skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ads will be even more effective inserted into prose.
I agree. Chat-as-search is very promising but I think it will cause big issues because people will not check the veracity of its statements. Right now, you actually have to go to a page to find the info and make up your mind on whether you trust this source. (Say, I generally trust CDC.) Chat simply linking to sources will not solve this problem because we are lazy. But, since we are lazy, I think it will take over the current model.
I've been debating moving from TTRSS to FreshRSS, but I have a question: can you get a "group by feed" view when I'm viewing a whole category/folder? Also, is there any kind of auto-tag system? I like to be able to take "Ask HN" and "Show HN" to separate them from a bigger HN feed, and I'm not sure if I can do that in FreshRSS.
Well, buying the leading node is big $ that not everyone can afford. Putting memory on package runs counter to repairability, modularity, etc.

When you're as vertically integrated and rich as Apple it makes sense.
You're missing the bit that "moves bit too much in wrong direction" is a strong signal that your analysis is fundamentally flawed. Maybe catastrophic news came out since you bought in.
Ask HN: Schwab Voice Id Secure?
Charles Schwab offers a voice id to verify who you are, instead of using a password. See https://www.schwab.com/voice-id. I'm skeptical this is very secure, especially with AI that can mimic people's voice. I like the idea of it though if it is secure. Anyone have any insights?
Sure, but Shorts has only been around for about a year.

> Now, Shorts claims 1.5 billion monthly viewers — more than TikTok has at 1 billion viewers a month — and gets 30 billion views a day. (In October, Meta said in an earnings call that Reels gets 140 billion “plays” a day across Instagram and Facebook, which includes when videos start automatically, as well as when someone clicks play. TikTok didn’t respond to requests for comment on views per day.) But unlike the rest of YouTube, which often brags that people watch more than a billion hours of video a day, the company doesn’t disclose watch time figures for Shorts.

> https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardnieva/2022/12/20/youtube...

Political pressure to cancel TikTok + heavy growth in Shorts and Shorts will be the main short video site within 3 years.
I think Elon threw his hat in the ring for "most wealth lost by and individual in a single year." And I agree, it is a really tough game to play. And now the table stakes are basically unreachable by most.
You don't actually seem to be addressing the quoted text... but I can reply to your arguments.

Sure, it would be ideal if there were a new book on C which did a better job of explaining some of the developments since K&R 2ed was written. If that book exists, I'm not aware of it. All of the books I've seen recommended are either too long, or poorly written. K&R's strong advantage isn't that it's short, it's that it's very strong pedagogically.

A "how do I learn C?" thread comes up on HN about once a month. In each of these threads, people will steer people clear of K&R, quoting something or another about how K&R isn't appropriate for this day and age (note: you do not explain why you think it isn't appropriate!). The tacit assumption here is that you can only read one book, or that if you read a book which isn't "perfect", you are somehow tainting yourself with corrupted knowledge. I think this is nonsense. An important meta-skill for learning is the ability to discern between good and bad information. The only way to build that skill is by consulting multiple sources.

Note that in my actual reply to OP, I don't specifically advocate for reading K&R, but instead to take a multipronged approach where you primarily draw from whatever learning medium you're most comfortable with. Most people I know that are in their early 20s or younger prefer learning from videos (I'm a math teacher and have lots of experience with people this age).
4 years of development time, 1 year of production to build inventory projected to last 6 months or something.

Take pre-orders a few weeks in advance, then everyone can have it day 1. No scalpers reselling them on eBay for 10 times the cost. No stampede at Apple stores because they already have a few weeks of inventory.

The accelerated product cycle is why you have awful launches like consoles. The product is barely finished and rushed into production in time for Christmas. There's not time to build the actual units. Slow down a bit and you can solve that problem.
And it will never be, because they will be always worried about PR, about regulators, about cannibalizing legacy business, etc. A new player who isn't held back by this has a good chance of disrupting the market with inferior technology. It happened over and over in the history of tech.

I'm sure there were quite a few SGI, Sun, and IBM executives laughing at that amateurish thing called Linux...
> live in a "you'll fucking buy it anyways" economy now.

In the case of Equifax, you are basically forced to use them (as the choice isn't yours to make).
TBF some methods are quite clean and very reliable.

The professional medical bit would mostly be to ensure proper oversight, proper handling of the remains, and allow the service to be provided to people physically incapable of doing so on their own.
How is Google Search dead? When by your own admission you still use it with a "prefix", instead of searching directly on Reddit or SO.

Not only is Google Search not dead by any measure, but 1/ most websites are completely incapable of implementing a local search function that actually works, and 2/ all of Google competitors try to copy its features (and do a bad job at it).

