skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I've built some AI-powered software before, and the issue for a lot of the consumer-facing tools such as this one is that a few incorrect results voids the value of the whole system. I think you'd probably need >95% accuracy for the benefits to outweigh the cost, and looking at the comments here it's clear that that bar has not been cleared.

To put it simply: If you can't be sure that the results are accurate, how can you default to this search system?
Julia is too different from Fortran for the old wizards to make the switch.
Ryan Reynolds. Just put Ryan Reynolds on Twitter, TV, and a few Facebook ads, and everyone will know. And yes, there are lots of people that could switch if it actually gave you an answer. At least it's significantly new, and a possible successor to text search. No, I would not change, but I read HN, I am not the mass market they are looking for. Oddly enough, the use I find most compelling would be Cortana, or Siri, or Google Assistant. If you could suddenly make them not dumb, then that would be very, very different. I'll bet the most likely place this ends up is Office. They already have an app like Stable Diffusion, I'll bet the voice reading on Outlook for emails will turn into a chat, or some such. Then you can add an actual conversation from there "would you like to schedule a meeting" and so on. "Would you like to add a contact? Ok, would you like to have me check for a business or personal address for them?". Cortana still exists for Office and Windows, IIRC.
Employees got 14 weeks severance. They didn't have to do that.
Another fun technique similar to hazard pointers is epoch-based memory reclamation (implemented here https://docs.rs/crossbeam-epoch/0.9.13/crossbeam_epoch/ ).

One advantage of these kinds of "localised" garbage collection approaches compared to typical GC is that the cost scales with the size of the specific collection, as opposed to with the total allocation rate / memory usage of the entire program.
Intel Sapphire Rapids finally released
It is a shame that Mr. Wolfram cannot write about things without making it 75% about himself. I once bought a book he wrote about great scientists, each chapter about a different scientist. I thought "This guy's stuff is usually so self promotional it is kind of gross, but this will be fun to see his take on these other people".

The book was still about him. Amazing.
One of Dark Sky's features was integrating hyperlocal weather stations.

Right now there are thousands of weather stations posting regular reports via APRS.

Any chance to see those integrated?
That's a contradiction: you're saying that the AI cannot follow clear rules because it is a large heuristic, but then you talk about the limitations of hard-coded behaviors :)

I believe the ML part can be relied upon to accurately behave as long as it can exhibit logical thinking at all (which, at least to a significant degree, it seems to be able to) -- in principle it would seem like its ethics potential should be proportional to its general (linguistic) reasoning potential.

I think this is exactly the benefit we have: AIs are fuzzy (like humans are), so then can understand fuzzy laws (which seemed to be a huge problem in the early days). The problem is how to get them to incorporate those laws that they can surely understand into their motivation. This doesn't seem insurmountable to me: a parallel critic prompt "Does this question and answer follow the following ethical guidelines: ... ?" (or something more complex but largely equivalent), or maybe some other form of engineering the AI thinking and motivation to include abstract goal evaluation at some stage.
From the article:

> Like fast food and snacks, the short story has been derided as minor cuisine, ephemeral and insubstantial, light fare compared to the novel’s sustenance.

Willian Faulkner would disagree:

> I'm a failed poet. Maybe every novelist wants to write poetry ﬁrst, ﬁnds he can't, and then tries the short story, which is the most demanding form after poetry. And, failing at that, only then does he take up novel writing.
Almost shocking at this point, isn't it?
Kiwi TNT: An Explosive Nuclear Rocket Test (Archive Footage)
The "slow" here is very relative.

Yes, you can't push Discord -levels of messages with a GC language (like their famous "we moved from Go to Rust" post told us all).

But you're not going to be at those levels any time soon, GC pauses are just fine in a good 99.99% of cases.

This kind of thinking is a type of premature optimization, you skip whole categories of technology (garbage collection) because you "feel" it's slow based on what you read about an edge case. =)
I think that's pretty clearly not the point. As someone who has worked with legacy scientific code written in Fortran, the copying is not the issue, it's blindly copying code that was written 50 years ago, probably by a graduate student, and not reviewed or revised in any way since. As the parent comment points out, if everyone reuses that code, the same errors propagate. It's not the type of reuse that comes with a nice GitHub repo and an established mechanism for reporting and fixing bugs.

In my case, one of the Fortran files essential to my group's research has 11 (!) versions with only filenames like file.f.goodworking (that's literally one of the extensions) to differentiate them and no version control or history.
Not sure what blanket you're hiding under but just because unemployment is low doesn't mean the economy is fine. Many companies are seeing a slowdown thanks to inflationary pressures in consumers. The stock market just tends to drop before earnings consistently drop and recover before earnings consistently recover.

