skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I wouldn't say full memory protection. The shared arena was kind of a "don't touch but the hardware isn't enforcing it" shared 1GB region that all processes had access to.
>I imagine there’s reasonably priced financial products like business lines of credit

So much so that there's names for various ways of cutting up the receivables risk. For example:

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/factor.asp
No one is saying the later. Thats a straw man. But let’s address the moving goal post argument, because that’s worth a serious examination.

The problem touted about “being canceled” is that cancelee’s life is destroyed. They’ve going to suffer long term irreparable effects.

But when you look at what actually happens it’s nothing. So if the problem is the harm, and there is none, and in fact sometimes profits from their notoriety? Then how is the goal post set out by the “victims” even met?

So yes, I believe they’re is goal post moving, just not the goal posts you’re implying.
Yeah... the big difference with paying clients is that they know there's a need, and they know they can't do it themselves (even if they incorrectly think they know enough to judge why.) Working with FOSS is essentially cold-calling clients having done a design proposal upfront.
>The problem is that the higher end GPUs are actually the same chip as the lower end GPUs.

Don't know where you got that info but that's definitely false.

If you look at Nvidia's lineup, each GPU has a die that's unique to that product in both size and markings. Sure, there have been/are a few products that make use of the same die but with defects depending on yelds, but those are usually in the same performance class (1070, 1070TI and 1080 had the same die), and not the case you're talking about of entry level GPUs being high end GPUs dies with defects fused off. That's never the case. An RTX 3050 die is a completely different part than a 3080/3090 die.
Just last night I read 'Fast Times at Fairmont High' and I was just in love with the computing clothing idea. Maybe it isn't so bad if my fashionable clothing and it's embedded ML model become obsolete. Maybe we can make our permacomputers more temporary, but also more disposable.
> seeming incompatibility with producing complex software [...] inherent in [...] minimal syntax design [...] ?

Perhaps they are culturally associated?

Imagine a Forth bootstrap moving quickly on to C ABI and dynamic linking, to libpython and python ast vocabulary, and to numpy etc. Or a "parse all the languages" GLR/mixfix-expr/regex-token sandwich parser and some LLVM vocabulary. But ... that's not "doing Forth". Culturally.

Lisps could read `a[i] = 3` as sugar for `(setf (aref a i) 3)`, but don't. And for overlapping reasons, an organization for weeks struggles to even build its big CommonLisp thing (reader symbol conflict hell).

When a community doesn't much go somewhere, the path is unlikely to be smooth. And so a non-technical cultural challenge becomes something more.

Minimal syntax has value and power. Non-minimal syntax has value. So if there's one, but not the other, that seems notable, and perhaps a symptom of other issues around tooling up for complexity?
Because it honestly doesn't matter most of the time.

In the majority of use cases, your runtime is dominated by I/O, and for the remaining use-cases, you either have low-level functions written in other languages wrapped in Python (numpy, etc.) or genuinely have a case Python is a terrible fit for (eg. low-level graphics programming or embedded).

Why bother making a new variant language with limitation and no real benefit?
Cash flow is the be-all end-all. If you cannot make rent, you are done. Big business does not care. Working for a big business, I have encountered other small companies who do not want to deal with us - getting $MEGACORP to pay their bills on time is a foreign concept.
FWIW, I find just looking at the world through binoculars can be consciousness-changing, as might be putting on glasses for the first time by someone with poor sight.
Video game use was also a privilege that my parents used to teach responsibility and priorities. If I wanted to be allowed to play games, I had to get all As in school, complete all chores, and participate in athletics. They didn't police my gaming time, so I learned to regulate it myself to meet those conditions.
That doesn't mean there nothing to be learned from mistakes previous languages made and striving to create iteratively better languages
As a professional programmer and a relatively optimistic AGI enthusiast, why would the current ML methods not work, given sufficient CPU/RAM/GPU/latency/bandwidth/storage?

In theory, as long as you can translate your inputs and outputs to an array of floats, a neural network can compute anything. The required number of neurons might not fit into the world's best RAM, and the required number of weights and biases for those neurons might not be quickly calculated by a CPU/GPU however.
Bit off-topic: My major pain point a while ago was that Gnome-shell crashes take down all running applications. Is that still the case?
A courier’s union could provide oversight and loss compensation. It’s the most decentralized way to do it imo.
EDIT: and health insurance and worker protection!
When my lens shifts, I tend to notice it at first, but over time the novelty fades. The shift is still important, but the consciousness of it decreases, unless there is an active effort or trigger.