I don't work for Google, I don't own Google stock. But Google's dominance is hard to not see.
Google has consistently better search results than every other search engine so this doesn't seem true to me.
Oh that’s an interesting angle.
I've already regularly replaced many search queries with ChatGPT. The spam on G is just too painful to wade through. It's far from perfect and I wish I could 'tune' it to be less 'mealymouth' where the answers feel almost deliberately nerf'd to be qualified and generic but if you could tune it to offer strong opinions on these - not even politics but even product queries like, "best place to buy X" or "best value robot vacuum" that'd be interesting as these are super spammed on traditional search and I think an AI with strong opinions that could have a conversation about the product would be categorially better. Like I need to replace my water heater and I want a reasonable assortment of options for my situation from a dispassionate AI that isn't trying to sell me anything.
I put in a Python script I wrote to automate some things around AWS. It described the purpose of the scripts. Then I asked it make some changes and it did. I asked it why would I use it. It gave me a plausible explanation. I asked it to add comments and the comments were pretty good.

I even asked it how the script could be improved and it made suggestions around adding error handling and making some hard coded names into command line parameters.

I asked it to give me code to implement the suggestions and it gave me working code.

It’s much better than you give it credit for.
I'd imagine Google also has a far superior internal dataset for training considering their core competency literally involves indexing the entire internet.

All Google needs to do is launch a superior LLM API on Google Cloud and essentially hedge their bets that any replacement for Google Search will be built on their API anyway. Or just spinoff a shell company so Google doesn't get bad PR for any bad results returned by their ChatGPT equivalent. Microsoft has avoided any real flak for the stuff that OpenAI releases

The other question is how does something like ChatGPT monetize to pay for the massive costs to serve queries? Google engineers have already tested this and say that LLM queries are orders of magnitude more expensive to serve than current results and I don't seen any paid service replacing a free search engine
Madoff clawbacks took years. Here’s a story from 2018, and litigation is still ongoing: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-amazing-madoff-clawback-154...

Importantly, clawbacks went way back in time. If you put $5 million in in 2000 and pulled $10 million out in 2002 then you had FBI agents at your door in 2010.

There’s going to be a lot of Lamborghinis on the used market, and plenty of vacancies in Miami condo towers soon.
A relevant factor is market segmentation - the average ad revenue is a bad target for such a price, since the people who are willing to pay $x/month for an ad-free version are the ones who are much more valuable to advertisers than the average.
Are you saying that the articles claims of Google leadership seeing this as a critical risk are false?

Because if Google sees this as a "red alert", it doesn't seem to be so laughable.

Even if Google can easily offer the same , and even superior functionality, it's much harder to cram ads into a chat conversation.

Even more so if competitors can offer comparable functionality.

Edit: To clarify, because this was mentioned multiple times:

There are two aspects why this might be bad for Google:

There are lot's of ways to monetize a chat bot, many of which would probably be even more effective than current ads, because they would feel more organic and thus more trustworthy.

But they would be highly misleading, and I would very much hope for regulators to quickly step in and require a clear indication that a suggestion was paid for. There are already quite strict rules around product placement in the EU, and this is definitely worse.

Sure, having to announce what is an ad is just the status quo. But I believe that would be a lot more off-putting in an "organic" conversation.

Secondly, Google benefits a lot from people clicking on links which then lead to sites that show more Google ads.
A more guided and effective "chat search" experience would probably cut out a lot of those ad impressions.

Third: Google has enjoyed a very dominant position in terms of market capture and technology lead. A new technology always has the potential to upset the balance and significantly weaken the current leader, because there are now younger, leaner and more agile competitors.
Biden signs post-quantum cybersecurity guidelines into law
Exactly. “Engineer Blows Budget” is also known as a day that ends in “y”.
doesn't quite make sense given they are so different - there was this again recently posted though https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34096668
Hell, I would argue that Shorts lowers the value of YouTube as a whole, from a consumer point of view.

It breaks UI continuity just so it can shove a product down your throat that is basically just TikTok but worse.
In my experience, linux as a technical expert can often times get messy. I’m probably just not the sharpest tool in the shed, but I often got in my own way. The default distros work pretty well these days for a laymen, because they mostly won’t tweak it to the extent, say, I would.

You are experienced and I share some of the pain, so I won’t beat the point in. But I do think every OS has its pain points and advantages — and linux has a unique adaptability that just about anyone can find their niche in. Nothing is bug free but it might just be smoother, given advertising has infected the major corporate Oses.
SAL is deliberately designed such that it can be defined as a bunch of macros that expand to whatever compiler-specific magic the implementation needs (e.g. MSYS64 doesn't support it at all, but they define all those macros as no-op, so code still compiles). So in principle it could work across implementations.
Surely someone is exploring language models that can be constantly updated in real time?

OpenAI is a non profit funded by people like Sam Altman, I’m not sure they don’t just have billions to invest.
> The biggest threat to Google's business is ....