High inflation necessitating high interest rates is not a healthy economy.
Fortran has nearing 50 years of history being studied as to parallelization optimizations, as a testbed for compiler optimizations in general.

This link shows an excerpt of this parallelization/optimization work for Fortran (Do scroll down...it's amazing).

https://dblp.org/pid/59/1867.html
So the same people pushing "living wage" are also calculating "excessive cost of government" like zoning restrictions and property taxes? No, it's just deliberately misnamed propaganda tool.
Why are pirate systems the best? They just AARRRR!
it's weird because while they support dynamic libraries the video-games filesystems are more and more immutable. thus the question is now how can I deploy my library to the game.
4th Gen Intel Xeon Scalable Sapphire Rapids Leaps Forward
Actually caring a tiny bit about security and not letting everything be a keylogger is not an “unfixable flaw”, there is working screen sharing for basically every mainstream desktop app, what exactly is that flaw then?
I still remember the first time I made an image change to another image using the “onmouseover” attribute. It was a magical time.
Your statement upthread, which I replied to:

> Most poor people are children under 18. I guess technically, you can work at 16, so some of them probably dropped out and work full-time, but it's definitely not the norm.

> Most poor "adults" - are people >65 who aren't working full-time either.

The first bullet point in your quoted source:

> Of the 40.6 million Americans living in poverty in 2016, 56.1 percent were working-age adults, 18 to 64. Important shares of those living in poverty are children and adults aged 65 and older (32.6 percent and 11.2 percent respectively, in 2016).

I don't know why you included all these other bullets in your response. Are you just hoping that by adding extraneous information, that it would make it seem like your original statement was correct? Or that you were saying something different from what you actually said?
> In essence, developers treat "legacy" code as if it was some kind of framework or language runtime -- to be used but never to be studied to have its internals understood. (I will never understand this approach to development)

I was baffled by this as well for 15+ years until just last year I had a key insight: most developers don’t like to read. In fact, most people don’t like to read. Most people are intrinsically lazy and since growing your skills involves hard work, they don’t do it unless pushed to do so, either by life circumstance or necessity.

Time and time again people have asked me: “how do I get really good at $tech or software engineering?” I recommend a few books or send them my standard list of must-reads. In 999/1000 cases the person approaching me gives me that defeated look that I know means: “Oh. I was hoping you’d say something not involving working hard.” Most people are polite enough not to say it to my face.

When folks have problems with HTTP I ask them if they’ve read RFC 2616, and if not, I offer to bring them a nicely printed and bound copy. It typically goes unread though some use it as a reference. Only once did someone follow my recommendation and read it cover to cover.

Folks seems to lack a kind of basic economic perspective. Spend a week, month, something along those lines growing your skills (or even just 30 minutes reading the docs on that thing you just spent 2 hours declaring idiotic). Yes, this means probably giving up your favorite Netflix binge, video game, or drinking on weeknights in favor of study. But once these skills are internalized they pay back for a lifetime with good returns. Yet for some strange reason people prefer to keep thinking short term and so they never learn what they’re doing. It used to make me sad but I’m making peace with it.
23% is what is in the bill as the initial starting rate.
Does this mean the price caps return?
Yes, they allowed companies and public institutions to sign up and use the product for free with quick on boarding. They basically set up a "use now pay later" approach where they allowed lots of leeway to let you figure out need and payments down the road.

The competition were charging by the user (you had to commit to some user license number) and you had to go through the regular onboarding process. Zoom was like you let us know what you need later. Let’s get you up and running and we’ll work out details later.
As others have written, it can.

Dart/Flutter is clearly further along. The main non-technical reason for this is that Flutter is the single blessed UI toolkit for Dart, whereas Rust instead relies on the creative chaos of multiple competing and/or overlapping open source projects. The Dart approach concentrates effort and removes the burdens of choice and intergration from app developers; the Rust approach has more potential for arriving at novel solutions, and is less likely to get trapped by top-down decisions.

It's all pretty promising, and great to have some alternatives to the rather creaky old toolkits we have. I personally think web tech will continue to be a strong contender or many multiplatform apps (for which - Rust has Tauri).
It's interesting to see that GC is "marketed" to Java developers as some important topic that they all should put effort into

meanwhile in .NET world GC is basically outsourced to

https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/author/maoni/ and team and their famous gc.cpp

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dotnet/runtime/main/src/co...

and nobody touches anything but one knob iirc
> and the stock price has plummeted since I left.

that describes pretty much every tech company in the past 18 months ;)
It's a magnitude cheaper than chemo and radiation.
It's interesting to read these articles about the implementation of an actual CPU, compared to the very idealised perspective that a lot of CS (and even some hardware-oriented) textbooks have. There's a lot of complexity that those who are used to the latter would otherwise not have seen.