Also, it can be quite difficult to go back in time and try to 'remember' what it is like to _not_ have the new worldview.
Citation needed on 80%+

That seems excessively high.
Interesting that in this case the capital on the w seems to make a big difference. I ran it a few times with a capital W and a lowercase w, it said sailfish for the lowercase w most of the time and switched between an orca and a dolphin for the capital W. I wonder if all the training questions with good answers in the fine tuning set were capitalized
It's so bad that I've started to disregard any customer support that happens as a chat. I'd rather drop and email or a support ticket than talk to some godforsaken chatbot or wait in line for 2 hours to talk to a human. It seems to me that the "chat support" craze has been used as an excuse to gut customer support teams.
Mmmm okay I see what you mean.
San Jose is largest U.S. city to abolish minimum parking for new housing
Nice site, love the interactivity and color schemes. I'm going to add it to my list of nice dark mode sites: https://darkmodes.com
Some explanation: https://www.nist.gov/pml/us-surveyfoot
I don't understand either.

They sell for 50% off right now for 42 a case, meaning normal price was 84.
84 × 6000 = 504 000

This doesn't add up with the 250k they were hoping for and the 50% off. Or am I wrong? (too bad they only have decaf yet, wouldn't have minded to try.)
I forgot the exact issue but if I recall it correctly, pwdless sessions are meant to be short lived sessions. I equally dislike reauthenticating my sessions every day
Do you still do those things a lot? Do you have a hard time quitting them?

Turning out fine is not the problem here. It's the addiction that is formed creating habits that are extremely difficult to give up. This only gets worse each generation due to even more time in front of screens. Kids from the 80s spent more time outside than those from the 90s and so on.

https://www.childinthecity.org/2018/01/15/children-spend-hal...
That only tangentially answered the specific form of the question. Why not equip Ukraine with anti-aircraft weapons that can threaten aircraft over Russia or anti-ship weapons that can harass targets in the Black Sea?
A very simple one is a variation on the simulation hypothesis - if the simulation has only one RNG, we'd expect similar patterns to show up in all random data sets related to the same event, which could be interpreted by someone who's studied them.

I don't subscribe to the simulation hypothesis myself in a literal way, but I'm working on something like the above theory using the language of QBism. If you're familiar with the quantum eraser, it's a variation on the double slit experiment where the photon is split into two entangled photons, and the observation of one is made after the other has already impacted the photosensitive screen. My interpretation of the results is that reality is quite dependent on perspective, and facts determined in the future at larger scales can affect the paths taken to them in the present. How that could affect a card shuffle isn't obvious, hence why I'm agnostic on that question. But it certainly suggests a mechanism for precognition as it's tested in the lab [1] and it's possible that only certain cards are 'significant' when viewed from the final result, which might tilt the odds of how a shuffle turns out as some biologists believe happens in adaptive mutation[2].

If you're interested in this line of inquiry I've got an essay series up on the subject and would welcome feedback [3].

[1]Radin, Dean I. "Electrodermal presentiments of future emotions." Journal of Scientific Exploration 18.2 (2004): 253-273.

[2]https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03032...

[3]https://github.com/temporalholonics/holistic-temporality-and...
I don't have any experience with this. But isn't content management exactly the type of use-case in which the total data will be more than the RAM.
The alternative presented here is conflating an IP address for a user.
Servers for documentation and release hosting, Servers for CI and testing will chew up
> The place isn't even on grubhub

What are some reasons a restaurant owner would not want their restaurant on GrubHub (let alone their listing as fleshed out/optimized/detailed as possible)?

They're either too busy or they're deliberately ignoring it/avoiding it for ______ reasons (they don't want the headache that comes with "grubhub" style customers/orders/confusion?)
> Maybe it was written in a way that priced by bag but somehow requested UNITS in a way that the total order volume in USD wasn't clear.

If the price was listed per bag as $6.83/bag (assuming 6 bags/case) and the PO said 6,000-units, that's the "best light" scenario for the OP I can come up. There are literally zero other numbers (no totals, no total dollar value) and the only difference is in the "units" which could be overlooked.

But what kind of PO doesn't have some sort of total which shows how much money the contract is expected to be worth.

I don't believe this scenario exists.
Also, Citizens United decision has warped US democratic politics ever since. Essentially opens the flood gates for plutocracy and lobbyists.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
An app that does one thing, extremely visual. A detailed landing page.

No screenshot.

Facepalm, frankly.
> panics are easy to trigger (e.g. methods with nil receivers)

No, methods nil receivers in Go don't trigger panics (if they are not dereferenced).

> every error must be handled explicitly, and every control flow path must be made obvious, no matter how much verbosity this creates.

Is this, bad? It is just the recommended way. You are not required to implement your code in this way.
> read past the buffer

"if you can tell your compiler that the string you receive is ‘padded’ so that you can read eight bytes safely from it."

But even if you can't make that guarantee, this still works pretty well as a performance comparison, you just need to make sure your final code has a runtime length check.
No, Protocol Labs it to IPFS as Blockstream is to BTC.