I would argue it's Google themselves. They just do not provide much benefit to their user base anymore, cruising on brand name alone in today's market is a gamble. Sure they can keep paying Apple, Mozilla to make google their default search engine... But does google search still provide good results? Better than reddit, amazon, apple, <insert your favorite here>. Android is still massive in non-US markets, so they corner their audience there... But in the US, what is still dominant? Google maps?
sayhello producing some great results. hyperlinks need to be more userfriendly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits

openness to experience (inventive/curious vs. consistent/cautious)

conscientiousness (efficient/organized vs. extravagant/careless)

extraversion (outgoing/energetic vs. solitary/reserved)

agreeableness (friendly/compassionate vs. critical/rational)

neuroticism (sensitive/nervous vs. resilient/confident)
> For companies that have become extraordinarily successful doing one market-defining thing, it is hard to have a second act with something entirely different.

Google are extraordinarily successful at selling ads. Their search engine is mostly a frontend for their add business. I don't see a way for ChatGPT to disrupt that market any time soon.
If you need custom build functions like that, neither Meson nor CMake are a good choice. If you have complicated build logic, you'd be better off with something more advanced, like scons, waf, bazel, ant, buck, etc.
Apparently around 15% of highschoolers take calculus. I dunno, I think “significantly less than 50%” has a generally right-ish feeling, sort of like, something that most people don’t do but not like super-esoteric. But it is subjective.

https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/calculus-is-the-pea...

It is possible that the majority of students forget it though, I tutored calculus for a bit and it didn’t always seem like their hearts were in it.
Can you use python or ruby with something like this, or only C?
meh - Google execs using the Code Red to whip up the team.

(and it's legit: ignore enough threats and one them takes you down)
Why not just ask "what problem are you trying to solve?", or "What do you want it to do?"?.. Not only does this put the requirement back on the asker to describe what they want you to do, it removes your preconceptions from the request.

A mistake I often see myself making is that as soon as I get asked to do something I stop listening and start planning how I'm going to implement the solution. In many cases my preconceived solution will not solve the actual problem, because I've not actually found what the problem is that needs to be solved.

In many cases the requester doesn't really know what they are asking for and will need some prompting to actually think it through. This requires a discussion, rather than a simplistic request to define "use case".
No, as stated, they don't encrypt the URL. This is likely so that, regardless of what you have entered for your "when is master password required" settings, the browser plugin can highlight when it knows that you've entered a password for a site.
The now-deleted Tumblr posts, supposedly:

https://caroline.milkyeggs.com/
That's fine, but apart from HN I read all my stuff from miniflux. That's where I tag and organize stuff, and also send to Walabag whatever I want to keep long term. Email is something in addition to that
I'm saying that Google has been working on language models longer than OpenAI has even existed has probably has an order of magnitude more data to train on. The battle will be one of user experience, which can be copied relatively easily - not technology.

For what it's worth, I'm not saying Google is unbeatable. I just don't think a language model trained on public data will beat Google. Maybe if it's some walled garden language model that has data that cannot be replicated, sure. That is my main point. Walled gardens will beat Google.
The elements are different. Typically “conspiracy to commit X” requires some number of people agreeing to do X and then someone from the group doing at least one overt act in furtherance of that agreement. So you can be guilty of “conspiracy to commit X” without ever getting even remotely close to doing X.

So for example if two mates talk about that they are going to kill person Y, that is the agreement. And then one of them buys a gun, that is an overt act. And even if person Y has very good security, and the two dudes have no chance in hell of murdering Y ever, that is still a “conspiracy to muder” charge.
You're assuming that it would be valued 40M at exit, right?

How would it be different from them giving me 0.5% instead of 1% but at "face value"?
TIL there is an Era 2 to Mistborn - just put holds on all of them at my library. 22nd in line for the most recent one!
Mathematics is different from programming as an activity and ontologically.

Activity-wise, mathematics is about intuiting and proving theorems to progress the frontier of knowledge about abstract mathematical objects (groups, probability distributions, triangles, matrices, knots, ...) and their interconnections. This has little to do with programming, but
proofs by mathematical induction (German "vollständige Induktion" = "complete(d) induction"), which is actually - like all mathematics - a deductive method, can be better understood after understanding recursion and loops. It is also very hard.

Ontologically, for instance, "x = y" in mathematics means "the unknown value x equals the value y", and that is true always, at any time (until the context changes from one theorem/proof to another, when x and y may be 'recycled' without saying it explicitly). In contrast, "x = y" in (e.g. Python) programming means, "look up the value stored in the memory location labeled y and copy that value to the memory location labeled x." This is rarely said in textbooks and tutorials, so I tend to make a point of stressing this when teaching programming, in particular to non-computer scientists.

What the OP refers to is perhaps more applied mathematics than mathematics, though: using mathematics as a modeling tool.