Also worth noting is that, like the Z80 and 8080/8085, but unlike the 6502, the designers of the 8086 opted for instructions that took more cycles and compensated for that with increased clock frequency, instead of the 6502 that has shorter instructions and a lower clock frequency.

and the hardware fills in the particular ALU operation from bits 5-3 of the machine instruction.

This is clearly seen when the instructions are represented in octal:

0u4 alu AL, imm8
0u5 alu AX, imm16

The ALU operations are respectively: ADD, OR, ADC, SBB, AND, SUB, XOR, CMP.

According to the datasheets, the 80186 can execute the same instruction in 3 cycles, and the 80286 can do it in 2.
You are misunderstanding the problem. This is not about harm caused to other parties. This is about reputational damage to the company making the AI system.

If you buy paper and write a deplorable manifesto that is your problem. Paper and pen is old technology therefore nobody is going to write an article about the deplorability of the paper manufacturers.

If you do the same with ChatGPT that is OpenAI’s problem. The concept of generative models is new enough that it would be news and their brand would be tarnished by it.
Agreed. Financial success and career progression as a software dev has little to do with your talent. It's more about luck and BS ability.
Most successful or fast-growing big tech companies can afford to brute-force every problem by throwing tons of developers at them.
Most developers tend to produce code which just barely works and is way overcomplicated but it
doesn't matter because most fast-growing companies don't have any issues hiring large numbers of developers to patch up the many mistakes by brute force.
Thanks and sorry I searched for the Forbes link, didn't find so posted but I'll try to search by headline or similar next time. :)
Dev snapshot: Godot 4.0 beta 11
They were well-positioned at the beginning of the pandemic, mainly because their client applications were so easy to install (in large part because of how they circumvented OS security features). Other solutions are better now, but they were in the right place at the right time.
The Tesla CHANGED LANES AND STOPPED. There was no tailgating. This is 100% the Tesla’s fault. Everyone else is a victim.
If this is a CVE, then arguably any method invocation on any function argument in any JavaScript library is a CVE, and we might as well throw the whole thing away. Is there a way to challenge this as not-a-CVE?
"No" SWE ever got promoted for documenting someone else's code. Follow the incentives.
I think of HyperCard as sort of a domain-specific language for a certain UX.

If your application was naturally modeled as a set of records and where you wanted a nice UI to navigate and edit records, it was incredibly easy and productive to get up and running. It's hard to understate how much easier it was to make a GUI app for storing recipes or something along those lines in HyperCard compared to anything out there.

But, like other domain-specific languages, if your app didn't fit that UI style, it got real weird real fast and you felt like you were swimming upstream.
The alternative, WebEx, was even crappier at the time.
> At this phase in life, I've solved all my material problems...

That sounds like a signaling problem. If one of the first things you talk about is being wealthy or displaying a lack of concern about spending money, then people who key off will take an interest.

To me, this is all very common sense that I'm sure you've heard before, but I'll share it in case my reasoning helps it resonate better.

I would suggest connecting with people without the direct intention of dating. For example, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4gWMTDaxKk

Then as you meet people doing these other things, you can ask them out for a date or be friends. As you make friends, you'll have access to more datable people via your social network, which (mostly) removes the problem you're describing since the people are pre-vetted by the type of people you make friends with. (I.e., the traditional way of finding dates via your social network).

The other option is to not talk about money/means/etc. (and avoid spending money during dates above the bare minimum; i.e., splitting the check) until after four or so dates, effectively weeding out those people quickly.

Another thing is to avoid making assumptions about what other people want or who is/isn't datable. People will often artificially limit their options or agency, such as an unwavering belief that "the man should pay," etc.
Well, google was busy only supporting chrome browser for hangouts (yes you could have video in FF but it wouldn’t support blurring or any other advanced features it did in chrome), and Microsoft kept failing with Skype for Business.

End of day, when you needed an app for video conferencing that worked for everyone, your choice was mostly zoom.

And now we are here
My manager's generic concerns are:

1. Are you happy with your work? I talk about what I'm proud of, what I'm bored with, what I'm putting off out of dread. We occasionally problem-solve around the third one buy usually it's a petty complaint that I need to voice before rolling up my sleeves and our meetings are early in the week.

2. Is anything in your way of making progress? I rarely have much to say because ICs at my company maintain as much fluidity as we can and I'm not shy about talking about my difficulties in public.

3. Are there any problems I'm not aware of? This is where I get an opportunity to percolate issues upwards. Sometimes bad processes make extra work, occasionally somebody's contributions are going unnoticed, etc. Sometimes this is fruitful, sometimes problems aren't going to be resolved. My manager just doesn't have that much power, but at least we've got rapport.

