skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yeah, but people were also saying this about self-driving cars, and guess what that long tail is super long, and its also far fatter than we expected. 10 years ago people were saying AI was coming for taxi drivers, and as far as I can tell we're still 10 years away.

I'm nonplussed by ChatGPT because the hype around it is largely the same as was for Github Copilot and Copilot fizzled badly. (Full disclosure: I pay for Copilot because it is somewhat useful).
Good ideas. Thanks. I don’t have much money to spend on it but I am willing to put some time in.
I have this suspicion that often people who thrive at "school" suck at doing things, their whole life they are getting programmed to:

a) do things for an quick and clear reward

b) always be in extremely well defined rules (when semester starts you see how people obsess over edge cases and their impact on grade with a professor)

c) always do it for pleasing someone else and get their admiration (teachers, parents, peers, etc)

d) only be motivated by fear

In a way the better you adapt to that system the more 'slave' minded you become and only do what is asked, when rewarded, given clear instructions and a threat of leashes is near. Often Top students in HS end up mediocre at college and life.

Lack of motivation plagues them all life as they have no clear guidelines, external threats, or third person providing validation.
Peer as in the aristocratic tradition of people of equal social standing and status? That's how you end up with institutional corruption, one hand washing the other, PI's rubber-stamping each other's shoddy work because members of the club are expected to support each other, and so on.

Or, peer as in someone of equivalent actual knowledge and experience? AI isn't there yet, but I imagine a machine learning model trained on published papers in a given field would be able to quickly spot a lot of simple errors and/or poorly supported conclusions.
(Tailscalar and a tailnet lock author here)

If you're okay with trusting Tailscale's control plane, we have a feature for exactly this use case! Its called Device Authorization: https://tailscale.com/kb/1099/device-authorization/

You could also use tailnet lock in this fashion, by issuing a `tailscale lock sign` command for the new node once you've verified the provenance of the new device. Because it involves signatures with keys on your device it could never be as simple as a REST API, but maybe we could offer a more easy to automate command or better client library support (suggestions welcome!)
yeah. I realized that after someone else posted the same. I was referring to another crazy idea: Nuke the CO2 ice caps for a greenhouse effect on the entire planet. [1]

[1] https://www.sciencealert.com/elon-musk-still-wants-to-drop-n...
No worries - the part about tech being better than almost any other industry.
There is/was already a social network for that - Ning.

Back when social network platforms became A Thing they adopted OpenSocial - they had a news feed, notifications, etc - but each social network was completely isolated. I haven't taken a look at Ning since I worked on social networking apps about 12 years ago, so I have no clue how they've evolved since then.
it's a civil war, which the US ensured would not be resolved, firstly by helping transport Chiang to Taiwan in 1949, and therefore ensuring continuation of conflict. In US interests to at least avoid reunification, probably now in US interest for hot war to break out
This could be a boon for aquatic dead zones that suffer from hypoxia (low dissolved oxygen). The oxygen released during electrolysis could be reintroduced into the water to bring it back up to safe levels. Obviously some efforts need to be made to make sure that the salt and oxygen levels don't get too high.
Marker placement in motion capture is often intentionally bilaterally asymmetric because it makes automatic labeling of markers easier (with respect to side/orientation of the subject).

Source: Am a biomechanist with several years of mocap experience.
The problem is that the number of unarmed people shot by police should be zero. There are bizarre, exceptional circumstances, but they should be numbered in the handfuls, not in "small fractions".

Once it gets beyond a rounding error, you get a vicious cycle. An armed criminal now has to make a judgment call: if they disarm, will they be shot anyway? An unarmed civilian has to watch every cop to wonder if this is the one with a bad attitude and a gun. And now the police are worried, too: every single person has to be treated as if they are armed, and has to be prepared to shoot them on very short notice if they are.

Exacerbating matters is that there is a large contingent of people who will excuse every single unarmed shooting. There is no circumstance so egregious that won't bring out a lot of people finding excuses for it, no matter how absurd. So people believe that each unjustified shooting is prelude to even more, because you never get a unanimous "This was a bad thing and we need that to not happen again". Instead, we hear loudly "This was an OK thing and could happen to you."

So people are reacting rationally to a "very small fraction" of shootings, because the consequences are so bad. It doesn't matter that the overall number is small: it's enormous when it's you, and that enormity overshadows many people who want nothing more than to have it not be them.
I have this two CD compilation of Carlos' work on The Shining, probably a bootleg but how else could I get it? It's quite interesting and I think Kubrick ought to have used more of it.
I understand your frustration, but the poetry team's response makes sense. The situation you got yourself is quite strange. System package python environments are notoriously nasty (frankly they were a mistake, but they emerged before venv, so it's hard to fault).

Non-PEP440 compliant libraries are also a pain in the ass.