I like the OP, but what is missing from it is the recognition that a lot of what he talks about is already happening in machine learning: any machine learning is mathematically a numeric optimization process, so all these tools like Tensorflow or PyTorch under the hood use what the OP calls "FORTRAN" way, often implemented in C++ and sometimes actual battle-tested FORTRAN libraries (e.g. via NumPy https://numpy.org/doc/stable/user/building.html#accelerated-...).
The phone comes out once a year, anything that doesn’t make it can just go in next year.
I remember there was something similar last year, where the top 5% or 10% of users (based on karma) were listed/ranked. Any bright mind with free time willing to do something like this and share it? (Yes I know the answer, I should do it :-))
I wonder if you could construct the EM field needed for remote charging by using interference across a grid-shaped coil. The Tesla approach seems pretty brute-forced.
>PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PROTECT YOUR MENTAL HEALTH AT ALL COST!

You forgot to mention physical health, unlike mental health the damage to physical health can be relatively permanent and relatively irreversible. And of course physical health and mental health is related.
One other piece of additional context that I think is important: I assume the reason this old presentation is linked here today is because it was linked from this LA Times article about tracking Musk's jet: https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2022-12-21/la-fi-priv....

Plane trackers have discovered secret government surveillance programs, sparking congressional inquiries. They have tracked dictators and criminals. They did help uncover the CIA's extraordinary rendition program. They did track a Saudi kill squad's movements, after the fact.

There is no evidence that anyone has ever been killed, injured, or threatened using plane tracking data.
Of course Google can make money in the same way, but my point is that any reasonable price of what people would pay for a ChatGPT-like-service (which has to be competitive, as it can be replicated by others and the costs aren't that high) is far less than what Google can currently earn from the same queries through ads.

Like, currently a Google competitor like Bing or DuckDuckGo is still sending lots of money to Google because they redirect users to websites showing Google ads. A non-Google ChatGPT pays Google nothing.
Just arbitraging ensures this scheme never blows up in their faces and they can never get charged with a crime. Acting shady (but not actually stealing anything) isn't illegal.
Not from what I have seen, It’s kinda risky because the fact that Ractors still is in experimental stage means that there couls be major breaking changes at any time, both how you use it and internally.
What would you use for your 64-bit integer type, then?
Him and Kate Reading did an excellent job with the Wheel of Time. He does so many different voices and really amplifies the emotion of a scene. Puts to bed any questions of basic voice to text replacing audiobooks in the near future.
If I had the option between going back in time and killing Hitler, or going back in time and preventing CMake from ever being written, I'd pick the latter every single time[1].

Same with Bluetooth, Qt and every other piece of janky garbage that works just well enough to survive, but badly enough that every single person on the planet hates it.

[1] This is obviously hyperbole, before anyone gets "HN literal" in the replies.
Both Firefox and Chrome use GTK under GNU/Linux, the KDE team has invested a lot of effort in keeping GTK as well supported as you could hope for. Using GTK is fine, though of course Qt allows you to ship a single application to not only Windows, GNU/Linux, and Mac, but with some tweaking Android as well.
ractors, due to its "no shared or immutable only memory" constraints, is fundamentally incompatible with 99% of ruby code in the wild. I don't see it getting much adoption until some of those constraints are relaxed.
So, mRNA vaccines lead to cancers?
Initially I used Mailbrew, but for the last 5 months I've been happily using my own open-source tool through Obsidian: https://github.com/piqoni/matcha

It is a daily digest and supports also terminal mode.
Like "dependency(..., include_type: 'system')"?
The spiral rule is itself inherently non-trivial in application.
LPT: Don't insult the people buying your cars while you are flailing at running twitter.
> it's much harder to cram ads into a chat conversation.

why do I feel like this sentence will age poorly
Not much no. Most of the places I travel have fairly good public transport options. Still, I was under the impression that it was fairly common for airports and even credit card providers to assist in such matters. I'm not sure I support the worsening of my local taxi service so that it's easier for tourists to book a taxi in Sri Lanka.

Replacing existing services with a massively unprofitable and yet more expensive alternative doesn't exactly strike me as a net positive. That's before we even begin to consider the ethical concerns raised by the criminal activities of the company and it's executives.
I think your average person, familiar with Apple products, would use air drop. There’s no sanity in bouncing off of iCloud. That’ll be many times slower than USB, for most asymmetric internet connections.

USB 3 will be a couple times faster than WiFi 6, used between modern apple devices, so I see how that would be beneficial, for people editing.
As they say in fencing: touche!

In IT (a term most of HN (a term most of Hacker News understands) understands), it is probably OK to agree the really common jargon that everyone probably knows. HTTP, WWW, etc. But be cognizant that eBPF for example isn't something you can assume everyone knows what it is. Use it, but then expand or include a link to where it is defined.