skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/utility/optional/value_or

value_or's parameter type is U&&, so no there's no additional copy there. There's only the explicitly visible default constructor call.

But you did get me to take a second look at the post, and yeah the author's statement of "Finally, we copy construct an instance of A when the call to value_or terminates." is just incorrect. Try it out yourself: https://godbolt.org/z/hWqnrfGKE

If you replace the `.value_or(A())` with `.value()` there's no reduction in copies, only a single reduction in the constructed count which of course makes sense since the `A()` parameter isn't there.

The way you would optimize this to eliminate copies would be to do things like construct the optional in-place and take the parameter by const& instead, such as:

A f(const std::optional<A>& z) {
return z.value_or(A());
}

A g() {
std::optional<A> z(std::in_place, "message");
return f(z);
}

`std::in_place` being definitely a classic C++ "quirk" here and usually unlikely to be worth it but hey if you want to play "minimize the copy count" golf there you go. The value_or isn't actually adding any copies, though.
This article has some textual oddities that make me suspicious.

It confuses "mouse" and "mouth". It has some unusual uses of "the". It confuses the higher decibel level of shouting with high sound frequency.
In case someone wanders into this conversation later, Paizo just announced that they are doing something exactly like what I hoped for.

> In addition to Paizo, Kobold Press, Chaosium, Legendary Games, and a growing list of publishers have already agreed to participate in the Open RPG Creative License, and in the coming days we hope and expect to add substantially to this group.

https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6si7v?Paizo-Announc...
There's mice on the internet
If old media plays their cards right, the proliferation of AI-generated content may prove a blessing in disguise for them. If they take firm stances against publishing AI-generated content, then paying old media for the news may become the best way to reliably get real content written by humans.
How is this different/better than htmx?
Doctors are required to keep getting recertification based on current practices, they can’t just regurgitate outdated information.

General practitioners refer people to specialists because nobody can keep up with every bit of new research out there. A doctor looking something unusual up isn’t a sign of incompetence but rather best practices.
For more information on the technique the parent describes in point #1, I recommend the book "Moonwalking With Einstein" by Joshua Foer.
The author disclosed it in the first line of the article, albeit in a joke about death row records. Looks like someone needs to brush up on their west coast rap discography.
Not enough process can be a pain too. "Just do this for us" without specific requirements, and then the thing you've built is never good enough and needs to be continually refined anyway or it's never used. Those environments are also soul crushing, just in a different way from the ones with too much process.
Data Doesn’t Support New Covid-19 Booster Shots for Most, Says Vaccine Expert
If you use semantic versioning correctly, then you shouldn't need to worry about api<->implementation inconsistency. Or rather, when you need to, you know which parts you have to deal with.

I don't think there is a way to avoid this?
> "But I need a car!" Yes, but you don't need a car you can't save up for, you need a car you CAN save up for.

How are you going to save up for a car if you can't drive to work? You certainly can't afford to move to one of the three places in the US with functioning public transport systems.
You may pay more than the interest. It's hard to prove the diff of purchase rates between if you have vs haven't had the incentives.
The "lucked out with our industry remaining intact while the rest of the world dealt with the fallout of the world wars" part can't be understated, though.

The reason the new social contract was able to hold was because America was the economic engine that rebuilt the Western world, and enjoyed monopoly industrial status for a while. That a.) created plenty of excess economic value that could support a large middle class b.) created enough social cohesion that the working class could remain unified politically and c.) took away all the other options for would-be capitalists to play governments against each other. They were forced to accept those 90% tax rates and unionized labor contracts because nobody else had any physical capital stock.

There were plenty of efforts to establish a social contract for workers starting in the 1890s, but they never took until the Great Depression, and during the Depression there was a significant chance they would be rolled back. Roosevelt's most ambitious reforms (eg. the NRA [1]) were found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, and there was an active coup attempt [2] against him. For the first few years after WW2 it was very uncertain if the U.S. would end up sliding back into the Great Depression, until it became clear that the Marshall Plan and other reconstruction efforts would stimulate plenty of demand to keep money coming in and give workers bargaining leverage.

Similarly, the era of the great American Middle Class collapsed in the 1970s, and the catalyst was foreign competition. By then other countries had rebuilt their capital stock and domestic industries. This let them put out products just as good as American ones at prices just as cheap, and because Americans had fat union contracts that allowed them a high standard of living, foreign competitors were able to undercut them. Having a good union contract with your employer does you no good when your employer goes out of business, and that was the situation for many of the dominant 1930s-1970s companies in America in the late 70s through the 80s.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal#NRA_%22Blue_Eagle%22_...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot
I agree with you on wifi networks - Internet connections should be dumb pipes. I don't know what you mean by "blanket ban per state" - the per-state bans in the article are still talking about state owned devices.