ConsenSys is an entirely different company focused on Ethereum, and neither invented nor maintain IPFS. That's Protocol Labs.

Protocol Labs didn't start out of ConsenSys either — in fact, I don't believe they have too much beneficial ownership in common at all. In addition to the separate founding stories already mentioned, you can read about how Protocol Labs was initially funded by Union Square.
This language seems to require at least one positive front page post per day so people keep using it. Compare with the anti-golang posts today.
private property successfully didn't exist in various societies, including larger scale societies and ones that had discovered agriculture, and not only under communist regimes. it does mean to share, without ownership.
For a long time, those have been nearly free and easy to get. The temptation then is to continue doing more and more marginal business models, because they work and the competition does the same.

Those are getting harder to find and more expensive. Lack of those at the right time is what causes the liquidity traps the Fed is always talking about, when it happens at large scale.

Little risk of that happening now it seems, and a lot more ‘reaping’ of marginal business is likely before the Fed changes direction.
Reminds me of one of my favorite videos on the internet:

"F*ck you, pay me"[1]

In which Mike's lawyer makes the very good point that you should really put an attorney's fees provision in your contracts so that the purchaser pays your legal fees if you need to chase!

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVkLVRt6c1U
Problem-Solving for Programmers
I love Toby. Makes it easy to organize my bookmarks, and also view them at any time because I have them all under different categories (for example: Daily, Programming, Games, Banking, etc.)

https://www.gettoby.com/
Yes, but like others have said, I never thought it was worth it. I like to focus on moving forward.

I have a friend who worked for a large law firm and he told me that even they wrote off some unpaid bills or negotiated discounts. I was shocked to find that even when the lawyers could deal with the legal work themselves, they chose to pass.

That changed my thinking on the topic.
Filed https://github.com/golang/go/issues/57530.
I fail to see the point of this. Buried in this post are one or two reasonable (but familiar) criticisms of Go. As for the rest of it, the author appears to be upset that everyone in the world didn't immediately stop using Go after reading his blog post of two years ago.
Two questions that I keep asking myself:

- What distinguishes thinking and computing?

- What is more fundamental? Form or meaning?

> is this all just a game of syntax that _feels_ like semantics from the inside?

The point is that in case of LLMs, there is no mystery here: it is syntactic templates (x) statistics. But do we know that 'syntax' is all there is to our mental reasoning? We don't know this (yet). I have flirted with the notion - heretical for me since I 'believe' in primacy of meaning, not form - and can kinda squint and see meaning possibly being a 'virtual' phenomena and possibly simply a 'narrative' of 'arcs' connecting 'facts' mapped to a syntactic template. That meaning is simply a process. [So, not even "42" ..]
It's not a question of whether the AI can be creative in a philosophical sense, current copyright law (in the US) only protects human creativity -- AI and non-human animals can't hold IP at all, nor can they delegate it to someone else.

Under current copyright law, if you built a model that surpassed humans and trained itself on simulations and it wasn't making derivative works but instead producing purely original output, the resulting output would not be copyrightable.

In fact, under current copyright law, if you built an AI that was sapient, the creative work it made would not be copyrightable -- unless you literally got the law to grant it legal personhood or something.

Moving AI in a direction of being more fundamentally creative makes this harder, not easier. The legal defense of copyright in cases involving AI is that the creativity is coming from the human using the AI, not the AI itself. As the AI gets better at generating usable output with less directing and micromanaging, that argument gets weaker, not stronger. The question isn't whether or not the AI is creative or produces novel output, the question is whether a human exhibited enough creativity making the work for it to meet the standard of gaining copyright protections -- which, traditionally, the US copyright office has usually held isn't true for AI-generated content.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-64114784

From Dec 29th attack:

Ukraine's military said 69 missiles were launched, with air defences intercepting 54 of them.

So 78% - I've not looked to see how normal or not that is, perhaps you can?
The author doesn't use Go any more, but cares about Go so much. ;D
Google will pay $9.5M to settle Washington DC AG's tracking lawsuit
From what I've heard about its difficulty, I'd be far more impressed if you were proficient at Go.
Perhaps not a grift, but surely the guy who arranged this deal (who they have since ceased doing business with) could have more clearly communicated to them to what it was they were agreeing. There are multiple points of failure, and it seems the company accepted the crippling responsibility on their end.
I wish I could say the same. A few months ago, my daughter's girl school used his as the poster boy for misogyny in their anti-bullying training program, so I looked him up. Distinctly unpleasant person, and according to Wikipedia he claims to have converted to Islam, so now he is also tarring my religion by association.

The problem is, trolls like him thrive off publicity, presumably ad impression revenue-sharing from Youtube et al is how he managed to get the expensive cars he was bragging to Greta Thunberg (although pimping is also highly profitable, so who knows?).

