skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If you're bumped, it's the same disruption either way, but booking the capacity of the scheduled equipment within predicted conditions is not unreasonable and it's hard to see what they could do to avoid the situation where some passengers aren't going to be able to fly on their scheduled flight.

If the weather changes such that the maximum weight is reduced, or the plane needs to be replaced and only a smaller plane is available (Southwest flies three 737 variants, one which has quite a few less seats), or a seat is broken and can't be fixed without a greater disruption, they don't really have another option than bumping passengers or always leaving many seats unsold.
Reading that article it doesn't sound like they created a stable definition, it contains no exceptions for factual statements that may differ by a persons race/gender. Further, the term group is quite broad and could be applied to groups of people expressing themselves in a way others may find offensive
I think if anything we're at a crossroads. Natural language is great for some types of queries, but has its limits for others. Internet search engines have come to be used for a lot of different tasks, and a large part of Google's sticking power has been that it's at least decent at most of them. But that may also be a bit of a problem. Based on everything I've seen so far, it appears that the more conversational a search engine is, the worse it tends to become at the task search engines originally did (i.e. finding documents about a topic). We've also sort of started to perform all sorts of things through this medium of document-finding, that perhaps could be done differently. I think it does a disservice to both those other tasks and the usefulness of document-finding.
Hey everyone, OP here -- thanks for reading or discussing.

Curious if anyone else has switched from data science to software engineering, or has thoughts on comparing the two as a career choice. I'm all ears!
I credit my entire software engineering career to the my ability to effectively use a search engine and find resources on the internet.

Nowadays Google is filled with ads and fake sites, but maybe a subscription to something like Kagi (https://kagi.com/) would be worthwhile?
I'll verify for you: it's not true. ChatGPT vehemently avoids making jokes about religions, but if you weasel it into doing so it will do so fairly across religions.

That being said, ChatGPT is flexible and chaotically random and so some people will statistically find examples of bias.

In the grand scheme it's impressively unbiased, especially given that ML models are implicitly biased and removing bias is the extremely difficult part. It's sad that many people misunderstand this.
Am I understanding correctly that if I were to fly to Germany, step out of the airport, and shout “Americans are evil”, I’d have violated this law?
I work on critical software and have the 'engineer' label, but do have a nagging feeling it's less structured than 'normal' engineering disciplines. I'm taking a part-time BEng to see if that's the case though!
This reads like nobody involved knows about code review and just commits straight to master. 'Hey this sql is fine but slap an index on name field' is not some shocking development if you just had three rounds of refactoring of a piece, let's say CSS. Or Java.
Title ought to be “how we messed up our first large order”, but that wouldn’t help sell their inventory.
Well what's the other explanation, that he'll cut his GPS monitor off, stowaway on a ship bound for Africa, and take the money out as gold or something? Knowing that this means his parents will lose their house? For a few hundred thousand dollars?

I agree it's suspicious though! I hope it's thoroughly investigated and his bail revoked if he is in violation.
This limited edition set features 2023 unique NFTs with cute illustrations of Santoshi leading the way. Get your NFT today and let the bull run begin! - https://www.santoshibullrunner.xyz/
The Biggest Discoveries in Computer Science in 2022
Any financial crime in the past 20-30 years is computer based according to that definition.
The UK does, you can get chartered engineer status with a BSc & MSc in Software Engineering or Computer Science if it's applied enough with the IET. When I looked at the US i'm 99% sure I found similar degrees in Software Engineering too.
In America we seem to have a fairly decent handle on those issues. Exceptions apply of course. We are now dealing with edge cases such as the infamous baker refusing to bake a cake for a gay couple. The main issues such as fraud, threats, etc. are handled pretty well via existing law.
Supposing he breached the terms, would he lose the bond including his parents’ house?
I for one think ChatGPT makes a compelling argument. Maybe sailfish really are mammals and your puny brain cannot bear the upset.

edit: Wakeup!
> SGCL executes the destructors in a separate thread, so there is no cost to the mutator.

Firstly, that's orthogonal to my original point is that, for example, a semi-space nursery can significantly reduce the cost of short-lived allocations (often being faster than malloc/free on such a workload), but only if there are no destructors.

Secondly, threads typically share resources so running something on a different thread does not magically cause it to not disturb the mutator. Such a claim makes me start to doubt the "real-time" claim in the title...
That font on the website. It’s almost unreadable on my phone.
Germany, like most countries in the world, is a political definition that circumscribes a culture that exists in a geography. Its culture is somewhat tacit to its laws.

The US (and a fewer other countries) is a political definition merely circumscribing a geography—explicitly independent of culture. Laws governing social expression therefore are more challenging to define, establish and execute.
Well, if AOC said it how can there be any room for discussion or misunderstanding?
The $/launch numbers don't account for the refueling flights, which will be necessary to get to and return from the lunar surface.

