposed to elements that destroy that film and result in accelerated oxidation.

And if you want to see something extra fun, look at what mercury does to aluminum without that protective film.
Yeah, aside from the much bleaker predictions of the article, we shouldn't forget just how exceptional and fragile the current interglacial is : we were already overdue for the end of it (give or take a few thousand years) !
What would it take to bring back the dinosaurs?
I completely agree, although having a fair world where one community cannot ruin it for others seems far away
I wouldn’t consider that an AI but more a machine that tells me what I want to hear.

If it’s intelligent it should have an opinion that consulting all the facts it will hold in as high of a regard as humans do their religious and political beliefs.

And I mean one it came to of its own conclusions not a hard coded “correct” one the devs gave it, something that makes us uncomfortable.
Practice documentation in projects
Raid 45
Not everything needs to have Musks companies shoehorned in.
No matter what you think about Rust, if you think Zig is a “serious replacement for C right now” despite being in development and still very unstable, I don't think you're doing C for a living.
Prior to NAFTA, rural Canada was in deep on the socialist end of the spectrum. This is where things like universal healthcare emerged, but along with that there was also a push towards what are effectively unions in industry to provide bargaining power amid an increasingly urbanized country (and world).

A number of industry unions were established at this time, a lot of which has lingered into the modern era. The most famous no doubt being the dairy industry, which has long been a particularly notable point of contention with the USA in trade relations. Dairy processors in Canada are encumbered in a similar manner, requiring quota to be able to operate.

"Shouldn't" requires opinion, which are best left in our own minds, but "can't" is a functional necessity of maintaining a union. If anyone could open a competing plant, with the only requirement being to meet hygiene criteria, they could destabilize other processors which is what these unions were established to prevent.
MS: Apple is not comfortable working under Khronos IP framework, because of dispute between Apple Legal & Khronos which is private. Can’t talk about the substance of this dispute. Can’t make any statement for Apple to agree to Khronos IP framework. So we’re discussing, what if we don’t fork? We can’t say whether we’re (Apple) happy with that.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1F6ns6I3zs-2JL_dT9hOkX_25...
> "Use it if you've got it, give it back if you're running low".

> You just need to make sure that "full" can be adjusted to make space for whatever application you might want to open next.

> full disclosure, I can't speak for how well this is adopted

This is the issue I'm highlighting. This is what everyone tries - engineers are one of the most vulnerable breeds to overestimating their ability to achieve an ideal plan. It rarely if ever works perfectly, and very often works sub-optimally to the point of significantly hampering overall system performance.

I don't know that Gnome abjectly fails in this goal, but I do know that it's not fast. It's significantly slower than other projects with comparatively much less engineering resources behind them. For some reason.

> It's not being "wasted" it's resulting in faster IO for anything that happens to be in it. Given the choice of having your RAM full or empty... you should pick full every time.

This is absolutely wrong, because you're basing this all on the assumption that if it's not in RAM it'll be loaded from disk. In other words, the assumption that "it" needs to exist in the first place (&/or needs to be the size that it is). This is really disingenuous: when people talk about RAM-hungry apps and wastage they're never targeting optimistic IO (good) they're targeting large unnecessary data being accessed at all.

Good low-RAM apps don't load excessively from disk. They use less data. They have more efficient raw resource handling & execution paths in the first place.

An emphasis on engineering systems that effectively & efficiently release RAM when needed elsewhere focuses person-hours on improving (very complex) pieces of logic that wouldn't be as necessary if said person-hours were instead focused on making those resources being loaded smaller / less numerous.
Give them the cash, everyone is different and they know what's best for them.
It's fraud for sure .. but it doesn't mean he intended to take the money or anything. He was just too naive to understand how dangerous mixing the funds would be during an inevitable period of pressure and (I'm guessing) felt like keeping the mondy separate is the kind of control that an overly bureaucratic bank would need, not a nimble startup like FTX :-/

Don't get me wrong, he should still go to prison.
> "She also does sculpture because every painter eventually becomes a sculptor and every sculptor eventually becomes a painter."

I've noticed this through various reading and art classes back at university, but I've never quite come across a reason why this tends to hold true across the two domains. Why do you think that is? Or, better yet, why does your mother think that is?
Exactly. This is what my business remark is all about.
> Except the math doesn't exert an actual force on you.

Because the math on the page doesn't have the logical relationships with your environment that defines gravity, it will only have those logical relationships with other mathematical objects described in the same system on the page.

