skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Make some benchmarks and tests that track the things you care about.
Speed, resources, etc are easy to test for.
Simplicity: how do you evaluate if complexity is unnecessary? If you think of a better solution, suggest that. Maybe do design reviews to figure out the simplest solution before they implement it.
Brittleness: use modules. Give them examples of good code, have a senior engineer review
Code style: linting, auto formatting
Good questions. Hmm do you think maybe it would be viable if the payouts were based on [model] performance rather than ostensible training time?

There's a useful asymmetry we can exploit: finding weights that perform well is computationally intensive and takes time, but scoring a set of weights is fast and easy.

A number cruncher could spend 2 weeks training a model, and then when they submit the results it takes me 10 seconds to score the model - to verify the quality of the results, and calculate the performance-based payout. In the #1 or #3 scenario where they didn't do or didn't complete the computations, they wouldn't have a well-trained model to submit for payout. (The lost time in #3 is inconvenient in time-sensitive situations, but mechanisms exist to address that - SLAs, up-front collateral, etc)

Regarding privacy, that's an EXTREMELY good and important question. There's some really neat prior art for privacy-preserving machine learning that could be useful here, e.g. https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.07229 "Privacy-Preserving Machine Learning with Fully Homomorphic Encryption for Deep Neural Network"

(note I'm approaching this as an interesting DistML thought experiment, not proposing it as an immediately viable or sensible initiative)
I think clear communication is important, and I initially tried to avoid digging into grammar until they doubled down on a weird use of a comma.

There are two verbs in your example, so it’s simply not a relevant example since the second verb is forming a separate sentence. It’s just connected with a comma in order to inform the reader that it is reusing the context of the previous sentence. In this specific example, that really makes it a broken sentence fragment, but it is often acceptable if it is being done poetically, which it arguably is there.

I phrased my previous comment carefully. The verb is never isolated from the rest of the sentence by a comma. “Posts” is the complete sentence; it just has an implicit subject and object.

It’s possible there are nuanced counterexamples somewhere that I’m somehow overlooking, but none of them are relevant to whether putting a comma between “laptop” and “returns” would make the title clearer.

But, if you’d like to try again with only a single verb…
Why was Klippenstein deprioritized? Elon Musk is disingenuous in his support for “free speech” if Twitter is limiting the reach of a prominent Musk critic.
Thats cold.
point was that if FAA software policies around safety were actually effective we would not have had the 737 max issues.
I’m more worried about the details of my credit card. Personally I’d be willing to sell a video feed with audio of my using the bathroom for extra cash if there’s a big market for it. But I know some people are embarrassed someone might learn they have bodily functions.
> https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-won-apos-t-formally-140...

You are completely misrepresenting what's happening here by saying Tesla is refusing to cooperate. NTSB is trying to pressure a gag order on Tesla that would prevent Tesla from disclosing information around a car accident to the public. NTSB deciding this is a mandatory part of the agreement is their choice. They could have chosen to go forward without this requirement - they didn't. Tesla still provided all the information they had on the situation, and still continued to provide assistance to the NTSB in their investigation. Just not as a "formal party". This is the NTSB making demands while also asking for help that Tesla isn't obligated to provide unless they want.

You're also misrepresenting the Toyota situation. Toyota actively denied fault for most of this situation, and was fined $1.2 billion for deceptive statements around it. They frequently referred to "pedal misapplication"
I think a lot of companies are afraid to integrate more tightly with Fediverse or build native things on top of Mastadon because so much of the implementation is AGPL. That's one of those licenses that keeps corporate IP lawyers up at night.
ubiquitous among boaters (incl myself)
If you're writing in Go, you can use it as a library. This is poorly documented, unfortunately.
I think you're taking the "survive" part of this too literally.
I eat three time a day. Am I addict?
It's the CEO/leader's job to make these decisions and to course correct when he's made a mistake. Publicly admonishing himself is, at best, a pointless display of virtue signaling. He could write 10 pages groveling for forgiveness from his employees and the public, but people would complain about that too.