Put both those facts together and you are playing with fire. In all likelihood you will eventually footgun yourself and end up with a python env superfund.

Just use virtual envs for everything.

I say this coming from over a decade of python experience and lots of time spent installing python in exotic environments.
I've long wondered if a part of peer review needs to be replication.

OR if there needs to be better incentives around finding nothing out. Like, given the goal is getting published, it feels like there should be better incentives for papers around not finding anything in an interesting way, or hypothesis testing and discovering your hypothesis was wrong.
Automation doesn't have to outperform the best of us, it only has to outperform the worst of us to have a serious impact. Outperforming a 50th percentile coder is a huge deal.
Ask HN: Are there any code gen tools (similar to Copilot) that use your code?
I'm fascinated by Copilot, ChatGPT, etc, but what I'm really wondering about: Are there any tools like those that learn from your own code (especially code in the same repo) to give smarter recommendations?

For example, I have a lot of patterns already established for controllers/views in my Phoenix project, and it would be incredibly helpful if when I add a new controller, the tool could suggest an implementation based on patterns in others. Such as the pagination strategy I use, the authentication and access control, common accessor methods I create, etc.
sovereignty is never about ROI, dumber wars have been fought over less
They're most of the way to doing it correctly! What's missing is a few edge cases, such as ensuring the click is happening without modifier keys.

This is how react-router handles it: https://github.com/remix-run/react-router/blob/main/packages...
I learned so much from keeping a copy of the yellow catalog in the bathroom. Like, how many different kinds of nuts and bolts and fittings there are. I still remember that stuff when a colleague is trying to design something.

In addition to a paper catalog that "just worked," they started out with a business that just worked, before the Internet came along. I'd say that Mouser and Digi-Key stand out in that regard too. About 25 years ago I remember calling McMaster and ordering a heavy steel machine base. It showed up the next day on a flat bed truck, and had to be unloaded with the forklift. It must have been drop shipped from their supplier, meaning they had already worked out a huge amount of logistics stuff before ever going online.
Or, direct air carbon capture. Getting to net zero would cost ~ $1 / gallon of gasoline (and equivalent for other things that emit.) I think we should be paying ~ twice that, minimum.

It's far less risky than trying to block out the sun.
I, also, can't login with google. Some browser extension must be breaking it.
>If now you are saying that Republicans are more often banned, maybe one reason is that Republicans are more prone to accept hatred or lies as part of their political ideology strategy. But being banned is a strategy consequence, it's the price you pay if you go down this road that is, again, totally a choice (as long as your political ideology is not based on hatred and lies).

I don't think that aligns with the doc drops from Twitter
How will Arc Browser make money?
NTOP – Linux “top” for Node.js part 2, now working directly from CLI-only
I'm working on this tool "ntop" to be able to quickly see the heaviest functions in any running Node process like "top" command for regular processes in Linux. The initial version required code changes but now it's working with just CLI (Linux only first)

npm i -g ntop

ntop inject 12345 // where 12345 is process id

ntop 12345

Prints:

Profiling client node-proc-3150 time 3000

(garbage collector) | 11.703ms |

utils.bulkPreparePacket | 1.53ms | file:///home/app/src/Utils.js:91:26

(anonymous) | 1.181ms | evalmachine.:3:14

(anonymous) | 1.126ms | file:///home/app/node_modules/lodash/lodash.js:1223:19

https://github.com/DVLP/ntop/
Hard disagree. The average middle school picture will have certain aspects exaggerated giving you insights into the minds eye of the creator, how they see the world, what details they focus on. There is no such minds eye behind AI art so it's incredibly boring and mundane, no matter how good a filter you apply on top of it's fundamental lack of soul or anything interesting to observe in the picture beyond surface level. It's great for making art for assets for businesses to use, it's almost a perfect match, as they are looking to have no controversial soul to the assets they use, but lots of pretty bubblegum polish.
Why Archaeologists Are Not Looking for Atlantis
Maybe a little off topic, but I'm curious -- why are all of the Actually Portable programs always named with ".com" at the end? Does this have any special purpose?
is not due to pure mapping data

Two big factors were that Google made itself an early mover in this space, and it made the product available for free.

In the world before Google Maps, maps were frightfully expensive, or tremendously outdated.

I worked for a company that subscribed to a digital mapping service. We paid large sums of money each year for the right to use the maps. In addition to having a dedicated terminal, we even had a full-time staffer whose job was to touch up the generated maps for our purposes.

Then Google bought Keyhole, and made all of its treasures available to the public for free.

It's like someone opened a bakery and gave away bread for free until all the other bakeries went out of business. A business model that drug dealers sometimes use.

Then the remaining Google bakery decided that the way it would make money from its bread monopoly is to collect personal data on everyone who eats bread, while pretending that the bread is available at no cost.
Valve hit a home run with the first year of Steam Deck
Agreed, my point is there is nothing unusual, it's a common practice everywhere, so I don't get why Bloomberg needs a big report, not sure if it did for all other big guys in the past, otherwise it seems it has an interest to target Elon.