If you could project the mathematical structure from the page back into the environment, then the gravity would be felt. This is why simulated systems are those systems, but only within the simulated environment.
Which, to be honest, is just a more contrived way of saying "I know this is true and I don't need researchers telling me otherwise". It is only anecdotal evidence in any case.
Ships aren't autonomous vehicles; they don't passively "sail". A ship has a captain who makes an active decision to depart from port. It is non-serious to use the passive form here.

Also, more importantly: if we can agree that nuclear shutdown was a bad decision, then we can work backwards from that and conclude that the people responsible for it shouldn't be trusted with anything more complex than digging ditches.
I know it's an archaic sentiment, but something about everyone being created equal...
Blue wavelength does have an effect on sleep. The photoreceptors linked to the suppression of melatonin are most sensitive to blue light. And melatonin is associated with the sleep-cycle regulation.
If Musk ate his own cooking he would allow it to continue.
won't survive a grep
rqlite creator here.

I'm not developing libraries, I'm developing an entire RDBMS. In my experience -- and this is broader than rqlite -- integration and end-to-end tests seem like they are great - at the start. But as you rely more and more on them they become costly to maintain and really hard to debug. A single test failure (often due to a flaky, timing-sensitive issue) means wading through layers and layers of code to identify the issue.

Overly relying on integration and end-to-end testing (note I said over-reliance, there is absolutely a need for them) becomes exponentially more costly over time (measured in development velocity and time to debug) as the test suite grows. If you find you're having difficulty identifying a place for them it may that you're not decomposing your software properly in the first place. All this is probably manageable if you're a solo developer, but when a team is building the software it can become really painful.

For more details see the talk I gave to CMU[1] on my testing strategy.

[1]https://youtu.be/JLlIAWjvHxM?t=2067
You can then audit the tests to ensure they test some condition that you are concerned about.

In reality nobody audits source code like that (see heartbleed for an unrelated example of critical code that didn't get proper audits from people who should have cared)
Right? and that was a particularly ridiculous version of it that read like it was parody to any non "crazy" person.
and a lot of the components used (e.g. nozzles) won't be available for third parties

Many inkjets use combination cartridge-printheads and you can buy ink cartridges freely (even if they're overpriced.) https://spritesmods.com/?art=inker&page=2
What Is a DPU?
If it's solely printing ASCII text, an open source daisy wheel printer would be mechanically easy to build. You could even make the daisy wheels swappable to allow different character sets.
It's unclear exactly what you mean by the upthread comment, i.e. how "using a lot of memory" maps to e.g. Linux smaps statistics. But you do mention e.g. gnome-shell taking ~2GB.

My own gnome-shell has e.g. a 100MB allocation where >95MB is in "Private_Dirty", then a ~200MB allocation where all the columns except "Size" in the "/proc/$(pidof gnome-shell)/smaps" are zero.

People typically exclude the latter category when talking about "real" memory use.

But the former is the sort of thing that would make it into "real" memory use by most definitions, and show up in "RSS".

What I'm pointing out is that knowing that doesn't tell you anything about whether the memory use contributes to memory contention, which is the interesting question.

It's entirely possible (and quite common) that most/all of that was used as a one-off, and is either sitting there unused, or would be swapped out as part of expunging stale pages to disk.

So, you could have a process that at one point used 2GB of memory, and still hasn't free()'d it, but for the purposes of needing to fit a 7GB browser process into a total of 8GB of RAM won't contribute to contention. Even though it "uses" 2GB still (as in "RSS" etc.) it's only ever accessing 100MB of those 2GB. The kernel will happily page out 1.9GB to swap, and performance will be mostly unaffected.

To make any claim about whether an application uses a lot of memory on a modern OS you need to know a lot about its lifetime management of data.
Cool problem and I can imagine it would be fun to solve - wish you the best of luck!
Thumb drives in a truck offer great bandwidth but terrible latency.
Because they are people at risk of being marginalized or abused. It doesn’t mean their preferences become law, but they should have a voice.
For english yes, but not other languages.

I edited the comment to reflect the possibility of effective internet discussions shifting to other languages.
Don't forget the big four signed off on evergrande and other Chinese real estate and it seems like there will be no consequences (we can't have the big zero)
The decline of Unix workstations hit me right in the gut. I went into college with dreams of working on operating systems for one of the big Unix vendors like Sun or SGI. Linux started hitting big in the middle of my freshman year and those companies started to decline. Fortunately, I was also into this new thing called "the web" and I was able to pivot my career aspirations toward that.
I really like #9, this seems like a simple way to make your site unusable except via the methods you desire.
> How many 'computer programmers' could do this in today's world?