I suspect the overall CEO compensation package for a company the size and structure of Lattice is trivial compared to other expenses.
> while I could theoretically use decameters, in practice average people seem to only use

Everyone uses decimeters where I'm from, it isn't strange at all and everyone understands it. People use mm, cm, dm, m or km depending on what fits best, that gives you a much more fine grained set of lengths to talk about and it is trivial to convert between them so people don't have to think about it.

Maybe countries that doesn't use metric in everyday life just teaches you cm and m, but there is no reason to just stay with those. The confusion is maybe that we don't mix units, you don't say "1 meter 8 decimeters and 3 centimeters", you just use one, and in those since the accuracy is in centimetetrs you just use centimeters, or meters straight. But if you talk about a distance of around 30 centimeters people just say 3 decimeters, and since everyone has worked a lot with those before they take their mental decimeter times 3 and they know the length.
Architecture and DevSecOps
OACA Podcast on Architecture and DevSecOps
Watching a movie in VR on a flight beats the hell out of the crappy headrest TV. A 2 hour flight turns into a 2 hour experience in a full size movie theatre. The seats are fairly similar so it would probably add to the immersion. With good noise cancelling headphones you might even forget you're on a plane.
I found this paragraph from the paper very interesting:

> 7 The relevance of FF to analog hardware

> An energy efficient way to multiply an activity vector by a weight matrix is to implement activities
as voltages and weights as conductances. Their products, per unit time, are charges which add
themselves. This seems a lot more sensible than driving transistors at high power to model the
individual bits in the digital representation of a number and then performing O(n^2) single bit
operations to multiply two n-bit numbers together. Unfortunately, it is difficult to implement the
backpropagation procedure in an equally efficient way, so people have resorted to using A-to-D
converters and digital computations for computing gradients (Kendall et al., 2020). The use of two
forward passes instead of a forward and a backward pass should make these A-to-D converters
unnecessary.

It was my impression that it is difficult to properly isolate an electronic system to use voltages in this way (hence computers sort of "cut" voltages into bits 0/1 using a step function).

Have these limitations been overcome or do they not matter as much, as neural networks can work with more fuzzy data?

Interesting to imagine such a processor though.
> Je n’ai fait celle-ci plus longue que parce que je n’ai pas eu le loisir de la faire plus courte. (I have made this letter longer than usual because I have not had time to make it shorter.)

~ Blaise Pascal, Lettres Provinciales (1657)
HPV is well defined. ;)

As for HPF, it seems to be a euphemism for hyper-palatable food, i.e. food that increases time and calories consumed before meal cessation. There's probably a threshold that captures 99% of the foods we are talking about while excluding 99% of the foods that are highly processed but not hyper-palatable.

For example, unsweetened dark chocolate (70%+ cacao) would certainly be highly processed but not something highly palatable to most people. Same with Grape Nuts cereal or bran buds. Unsalted saltine crackers also come to mind.

Palatability + calorie density seem like the best distinctions to focus on for this reason as processing is often used to increase palatability/density but not only used to increase them.
Microsoft Combat Goggles Falter as Congress Says No to Buying More
Given that these engines know how words are associated but not their meanings, some amount of human editing is required to avoid bogus text. Things like a missing not or pro-/anti- switches or removing any biases in the training set. But an editor can look over a whole lot of generated documents.
The rub is that not all problems are as simple as others try to make them out to be. Engineers who are able to vastly think through all of the nuance from business requirements and other systems that adds necessary complexity are by nature going to be seem like engineers who are attempting to add unnecessary complexity. A lot of the examples posted in this thread don't necessary sound like this case, but it's something I see on a near-daily basis at one of the BigCos -- engineers complaining that X is too complex when they're only looking at it through the Y lens and missing the other Z edges.

Even Senior Principals seem to over-ask "why are you building this new service when you could just work with the other team to modify theirs?" when in actuality working with that team would also mean working with 4 other teams who all have set roadmaps; it would result in a complete failure to launch. Even very smart people in high positions can very easily not grok such a situation.
More than half of all homes in Norway have had an air-to-air heat pump retrofitted. It is mandatory for all new construction. Case closed.
One can only conclude that there is negligible security regarding US classified documents, and that dozens of politicians have carelessly filed and discarded hundreds and thousands of documents without any regard for safety. It’s all a big, open mess with, no doubt, foreign agents happily taking advantage of it.
They often just crowdsource the labor for free with paranoid local people who listen to those scanners all day anyhow
Author here if you have any questions :-)
Usually you have to go to the address and be murdered before the police would fall up on the address.
The teaser says 8 cores/16 threads so likely will be at least equivalent. With a much better screen. And cheaper.
> Its for people like me who want a linux laptop, but don't want to go through the hassle of installing it.