As far as fraud goes, I hope the system will work out when bad things went too far there. We're all innocent with good intention until proven otherwise, Elon should be treated the same, like him or not.
I lived in Pawtucket, Rhode Island where Wendy was from in 1982 when Wendy did this and never heard of her. Pawtucket was a tough multi-ethnic working class town, so I can't imagine how difficult it was for her to be public at that time. I was really into synthesizers then too. Amazing stuff.

Tron Suite - Wendy Carlos (1982)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5RcNuQXuR4

Clockwork Orange [1971] - Theme

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MGqVkk3Uss
Noob questions, thanks in advance for humoring:

Do self-driving cars model, learn from, or both, from other cars? Say there's a new obstruction (traffic cones around maintenance crew). When deciding what to do, eg left or right, does the self-driver observe what the proceeding cars did?

Do self-drivers remember prior decisions? On the daily commute, there's a speed bump, pot hole, or whatever. Does the car anticipate the remembered road feature? Like maybe "Oh, last time I saw this pot hole, I had to swerve right. So this time I'm going tack right a little earlier."

Sorry for noob questions. Imagining a ubiquitous self-driving future, I keep thinking of boids and uncoordinated collective action, like flocking and murmurings. Wouldn't it be cool if cars did similar stuff?
This is the space project that most excites me and the one I most hope we solve in my lifetime. Much more interesting than Mars (not that you can't do both).

This video on gravitational lensing blew my mind https://youtu.be/NQFqDKRAROI

What do you think the odds are of if it being done IRL?
The final paragraph of the article is interesting though:

> Her self-imposed seclusion is a cautionary tale for us today, something that she admitted in the 1979 People interview. “The public turned out to be amazingly tolerant or, if you wish, indifferent,” she said. “There had never been any need of this charade to have taken place. It had proven a monstrous waste of years of my life.”

While that kind of tolerance/indifference wasn't available to everyone -- it probably helped to be wealthy enough to do what you want, and to be already established as a respected musician (Carlos actually was and still is world-famous!), and I'm sure it wasn't even as universal for Carlos as she was feeling it to be when she gave that quote in 1979 -- the quote makes me wonder if things have gotten worse over the past few years.

While there's more public acceptance in some quarters, it's also become a much bigger controversy in fact. It's hard to imagine a public figure feeling the kind of "indifference" Carlos described, where it didn't actually effect her career much, it wasn't a big deal to it. It was seen as an oddity, yes, but trans was perhaps not the cultural flashpoint like it is now.

Rather than "even today", I wonder and suspect that some things may actually have gotten much worse than they were in 1979 -- for all kinds of things, actually.
As an industry we need to get over this pattern of scoping down usage of something that has failed it’s prime directive. People still use MD5 in secure related things because it’s been allowed to stick around without huge deprecation warnings in libraries and tools.

SHA1 (and MD5) need to be treated the same way you would treat O(n^2) sorting in a code review for a PR written by a newbie.
What was the specific crime committed though?
I've done some work on AI audio synthesis and the artifacts you're hearing in these clips are coming from the algorithm that is used to go from the synthesized spectrogram to the audio (the Griffin-Lim algorithm).

Audio spectrograms have two components: the magnitude and the phase. Most of the information and structure is in the magnitude spectrogram so neural nets generally only synthesize that. If you were to look at a phase spectrogram it looks completely random and neural nets have a very, very difficult time learning how to generate good phases.

When you go from a spectrogram to audio you need both the magnitudes and phases, but if the neural net only generates the magnitudes you have a problem. This is where the Griffin-Lim algorithm comes in. It tries to find a set of phases that works with the magnitudes so that you can generate the audio. It generally works pretty well, but tends to produce that sort of resonant artifact that you're noticing, especially when the magnitude spectrogram is synthesized (and therefore doesn't necessarily have a consistent set of phases).

There are other ways of using neural nets to synthesize the audio directly (Wavenet being the earliest big success), but they tend to be much more expensive than Griffin-Lim. Raw audio data is hard for neural nets to work with because the context size is so large.
It indeed does. The only difference is that Rust has traits (similar to C++'s concepts) which require explicit mention of what interface the type parameters have inside the function, whereas C++'s templates will have a compile error after instantiation if you passed something that didn't meet the expected contract. This is closer to Rust's macros in operation.

Given

fn foo<T>(a: T, b: T) -> T { a + b }

The compiler will complain that you should have been explicit on how T is going to be used:

error[E0369]: cannot add `T` to `T`
--> src/lib.rs:1:32
|
1 | fn foo<T>(a: T, b: T) -> T { a + b }
| - ^ - T
| |
| T
|
help: consider restricting type parameter `T`
|
1 | fn foo<T: Add<Output = T>>(a: T, b: T) -> T { a + b }
| +++++++++++++++++

whereas in C++ this would have been accepted until you called foo with two things that couldn't be added together, like a Rust macro[1].