> I am not sure why you believe the kind of security violation is shoehorning in an unnecessary concern

I am talking about privacy, and the need for general privacy legislation. Your response brushed that aside in favor of talking about "security violations", seemingly asserting that the only metric for analyzing privacy-hostile actions is whether they violate existing laws like the CFAA.

> difference between someone sharing their interest in Harry Potter and the DMV selling your information

The two dynamics are overwhelmingly similar:

You have "voluntarily" chosen to give your data to TikTok, and to the DMV. You wouldn't have chosen to give your information to either of them in isolation, but you were pushed into doing so as a condition of partaking in some other activity. At any time, you can choose to stop giving new information to either. However they both can continue using information you have already given them, and at any time both can come up with new ways of abusing your information and unilaterally alter the deal you originally signed up for.

Asserting a strong difference between the two is ultimately just buying into partisan propaganda that blesses the actions of government xor corporations. From where I'm standing, they're both mostly-unaccountable bureaucratic power structures that exercise coercive power. There are indeed differences, but on this issue not enough to be meaningful - large well-established surveillance companies have much more in common with government than they do with small businesses and individuals (which are at the opposite end of the spectrum).

> I don't think most people realize how dangerous it would be to attack section 230 as a way to implement Europe style privacy laws. It's literally yet another attack on privacy

There is a lot to unpack here. I do not see how an "EU style" privacy law can be considered an attack on privacy, apart from some weird framing where corporations should have the right to privately strip individuals of our privacy.

I'm no fan of EARN IT, and I think focusing on S230 is fallacious (the only interesting question there is the hypothetical of whether the lack of S230 would have prevented the surveillance industry from growing up like it did - perhaps with increased liability, the tech industry would have continued producing honest user-representing software rather than switching business models to being centralized media sites. But that ship has sailed long ago).

Rather, I am advocating for privacy laws on their own. A free society is not one comprised of numerous unaccountable surveillance databases. And to the extent that I do consent for a business to process my information in the course of providing a service, this should not give them the right to retain it indefinitely nor abuse it for their own purposes.
Pro Tip: talk to customer service representatives as though they are chatbots
I have discovered that the best way to interact over the phone with customer service representatives is to pretend that they are chatbots.

You should speak slowly and clearly and spell things out. You should pause often for the CPU to catch up, but not so long that they notice the pause.

Remove all emotion from your voice and be over-the-top unambiguous.

Never ask about their day or engage in any chit-chat, but do say "please" and "thank you" because the robot has been programmed to expect these niceties.

Interestingly, the customer service representatives seem to really appreciate this approach because it makes their job easier.

Also, for all you know, they actually are a chatbot.
I'm afraid I forgot, but I'm sure it's out there somewhere. It blew my mind at the time that IntelliJ's git could do something that cli git couldn't.
Clearly, the solution is train a ChatGPT instance that is fine-tuned on generating prompts for ChatGPT.
`className` bit is React specific. Preact, Solid JS and others allow you to use `class` (and sometimes both) no issue. Some just opted to follow React's lead there
Reminds me of the hardware -> firmware -> software spectrum
> So you're paying $15 to get 11 great images that are what you want? That still seems pretty cheap

It isn't, stable diffusion + anything v3 or protogen is free

Midjourney costs 10usd/month for iirc nearly 2 hours of gpu time and is better than dalle
I think you're in agreement with the article - the author says that they didn't need to taint results because they were already terrible. And that they're not going to fix things because there's no incentive.
I think the problem is based on hit rate the number is a lot higher than $50. If you're charging $10/month the average user lasts 12 months and the number of users who marry is 10% then you're charging $1200 for a successful match to get equivalent revenue, not $50.
I feel the same way. All my programmer friends have all said a version of the refrain, “I just work hard for 8 hours then check out. I don’t care about programming beyond what it will pay me.” I understand and of course don’t fault anyone for that point of view, but it’d be nice to be around people who actually get excited about this stuff.
> "I never realized how impossible it is to make friends in adulthood" is pretty common.

Articles about this topic have been on very respected news sites for awhile, so at least that one exists outside the bubble you're referring to.
Right. Well I think that’s one of the reasons Musk doesn’t take Spacex public. The why he operates under is very much not palatable for any reasonable shareholder. Shareholders would want to scale out space deployments of practical things (satellites) and focus on that. If they knew Musk’s why, which is to get to Mars, well … well I mean that’s just crazy. What board is going to go for that?