For me, buying from an upstream-oriented Linux hardware vendor is about getting an assurance that on any distro newer than the hardware, everything will just work. I always plan to perform an installation because I have distro preferences.

With System76, a stable, fast, open-source BIOS is also part of the value proposition.

Personally, I'd never get an NVIDIA laptop again, 'supported' or not. At the end of the day, NVIDIA's kernel module will constrain what kernel versions you can use regardless of what any downstream vendor does. That means possible version conflicts with other out-of-tree kernel modules that I actually want, like ZoL.
How do these companies ensure that the hard drives get cleared of company data? I would expect most companies handle information that is legally restricted and have an obligation to ensure employees don't keep a stray copy of customer information.
I agree providing the Secret Key to other devices can be a pain. In fact it's our #1 onboarding challenge. On Apple devices specifically it's much easier as we can store it in iCloud Keychain, but we'd like to make it simpler everywhere.

Curious if you've had a chance to try the Setup Code? It's not as slick as iCloud since we don't own the OS, but it enables you to scan the code and get all the account details on your new device. That way all you need to do is type your password.

On that note we recently had a hackathon around this to make things even simpler and we had some success there. I'm hoping we can make this real and share it in an update later this year.
It's not hard. We just don't care.
Cool! Where is this?
I did a quick search and I think you might be getting your information from articles like this:

https://fee.org/articles/federal-covid-spending-will-cost-41...

Fact check:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/04/14/fac...

https://theconversation.com/joe-bidens-us-1-9-trillion-stimu...

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/03/11/us/how-covid-...

It looks like Biden's contribution is about $2 trillion to families and individuals. Counting the previous administration: another $2 trillion to businesses, $1 trillion to state and local, and $1 trillion to healthcare and other programs, for about $5-6 trillion total.

Worst case, that's about $18,000 per capita for 332 million people in the US. Best case, more like $6,000, since much of the stimulus was in the form of payroll loans that businesses were supposed to pay back, although much of that has been forgiven. Without knowing more details, the best I can estimate is the logarithmic mean, which is about $11,000. Spread over 3 years, that's just under $4,000 per capita per year.

Note that this is less than the $3,000 per year that I got in Pell grants to attend college in the late 90s, when money was worth about twice what it's worth today. At a $23 trillion US GDP, there's $70,000 per capita to play with, so $4,000 extra per year would raise per capita income by 5.7%. High yes, but not much higher than a typical 3% inflation. Especially when much of the world was out of work for a year or two during the pandemic.

The real culprit is corporate price gouging and speculation:

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2022/08/26/all-us-are-payi...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/25/inflat...

I noticed that Google and even DuckDuckGo have ranked this information so low that hysterical headlines totally dominate search results. It will be interesting to see how investigative journalism traces these knee-jerk headlines to their sources. Although I doubt that any titans of industry or politicians will be unmasked before the next election.
I'm inclined to think the following hypothesis is true: both _under_-investment and _over_-investment have negative consequences for otherwise promising technologies.

To be fair, the above statement may be too generalized to be usefully descriptive. There are at least two additional dimensions that probably should be included in any descriptive theory:

1. What is the nature of the technology in question? What do we know about similar technologies in terms of their evolution?

2. Over what time frame? This needs to mesh with the "nature" question (1, above).

---

Here are some example cases or scenarios:

## Unproven directions / little institutional support?

How does an idea go from a spark, maybe a paper, to having some institutional support? Perhaps someone in academia can speak to this. Overinvestment, it would seem, might create too many splinter groups, leading to a dispersion of necessary talent and connections.

## Promising opportunity for further research / good institutional support

Long-term, sustained investment in pure science works well as a foundation, since it allows universities and students to build knowledge over many years, sustain careers, and foster multi-generational knowledge transfer. Overinvestment seems negative to the extent funding streams come from a fixed pie.