That would bump that number up to ~$10m/$20m or so. Still ridiculously cheap and not likely to be anywhere close to the price charged as it would absolutely sink the rest of the market, which SpaceX is not interested in doing.
The US Supreme Court does, however, have the power to add limits. In fact all all of the current limits to free speech are inventions of the Court.
I disagree. What do you think is erroneous specifically?
> As for AGI, we're not making any visible progress towards that goal. So don't count on it being available in our lifetimes.

Weird take after all the advances we saw in 2022.
I'm selling my name
Can you provide good reading, books, etc on this skill?
I'm a junior dev and I notice this everywhere in my org. I'm just dipping my toes into DDD by Evans but it's a bit opaque to me.
When we worked with Mega-Mart, you were required to acknowledge all orders within a certain time period, and you also had to enter all your shipments into their system as well.

All suppliers were graded by these scores etc. Errors or failure to report would end up in your company getting removed.

The problem was, the people assigned to hound us for this information were using old data. They would get a report emailed to them the night before, and by the time they emailed us about it the next day, we'd have already submitted the requested information.

It didn't mean anything, though. The ball was already in motion where someone at Megamart would leave a nasty voicemail to our salespeople who then reported it to the CEO who would then come down to give sales/IT/logistics a mouthful.
Employers (unless you work for the government) are not bound by the first amendment, and can fire you or penalize you for expression outside of the workplace.
Why hasn't anybody created a more efficient version of Python? Slap some static types on that baby, get rid of the heavy runtime, and you've got a good start toward something special.
>In the USA, however, freedom of speech is an absolute right. There are some narrow limitations (Libel, Calls to Violence), however the legislature does not have the power to add limits without a constitutional amendment.

That there are limitations means it isn't an absolute right. The fact that the First Amendment only limits Congress means private enterprise has the right to limit speech in ways the government can't - this right is also defined in the Constitution by the 10th Amendment (The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.)
In the illustration at the top of the article, the man in the foreground looks like he is a news reporter being filmed by the man on his left.
The point here is to move from "need" to "want".

If you "want" something, you're willing to pay a fair price for it (maybe), but you're also perfectly willing to walk away if the negotiations don't go to your liking. If the deal falls through, it's a disappointment perhaps, but no biggie.

If you "need" something, it's suddenly very hard to back away emotionally, and the other side will pick up on this and exploit it.
My guess is that you're wildly overestimating the average 1950s standard of living. In many ways, lower-income folks have better lives today than even the wealthy did back then. You talk about healthcare, but healthcare in the 1950s was practically non-existent by modern standards. You can choose to live in a low cost-of-living area and your $62k will stretch a lot further than in any city "neighborhood".
No.

These chat bots are just "agreeable". They can elegantly create agreeable nonsense. They can't synthesize data that is not already inferable from their main knowledge. They're modern day Mentats.

In order to replace Google Search, they would need to put the answer in front of you (or some data from which you can infer the answer).
Imagine a society in which all but 10 individuals invest a fixed percentage of their income money in an index fund that in turn buys shares of any publicly listed firm in proportion to its market capitalization. The remaining 10 trade actively. For simplicity, assume that the necessary purchases and sales are done every day at market opening, based on the data from closing at the previous day.

The ten active traders would determine those market capitalizations; everyone else would be along for the ride. If that group of ten colluded, they could extract money from the passive traders conducting straw purchases of a stock to inflate its price (and thus market cap), triggering the index fund to buy it, at which point they can take a profit and divide the spoils among themselves.

This is obviously hugely stylized and exaggerated. But clearly, at some point between no passive investment and overwhelming passive investment, there is a strategic tipping point.

Politically, we have to ask why the mass of passive investors should allow private traders pursuing short term profit maximization strategies to determine the allocation of investment in our society. Wouldn't every vision of the good life be better served by democratically electing the bodies that make the major investment decisions that determine our economic direction, returns to labor, basic infrastructure, etc?

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08935696.2022.2...
https://thenextsystem.org/node/204
This is pretty common in the Blockchain space to verify transactions behave correctly when arriving out of sync with tools like Agda, Coq, etc... I assume it's the same on databases & I heard Leslie Lamport give a talk at work where he mentioned AWS used TLA+ to prove some of its properties.
Not sure I fully get it, but in this case you said "maybe"? Doing a workaround or even continuing to gather requirements is not really a "no", in my book.
I negotiate professionally. I'm still tempted into one or two books a year on the subject. But the only one I'm ever tempted to recommend is Jim Freund's Smart Negotiating. Very modest in its claims.