He carefully keeps that one out of sight.
Successful couples do exit but they dfi get a pretty good permanent marketing machine because everytime someone asks, "How did you meet?" They'll promote the app. Also many (most?) people on there aren't looking for a long term relationship.
To me it's misogynistic because when I heard it first it's implied that my happiness is tied to a woman. Since I'm happily married and very much in love I know that without her I'd probably end up being a philosopher pondering problems without answers to run away from the trauma of losing her. I've been through it before :)
Is the "bad" writing partially just different cultural values of the writer? Lots of people object to the emphasis on female beauty in the Dark Forest, along with the subplot of finding the "perfect" mate.
Hmmm, I suppose I'm interested in what you mean by bullshit. Just because AI makes something easier to do, doesn't mean the work is bullshit. Lots of research, composition, and communication work becomes much easier to do with an AI assist, but that doesn't mean the work is bullshit.
>once a lot of pr, journalism, copy and marketing is replaced

Enjoy them doing something productive (I hope)
I'm less worried about stuff like ChatGPT killing things off, but more about just making everything noticeably a bit worse.

To take an analogy: bad voice recognition software abounds everywhere, not because it is better than what it replaced in terms of UX, but because it works just enough and allows massive cost-savings on hiring people to do customer service jobs.

A world where most marketing copy is written by mediocre AI, and more and more written and visual content are generated by big models that are technically impressive but intellectually hollow is going to be one where the quality of everything sucks just a bit more, but it's so cheap that it becomes pervasive.

(This trend is already apparent and not created by, or limited to, ChatGPT.)
Just to close the loop, in case you didn't know, the next biggest players in the Table-Top Role Playing Game World got together and did exactly what I was hoping for:

> In addition to Paizo, Kobold Press, Chaosium, Legendary Games, and a growing list of publishers have already agreed to participate in the Open RPG Creative License, and in the coming days we hope and expect to add substantially to this group.

This would be roughly akin to Google, Microsoft, Meta, and Rackspace announcing they would work together to fight some awful cloud computing initiative from Amazon. But thanks for angrily telling one dude on HN that he should be the one to lead the charge. Really great advice, thanks.

https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6si7v?Paizo-Announc...
> a private owned company can care about it. Even successors.

In theory, but rarely in practice. I've seen a lot of private, family-owned businesses go out of business or get sold after the son/successor takes over because of exactly the phenomenon jesuscript mentions. Even if the successor cares, they don't care about the same things as the founder.
Neo4J is bad at aggregated queries but that is not what to use a graphdb for in the first place.
This 1000x. For a larger project, I asked and got approval for a POC. When I submitted the POC with feature flag for review, I was told by the same management that it wasn't "production worthy". Never burned out faster in my 20+ year career.
DARPA funding research projects to boost people's resilience to extreme cold
My problem with typescript is that at the hands of a typescript aficionado the code is nearly impossible to read.

It requires so much mental effort to understand what's going on
- hisubway. online/shadowban don’t seem to work for @kenklippenstein atm.

- shadowban. elrincondelantropologo. com reports: No search ban, No suggestion ban, No ghost ban, No reply deboosting detected.

And it remains inconclusive as always…
To which ChatGPT could respond with:

1. titles of tickets moved within the past 24 hours

2. title of ticket in progress

3. No blockers right now
It's not just capitalism. Bloated management and wasteful processes are problems under feudalism and communism too.
I believe, by design, it's subsidized by production of incentives of spending more in general.
This has been a problem with every new productive technology. The civilized answer is "society takes on the responsibility of teaching them to do other things".

Of course, this often does not happen for one of two reasons. First, society doesn't always choose the civilized answer; it often chooses to just marginalize the folks who just lost their jobs. Second, society often really wants to pick the thing they're teaching these people to do -- this is how you get people trying to teach coal miners how to code, despite coal miners being by and large uninterested in coding.

These are pretty real problems that we're already grappling with, but we're going to need to get very serious about it very soon. LLMs aren't the only reason why.
This is super exciting! It's been a privilege to watch Linus grow from a C++ noob to a competent browser developer (and TC39 invited expert!) I can't tell you how proud I am of him.

Please consider supporting Linus on this journey! :^)
America has “Puritan Roots”, while long removed and tempered by centuries of immigration, westward expansion into territory of other cultures both native and similarly imperial (the French and Spanish territories of the new world) … but somehow you can still see the
Puritans influence, reverberating down through time in the minds of each generation of waspy Protestants… it even got monetised in the form of purity preaching baptist and Christian megachurches with the fostering of a “everyone is a sinner, give money to much church to assuage your guilt” mindset being lucrative to a charismatic few…

The short version… what do you expect from a country founded by the Puritans, the only people who looked at the repressed tight laced morality of Victorian England and said “harlots, degenerates”… they were pushed out of English society for being killjoys and too prudish… for Victorian England
Writing wrongs: how true crime authors can fall victim to tragedy
The space elevator has an unsolved problem of colliding with satellites in space, so even if we find a good material to build it, it won't work.
Any Concerns with Building on ChatGPT?
Have any developers raised concerns on building applications on top of GPT-3 or future releases?