The correct response is ostracism and damnatio memoriae. Don't get upset about him, let the law deal with him if he's committed actual crimes, but just ignore him and starve him of the oxygen of publicity.

I'm lucky that I mediate the news and everything through my own RSS feed reader that has extensive filtering capabilities, so anything that mentions the Kardashians, football, the Olympics, unfunny April Fool's pranks and other topics of utter uninterestingness is automatically deleted and doesn't waste a nanosecond of my time. I just added him to the list.
Yup. It’s easy to point fingers though, if you don’t see the reality on the ground or understand the risks.
I would recommend reading “Indistractible” by Nir Eyql if you are looking for more tools for this
Ask a lawyer!
My educational background is much closer to data science (Math with CompSci Minor B.Sc., Data Science M.Sc.) but I've never worked in a pure data science role.

Training and tweaking models looks like the easy part of developing data driven products. Hiring compenent enough people also seems easier than for software engineers.

Many ML libraries produce good enough results without having to design elobare models myself. I see data science more as yet another tool in the belt of a a software engineer - like server admin, CI/CD, IaC, databases,...
s/necessarily//
Why would they be short-lived? Just send a refresh and access token like normal authentication, the only thing you're changing is whether the user authenticates from a password versus a link which has a unique identifier, they're both looked up from the database / in-memory cache all the same.
Only if you actually sell the product at that price, and nothing goes wrong.

But yes, they’re talking cashflow and liquidity issues.
Of course, happy it's helpful.
Why would you have a method that doesn’t touch the receiver? Refactor it into a function.
You have a minuscule reduction in deaths over a massive increase of flu shots, percentage wise. Is the whole downward trend attributable to the flu shots? Certainly not unless you think that the better overall care over the years other than vaccines, improved knowledge of the disease was neutral at best. We could remove the flu shots entirely and it won't make much of a difference in the end result with regard to flu deaths.
Another Gmail account is one of those for example, according to what Google tells me when I try to use it.
CPU-bound tasks are limited to a single core due to GIL but, for sure, it's not single threaded language!
This image alone is worth the read https://giphy.com/gifs/funny-how-task-iCFlLMvzDHIk0
Let me know when you've figured out how to run Audacity in a web browser
What's with all the Go hate on HN all of a sudden?
I just found it presumptuous. Who ever said it shouldn’t be upstreamed?

Trialing new designs in your own space is a pretty common pattern and there’s ample history of good ideas being adopted upstream once proven.

Or sometimes you just might not have the energy for it. It’s okay for your gift to the world to merely be available, without pressure to go farther.
OK but why would we continue to pay the police to do things they aren't doing.

>“In many cases,” she added, “it means redirecting funds from police departments to other parts of society that help people like housing, education, and communities.”

Just like the person you're responding to said.
The point is that a "unit" could not possibly have been a $16 bag of coffee, if they were getting paid $41 per unit.

The story smells fake to me. The most charitable interpretation is that they were misled by their "food broker" more than they realize even now.
My problem with Python, especially when reading someone else's code, or my own old bad code, is that I find that Python doesn't fit [my] brain.

The lack of typing (in my experience you always end up with a bunch of libraries that don't have type hints) means I spend most of my time just figuring out what I'm supposed to pass to a function (I hate the django docs. Give me something like docs.rs where I can quickly scan what functions something implements, and see what they accept and what they return instead of forcing me to read an 800 page novel that STILL doesn't give you that basic info), and writing tests and trying to guard against passing the wrong thing around.
Definitely gets attention on HN for it.
I came of age in the industry when there was little distinction (python guy since 2004 or so). That provides many pros and cons.

The more you know broadly, the smarter you’ll sound. And generally, you will tend to be more useful and fulfilled.

If you want a career that is focused, you have to choose a focus. I’ve struggled with that. You need a broad base of knowledge to be good at understanding all things, and how they connect.

But eventually someone needs a lightbulb changed, and I’m testing the grounding of a nearby lightswitch while on the phone with a contractor about shielding noise from the antiquated home stereo system.

Edit: I should probably mention explicitly.

Investing in TensorFlow or CUDA is one thing. Investing in certain ML techniques or modeling domains another—and python yet another—

Systems and general engineering is a completely messier enchilada. You still get paid!

So. I guess. Do better than I. Choose a scale. It’s impossible to focus on everything unless that’s just an impulse you’ve got :)
They seem to sell the bags on their website for ~$15 so they should know that someone selling them for at least 3x the price is odd.
Are brain implants the future of computing?
A lot of larger companies push off supply chain risk to their suppliers this way. Auto industry is notorious for it.

They might order 10x what they think they’ll need to hedge a risk on their side, fully expecting to cancel 90% of them (and telling the suppliers the opposite of course), and screw all but the lucky one. And often use that as leverage on the ‘lucky’ one too.