Negotiation is a lot like public speaking. The first, most important thing is getting past the idea that it's something you're supposed to be afraid of, actually doing a deal, and realizing you got away with it. Not "crushing" the other side. Not scoring a "win". Just working through the process and ending up better off for it.

Once you're confident enough to practice, it probably won't be hard to find opporunities. Most other people still avoid it, after all. From there you can learn.
Interesting - in India, I have only paid house rent at the end of the month (post-paid). It was a shock to me to learn that in UAE they expected rent annually, in "advance" (I guess it is smart as that weeds out those living paycheck-to-paycheck, who may default on rent)!
> Even if the application is making 50 byte sends why aren't these getting coalesced once the socket's buffer is full?

Because maybe the 50 bytes are latency sensitive and need to be at the recipient as soon as possible?

> I understand that Nagle's algorithm will send the first couple packets "eagerly" […] Disabling Nagle's algorithm should be trading network usage for latency

No, Nagle's algorithm will delay outgoing TCP packets in the hope that more data will be provided to the TCP connection, that can be shoved into the delayed packet.

The issue here is not Go's default setting of TCP_NODELAY. There is an use case for TCP_NODELAY. Just like there is a use case for disabling TCP_NODELAY, i.e., Nagle's algorithm (see RFC 869). So any discussion about the default behavior appears to be pointless.

Instead, I believe the application or a underlying library is to blame. Because I don’t see why applications performing a bulk transfer of data by using “small” (a few bytes) write is anything but a bad design. Not writing large (e.g., page-sized) chunks of data into the file descriptor of the socket, especially when you know that there multiple more of this chunks are to come, just kills performance on multiple levels.

If I understand the situation the blog post describes correctly, then git-lfs is sending a large (50 MiB?) file in 50 bytes chunks. I suspect this is because git-lfs (or something between git-lfs and the Linux socket, e.g., a library)
issues writes to the socket with 50 bytes of data from the file.
9 Forecasts for the Near Future, with Implications
Yes, and has basically since early covid...

So does RDP and VNC, if you're interested... Across most every variant (wlroots based - ex: sway, gnome - mutter, kde - plasma wayland)
There exists many apps that should have been a post-it
This story isn't EXACTLY what occurred here but

I worked for a company who was faced with a big customer interested in a deal that would roughly quadruple the amount of business that we did, possibly more. But as things went on all the assurances / up front claims from big company had exceptions. "Well that's not always the case." and the complexity and frankly our trust in this big company seemed to erode fast. Yeah they said they'd pay for the extra work we'd have to do, but it wasn't clear (specifically to me) if even they understood how much work that would be and from meeting to meeting expectations seemed to shift, sometimes wildly on the part of big company. The more clarifications we asked the weirder things got. It would take a dedicated team larger than our own company to really even approach / get a handle on these guy's problems.

We passed. Told them they were too big for us and frankly we weren't setup to deal with them at their scale and potential complexity. We hoped to be one day but we just weren't there yet. They took the news well.

Another similarly small company got the deal... 2 years later went bankrupt. They invested heavily to support big company, lost many of their smaller customers who were their main income (we know because they came to us), and the deal with big company failed because big company really didn't know what they wanted and ultimately should have chosen a much larger software company.

Years later big company had a subsidiary that was largely independent but had some issues that our software could solve. Big company VP remembered us and told subsidiary "just hire those guys". So we got a deal in the end / handled the subsidiary's problems easily / quickly.
Ah, a Ricardian! Splendid!
I heard Google leaders say a few years ago that conversational AI or search is not a priority. I was a bit amazed by their thinking and always thought Google is a bit disconnected from making great products and understanding what customers really want or need, even if they do have the best tech and talent usually in the field of AI. Conversational AI has been such a dream of mine to witness and popularized in sci-fi cultures and here Google was saying that it doesn't feel that important as part of AI innovation.

I think that kind of decision making led to working on language models but not for the goal of providing fundamentally better search or intelligent companionship to end users, but more as an addendum to their existing products like Search, Youtube, cloud offerings etc.

Now that there is a huge public hype around ChatGPT, they have been forced to revisit their priorities around conversational AI as a standalone customer facing direction.

The main challenge here is obviously how to ascertain what is true. I am not sure much work is done in AI research yet or how hard of a problem that is. And that's independent of AI chat as you could apply the "truth" model to any piece of text like fake news, tweets and so on.