They're numbered in the thousands.
It's like floppies at the late 00's. You never need them, except for those 5 or 6 fringe use cases that nobody else has (everybody has some 5 or 6 of them).

If our computers were actually able to connect with each other, we would be using phones for everything already. But they can't, and phones are so user hostile that it's not obvious that you can even read your data in any way.
> Almost never

Isn’t this the key point? That *most* “software engineering” is not engineering. I can build a bridge and not be an engineer; similarly I can build software and not be an engineer. The properties of the bridge/software is what makes the difference isn’t it?

> How many large construction projects fail due to incorrect engineering compared to large software projects?

Yes, poor engineering is rampant. But I will argue that malleability also plays a large role in the delta. In traditional engineering you build a car (and you are “done”). In software you build a car and get asked to make it an aeroplane without going back to the drawing board.
It's also a matter of scale and returns.

Were there a fleet of same-model ferries operating close together, then their repair and parts would be readily available nearby. Were it actually important economically for the town to be continually accessible, a ferry repair facility would be located on the route.
Why would the term "evangelical authoritarian" be nonsensical? There are some very hierarchical evangelical subcultures, that frown on criticizing higher ups have very strict rules and do nurture "us vs them" way of looking at the world.

The "evangelical authoritarian" does describe them well.

And I am saying that as someone who grew in evangelical church. Mine was significantly less authoritarian then it gets to be, but I still read enough texts produced by authoritarian ones and had enough contact to know it is not made up construct.
TAI is very useful. The thing people seem really anxious about is that it isn't directly tied to the Earth's rotation. But, like, so what?
A bare metal programming guide
These are common but post-hoc justifications. Government launch monopolies have suppressed a lot of competition in the market, that would exist in plenty if the money was fairly spent.

A particularly salient example in light of Russia's war is that Congress repeatedly underfunded the Commercial Crew Program in favor of over-funding SLS, while we were trying to wean off Russian dependence.

But this is far from the only case. We could have had redundancy in Artemis by designing for commercial lift; half the money split between three providers would have given a lot more lift and a lot better cadence than SLS. We could seek out redundancy for SLS now, by buying rockets Artemis already requires, modified for SLS' flight profile, and spending a tiny fraction on, say, ULA and Blue's rockets.

We would have more backup launch capabilities, and more relevant talent, and more institutional knowledge, if we just invested the money in open-market demand for products, rather than supporting and endorsing monopoly-making. Was Congress more up in arms over Starship HLS, or ULA EELV? Think what it says to the market when a government is more willing to give money to a company for forming a monopoly and to penalize them for flying commercial payloads, than in purchase of a product.

The motivations for these programs aren't actually grounded in the betterment of the industry, nor of the US' launch capabilities in general. There is no way ~$100B on SLS/Orion is a sane allocation of money for that.
What do you mean by "the way it's able to access data"? AFAIK ChatGPT is just a fine tuned version of GPT-3.5 optimized for chat[1], it isn't any different from GPT-2 in the way it accesses data.

[1]: https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/#methods
A discussion about ethics must involve a discussion about the effects of a system of ethics on a group of people: This is a real-world effect that must have it's issues and priors spoken about, or you risk creating an ethical system for a group of people that will inevitably destroy them (which I would argue is bad, but I guess that is also debatable).

Such a discussion is about something tangible, and not purely about held opinion (i.e. you can go out and test it). I can see how someone might find that engaging. You are right that I usually do not (unless my conversational buddies have something novel to say about the subject, I find it extremely tedious). It is a good point, thank you.
Most of the human responses on HN can be distilled down to about a dozen "trope" answers. For example "Rewrite it in Rust" or "Patents are bad" or "Let's not turn this into reddit" or "I'm special so x doesn't apply to me" or "Zoning laws shouldn't exist", etc.

So you don't even need ChatGPT to be convincing on Hacker News. You just need a few dozen lines of Perl.
Hugging Face: Deep Reinforcement Learning Course
> That just show that the robot is consistent, not that it actually makes sense.

A consistent argument is an argument that makes sense to the robot, not necessarily one that makes sense to you.
> arguably entirely fantastical market cap

The idea of using market cap as a frame of reference for crypto needs to die. There are much stricter controls about how a company issues more stock (and thus can inflate or deflate the price) than how a cryptocurrency issues more coins. Also, cryptocurrency market caps are denominated as an exchange of <insert your country> fiat, whereas a company's market cap is in the fiat in which the company is actually sourced (e.g. NASDAQ).

You just can't compare the two.
NIST made a handy flowchart.

https://twitter.com/vitalikbuterin/status/106746870697496166...