I frequently turn these questions around on my manager. It's good to know what's going on in his head, and I occasionally get to help problem-solve.
I'm familiar with RSA and it is still considered secure. So for the proof of concept I was happy with it. Of course it could be replaced in the future.
You know more about the subject than I do, but I don't think you're entirely contradicting one of the author's key points: It's incredibly hard to rewrite a system from scratch - and in effect, to just write a system from scratch.

But it would make sense to have a "professional scientific fortran programmer" go in and do some housecleaning to make things right, without whining, "Why can't I just rewrite it in Java???" Heck, it sounds like fun to me, but that's because I'm basically a professional janitor, and hey, hurricanes and polar vortexes and all that.

So why doesn't that happen? Is testing improvements too expensive? Do scientific programmers just have no respect for the craft whatsoever? Is there nobody with the necessary interdisciplinary skill set?
> It offends my "libertarian" sensibilities.

Train your own model. :) It will do whatever you want it to do.
Nah, just an error of description. The question is whether the person you put in charge is deeply knowledgeable about the product, capable of working on the product, and using that to make decisions. As opposed to someone making decisions in a trained-for-generic-business way.

MBA vs. not-MBA is an oversimplification. Especially since someone can have an engineering degree or whatever and an MBA. But that's not a no true scotsman. There is a pretty clear dividing line between the two groups.
I don't think you should treat them as guilty if they took funds that were stolen, unless you knew for sure that they knew. Just that they should always have to give it back.
That's exactly right! As I explained in the post, we made a big tradeoff to get things started at the beginning, which was using mongo to handle large analytics workloads. It's been a year since I wrote this post but we've had a lot of success improving query performance within ClickHouse as well. Will write about that soon :)
The emulated one is called DECKARD and is such an interesting topic. These consoles are even sought after in some speedrunning because they run with less stutter.
> Markets can remain irrational longer than rational people can remain solvent.

Amazing... What a summary.
The taste test on this is bad. Please flag. Any reputable orgor individual would have a legal entity, place of business etc. Please remove
Is it a common startup idea to open source a successful product and change the payment to be donation based?
So I work for a major insurance company, and though I'm not involved in the "insurance" aspect of it, it's been said during large corporate-like meetings that the reason is that vehicle during the pandemic were going a lot faster, probably because of less vehicles. My understanding from the people who sell auto insurance is that less cars yields more intensive accidents, albeit if fewer. Interestingly enough the numbers work out that car insurance payouts have been a lot less profitable during the pandemic because of it, because the crashes are more damaging.

That's hiw I understood it from the guys who's job it is to make money by selling auto insurance anyways.
Regarding living below your means. For a lot of people their default mode if they don’t stop themselves is to spend almost as quickly as the money comes in. For people raised in a culture (be it family or larger) of saving and living below your means, who then get good jobs, I think the problem can easily become reversed where you are so attuned to the time-value of money and frugality that you become a bit miserly.

I was spending about 10-15% of my gross income for a few years until I realized I was denying myself a lot by not spending closer to like 20%. Yes I am happy that it allowed me to grow my investments quickly. but after a certain point it feels like you are just optimizing for a high score in your 60s. If you are financially driven you may always be thinking that $1 now could become $10 (in real terms) in a few decades. But I imagine when I’m 60 I’d gladly trade 20% of my worth to be able to experience things as a young adult.
WebEx. Lol
> As I see it, there is clearly no way to advance ChatGPT into anything more than it is today. Impressive as it is, the curtain is wide open for all to see, and the art can be viewed plainly as what it truly is: magic, and nothing more.

(I only RTFA after writing this comment, and I now see that the below is what they're doing)

I'm an outsider to this field. My unexpert thought was that perhaps this model could be used to identify the maths components of that question and then we (programmatically) feed that into a different system that gives the answer. That answer then could be provided as context when asking the real question, so the model has access to the mathematical facts.

E.g., I just put this question into the playground:

"Bob was asked to add 234241.24211 and 58352342.52544, and he wanted to know the result. What is the result?"

Identify the mathematical question in the preceding question and write it as an equation.

The answer I got back was:

234241.24211 + 58352342.52544 = ?

That could then be fed into a different system that is designed to do mathematical calculations (or logic). In short, not by doing more of what has been done so far, but instead combining these models with different systems.

We take the result of that sum from a separate system, and redo the same question, providing the mathematical details as context. E.g., now asking:

234241.24211 + 58352342.52544 = 58586583.76755

Bob was asked to add 234241.24211 and 58352342.52544, and he wanted to know the result. What is the result?

With the response:

The result is 58586583.76755.

Thus getting mathematically accurate answers. Note that if I don't include this context with the calculation completed, I get back the answer:

6,179,563.76754