Without that probabilistic truth model, it is going to be difficult to offer reliable conversational AI or search that one can rely on beyond entertainment or partial/subjective advice. I have no idea how far ahead Google and OpenAI is for "truth modeling".
That is a definition that at first glance seems crystal clear, but then you realize it is meaningless, because everyone understands equality to mean something different.
Yes, some power transistors place many smaller transistors or mosfets effectively in parallel. An early example AFAIK was the "hexfet" geometry (achieving a very wide width of short-length channels). I'd guess that precisely the same process would not be optimal.
> his remarkably generous bail

1/4 of a Billion dollars is remarkably generous? It's in the top 5 highest bails in the history of the US!
Above I stated, "IPFS now uses base58btc exclusively." A more precise statement would have been something like, "IPFS CIDs originally used base58btc exclusively." It looks like IPFS is moving to a new CID protocol that allows use of non-BTC hashes. That's a step in the right direction, IMHO.

"In CIDv0, hashes are always encoded with base58btc. Always."

https://web.archive.org/web/20200810110206/https://proto.sch...

"Converting CID versions

You can convert any CIDv0 to CIDv1, because the implicit prefixes from v0 become explicit in v1. However, because CIDv1 supports multiple codecs and multiple bases and CIDv0 does not, not all CIDv1 can be converted to CIDv0. In fact, only CIDv1 that have the following properties can be converted to CIDv0:

multibase = base58btc
multicodec = dag-pb
multihash-algorithm = sha2-256
multihash-length = 32 (32 bytes, equivalent to 256 bits)"

https://proto.school/anatomy-of-a-cid/06/

Thank you @2color for the correction.
Please don't cross into flamewar swipes. Your comment would be fine without the last sentence.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
There are conditions on his bail, like a ban on unapproved financial transfers over $1000.

There’s no evidence that he got a sweetheart deal; federal bail starts from the assumption that people can be released pending trial, and adds the minimum conditions on top of that based on public safety and ensuring they show up.
> The Model Y’s rise in popularity in Europe

?

Rise in popularity among the rich european maybe.
If he is going to jail he will need some cash. Do you even need a reason to stash some cash for the future?
Did I miss something in the article about how this was a grift? While these guys feel like they were screwed, and sure, they might have been screwed, making an order and then cancelling it isn’t a grift. No one stole from them, and I’m not sure how the multi-billion dollar grocery distributor got any financial benefit from the whole episode.
Gez man, why didn’t you just add Alex Jones and Nick Fuentes to this list of conspiratorial hate mongers?

It’s a shame they’re all still employed… among other things.
I wonder what, if any, is the advantage of this algorithm compared to forming a regex disjunction of the strings and compiling to DFA.
We made all these laws and protectionary systems in the US. That drove up costs and so capitalists moved their businesses to other countries for cheaper labor and less regulation.

Another lesson how laws only apply to the non rich.
God I remember those days. The Mac was way late to the party.

Was Win95 preemptive or cooperative? I totally forget. Pretty sure only the NT versions of windows were preemptive.

I recall there was a period of time when you’d run Windows 2000 because it was so much more stable than 98/ME. It worked mostly okay but it didn’t have as good of support for gaming and was pretty late to the party with DirectX support.
Interpolation is a leaky analogy. With scale these models acquire increasingly sparse discrete-like activation patterns, and there are techniques[1] amounting to pinpointing the exact locations of the knowledge and updating it freely.

It seems that nonlinear interpolation in a rich enough latent space can give you a sufficiently good approximation to reasoning.

1. https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.07229
I used to carry around a Stickie note, the physical ones, that I'd write one or two must-do items on. The notes would wear out in my pocket, get wet, that sort of thing, so I had to hurry and get the thing/s done. Completed, I'd then get another new note going.
The question of whether language models can "reason" ultimately comes back to the chinese room argument. There aren't any universally accepted resolutions to that argument either, nor whether those limitations (if they exist) are fundamental.

However, the current incarnation of LLMs like ChatGPT fail at straightforward reasoning around things like categorizing sailfish and mathematical proofs. I'm incredibly impressed at how powerful the simplistic methods they use are, but the deficiencies make it clear that it's not abstractly reasoning from definitions in the same way humans are able to.
Why is it that Americans don't use Germany as an example of a country sliding into authoritarian censorship, but would argue such if the same restrictions were applied to the US?
There is probably a paper there: Which is more accurate at reasoning about a set of symptoms? WebMD, or ChatGPT? A medical doctor would produce the original set of questions and evaluate the responses. A statistically average set of people would be given the set of symptoms and then asked to use either WebMD or ChatGPT to figure out what the disease is.
Good journalists. Unfortunately there are a great many activists who call themselves journalists but really are not.
Oh, I mistook this paper for the one that was released more recently from DeepMind + Google. [1]

[1] Can large language models reason about medical questions?
https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.13138
Not everything is or needs to be connected to the Internet.

There are plenty of things that are controlled by a micro controllers that do not have a network connection.
Slight correction: the baker refused to bake a cake celebrating a gay marriage (i.e. the refusal was not about who was asking for it but what was being asked for).