[1]: https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=nightly&mode=debug&editi...
Correct. I love that the focus of HN is on discussing topics, not discussing individuals. Of course a topic could be an individual, like Elmo, but that's not the focus of the site itself. I don't follow any individuals on HN, I just respond to whomever I'm discussing a topic with and I don't care who that is.
no people had good understanding, or consistent explanations. Thunder = angry God. Sickness/diseases natural things but curable with leaves and herbs sometimes. Rain another natural gift from God. Also you seek answers to question that are new, not something you grew up with. Did you when woke up question why air is less dense than water? No! Does it bother you why sunlight is so bright? no it's just a matter of fact.
Sure, it’s good to point out the difference between “the behavior of a typical optimizing compiler” and “things actually guaranteed by the language”. The context of the discussion was the former, I think. I’m not even that certain that monomorphization is actually required in theory.
> We mash together ideas, and try to distance it from other works. It doesn't matter what we take as inspiration, or so we claim, as long as the output doesn't overlap too much with pre-existing work.

I feel a big part what makes it okay or not okay here is intention and capability. Early in an artistic journey things can be highly derivative but that's due to the student's capabilities. A beginner may not intend to be derivative but can't do better.

I see pages of applications of ML out there being derivative on purpose (Edit: seemingly trying to 'outperform' given freelance artists with glee, in their own styles).
Anyone need Twitter furniture?
Get angry.

When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back! Get mad!
The proven downside is the money/time spent on it. And plenty of that "volunteer" time is time researchers would otherwise have spent on research. (Note: I'm not counting the time spent doing the review and feeding that back to the researcher — that can be valuable. I am counting time spent doing countless revisions just to please a reviewer, time spent resubmitting work elsewhere, etc.) And don't get me started on money wasted on price-gouging publishers thanks to their role as gatekeepers of career credentials.

The question is not why scientists spend time doing peer review. The question is: why do academics waste time bending over backwards to adapt to the whims of a particular reviewer even beyond when they feel the input is useful? (And the answer is above: the career credentials.)

Again, I'm not agains peer review by itself. But it should not be a gatekeeper to publication, nor have this much leverage on people's careers (a binary decision for every article).
I get it. I (also many people I talk to) feel a bit "different" after the vax. It's the same for all of us: feeling a bit "weird" and "off" and slightly less energetic, after the vax (not immediately after, that's expected of course, but I'm talking about the upcoming months).

After hearing all the mysterious side effects and the actual virus not really much dangerous than common cold nowadays, I doubt I'll take another shot after now.
This is huge.

This show me that Stable Diffusion can create anything with the following conditions:

1. Can be represented as as static item on two dimensions (their weaving together notwithstanding, it is still piece-by-piece statically built)

2. Acceptable with a certain amount of lossiness on the encoding/decoding

3. Can be presented through a medium that at some point in creation is digitally encoded somewhere.

This presents a lot of very interesting changes for the near term. ID.me and similar security approaches are basically dead. Chain of custody proof will become more and more important.

Can stable diffusion work across more than two dimensions?
Never tried this with RDS, but it's entirely possible to use postgres_fdw to interact with a foreign table on another postgres server, where you might have more choice about what extensions you run.

I'm doing this right now because I have a postgres installation that it's not yet convenient to upgrade beyond v12, but where I'd really like the benefit of the recently-improved JDBC FDW, which requires at least v13.
Isn't that exactly how the vast majority of engineers pass interviews today? They study up on the handful of algorithms that come up in interviews and then (with varying levels of acting) recite the answer to the question they knew they would get. What? Overfittings only bad in if you're a robot huh?
That person was me.
I agree that non-profits can buy real estate.

Maybe I wasn't clear, but my point what that charities cant legally operate for the sole benefit of the donor.

I used buying a vacation home as example of this. A charity cant do that legally. A shady charity might buy a headquarters as a pretext an use it as a vacation home.
> It's the transition period - the accounting wizard or the brilliant doctor losing their jobs and status and becoming kindergarten teachers or care takers or unemployed.

Yes, this is a big problem.

However... a lot of people would enjoy being teachers, albeit with significant improvements to the educational systems.
Right.

So Disney don’t need to worry about AI art tools - so ‘attacking’ them with such tools does nothing.
One thing i have read but not seen brought up here yet is that zwave has so far only have one hardware soc vendor (silicon labs). This would seem like how they have been able to enforce certification compliance. And it’s probably leads to higher cost (hardware and software?) and thus lower adoption.

This open source project reportedly will start allowing more chip vendor as well, so it will be interesting how that affects the ecosystem.