Is there anything in the OpenAI license that gives you pause?

I’m trying to better understand why some people might not want to build on top of ChatGPT, and the business or engineering concerns behind that.

Thanks
No not at all. Software Engineering is about building systems to the appropriate quality level.

For projects I'm usually involved in: this means being disciplined, writing good quality tests, keeping code clean, documentation and following the various practises and conventions. This, if you're doing it properly, means you'll be able to ship code much faster than if just "programming".

I use scrum by choice; but you can deploy a lightweight version that cuts a lot of the bullshit if you have a good team.

If you're re-architecting things then that's a huge red flag. Unless the underlying assumptions have changed enormously or you're working for a start-up who had inept "programmers" (like myself 20 years ago) YOLO'd V1 then what you're doing ain't engineering.
It could also be the wrong tools.

eg I like having tests, and I like writing them, because they make my life better. But the contrast between the effort level to write tests in ruby or python vs go... I hate go, I hate the lack of good mock support, and I dislike writing tests at work because I hate go.
This somehow reminded me of this sketch https://youtu.be/owI7DOeO_yg

You could definitely believe that it was chat GPT that they were using
It’s gonna kill the internet as a place to find useful information. Google is already almost unusable for researching any topic that’s even adjacent to anything that can be monetized. Widespread, good-enough, AI-generated, SEO’d “articles” will push it over the edge.
> I'm coming around to the idea that in general the more bullshit something is the easier it is for AI to disrupt.

> in general
Thanks! Is this basically what chatgpt is, a thin frontend on GPT3? Or is there more to it?
Any good way to adjust that for the effects of other social spending that's not on the school's books?
Even if we conveniently assume that all the people of the future smaller population have it in them to do the jobs AI is not yet good enough at (and none of them are would-be copywriters because that's where their skill ceiling is), surely the game-theoretical shift from "if you, aspiring original writer, don't make it for some reason or another, you'll have to settle for a lower-prestige/-pay writing job" to "...you'll actually be stuck with none of the skills you acquired being of particular value to anyone". Writing as a career would assume a risk profile more akin to trying to become a K-pop idol.
here I believe: https://github.com/jhhuh/st-sixel
dnsmasq is not a recursive resolver.
"About 500 jobs — nearly one-third of the current workforce of 1,636 — are those entry-level desk positions, in which workers label images from the company’s self-driving vehicle software — merge signs, turning lanes, pedestrians — in an attempt to train the autonomous driving algorithms."

Glorified captcha farm, what a joke.
Subtitles got noticably worse now that their generation is often farmed out to AI, especially in translations.

Drives me nuts as someone who likes using subtitles.
Take them outside and shoot them.
There are a ton of semi-competing configuration languages and systems that folks are using to tame cloud system configurations (which grow to immense complexity). Cue, dhall, jsonnet, starlark, KCL, HCL, etc. are just a few options. It's very hard to pick a 'best' one though as they each have interesting strengths.
I do feel that are we are now in that same era for VR where there is a huge barrier to mass adoption. I believe only Apple can move the industry ahead at this point
This is why there are matchmaking services charging 10k a year.

You used to see ads for them in Skymall.
There is also the PETAL stack: Phoenix, Elixir, Tailwind, Alpine, and Liveview. The ordering doesn't make sense, but it is a nice acronym. I haven't actually gotten around to developing with it, but I am excited to do so.
The Four Stages of Creativity
Data-informed flex-grow for illustration purposes
As a result, emails from your domain will never reach anyone who has a "forwarding" email address: for example, someone who uses Cloudflare to manage their incoming email for their domains, and forwards it to their real email account.

This is a lot of people.

Why are you OK with that?
I agree with the article but maybe you are trying to do the wrong thing with ChatGPT. I am not a native English speaker (as many of you already noticed due to my grammar mistakes), so ChatGPT have been very useful to rewrite my texts, fix grammar and maybe "beautify" them a bit. It's has been an invaluable tool in that sense. I feel much more confident now sending emails and writing important messages knowing that the grammar and tone have been "approved" by this IA.

By the way, I asked ChatGPT to fix/improve this previous comment and this is the result:

I agree with the article, but perhaps you are using ChatGPT in the wrong way. As a non-native English speaker (as many of you have likely noticed due to my grammar mistakes), ChatGPT has been extremely helpful in rewriting my texts, correcting grammar, and making them more polished. It has been an invaluable tool in that sense. I now feel more confident when sending emails and writing important messages, knowing that the grammar and tone have been reviewed and approved by this AI.
Oh indeed. Sometimes people repeat FUD just because they feel like they need to say something and they aren't well informed. Other times people do so because they are honestly concerned. Unless you know the person, it can be hard to differentiate.