## Mature enough for technology transfer to small companies (often funded by more risk-tolerant investors, such as Angels, sometimes VC's)

Funding of consortia that bridge academic and commercial interests. Such as the famous MCC of Austin, TX. Overinvestment would tax the resources of educational institutions, which struggle with the value proposition and tuition and fees increase _much_ more rapidly than inflation over the last ~20 years.

## Proven technology, but unclear market fit / sales to early adopters?

This seems to be an area where investment works well. Small companies need to customize the technology and sell it. Overinvestment might lead to too many squirrels chasing too few acorns, though. Markets tend to do well when there are enough competitors to drive prices down and innovate. They serve humanity more broadly when market failure are mitigated and minimized.

## Proven market, though perhaps still niche / unscaled / viability for the mainstream?

Similar to the case immediately above. Additionally: overinvestment runs the risk of creating inflated expectations and distorting labor costs.

## Proven business / opportunity to improve efficiency of known problems (e.g. practices -- perhaps 'boring' or 'messy' to some -- that nevertheless can dramatically improve quality and/or reduce expenses

A sustained ecosystem of companies that build expertise among their employees, who share best practices indirectly (i.e. adoption of source control, automated testing, continuous integration) helps drive continued improvements in an otherwise 'mature' industry.

---

Even if the above questions could be made more specific and testable, it would require _significant_ structural and behavioral changes to move technology investment towards a "happy middle".
Fair enough. Where is this?
When I hear "move fast and break things", I am reminded of a guy that I worked with. He delivered work fast......full of bugs...0 planning...and his daily ritual was to just keep patching the "pile of shit" he put together.

He has now moved on and we sometimes chat, he works for a huge corp, still sucks at writing SQL.
> Any programs which promote heat pump installations above a certain scale must either include huge investments into grid robustness or mandate that all heat pump installation must include fuel-based backup heating sufficient for a week or two.

That's a little extreme. You also need to consider your failure modes. I live in texas where a bunch of people died due to an extreme freeze and a very poorly regulated grid. When that happened, it wasn't just electric that was lost, but a big problem was natural gas wells and pipes freezing up too.

The cost to install and maintain both systems would be an automatic deal breaker for many people. I don't think you need total redundancy, but having some is good. For example, I went and bought a "buddy heater" after that freeze. It runs off of a 5lbs canister of propane and has an automatic Carbon Monoxide cutoff. It gets toasty. It won't last forever, but it's a good emergency backup.

One thing I think everyone needs: An emergency radio with crank power. When the grid goes down, so does internet and cell towers. The only way we got news was via radio.
> I work in embedded systems, so I'm generally writing C for resource-constrained systems. This sort of environment is rife with footguns, and I spend most of my time just trying to avoid those. A big part of that is keeping the things that my team controls as simple as possible, and while we are resource constrained, it's a balance.

Do you measure the balance?

I write software for drones. Power use is a very real concern and its performance must be balanced with real-world-clock performance. So I wrote some starter benchmarks and tasked the team to continue writing benchmarks against their code. When the team wants to simplify something, we also measure that against benchmarks.

We use C++ instead of C. You can still footgun yourself with C++ but it provides a lot more safety mechanisms than C.
I hate this BS about A managers hire A people, B people hire C etc. This is total MBA thinking (I think it comes form GE, or at least they espoused it) on a forum where people routinely mock MBAs.

I have been lucky to work in a field where teams frequently work in parallel and success or failure is pretty clear cut. And teams are often stratified based on the priority of project. Many times-- not always -- the "B" team crushes the "A" team. Why? Some reasons include: the A team is performative and focused on the things that burnish the careers and reputation of its members. B teams have more of a sense of the wolf being at the door and that if they don't perform their task they will feel the consequence. Being underdogs promotes teamwork.

Obviously people have profound differences in their strengths and weaknesses and some people are completely inappropriate. But calling people stars or A player covers up a lot of lazy thinking that includes a lot of bias. I have worked at smaller startups that say "we only hire A players". Obviously that is delusional but worse it covered up the more profound questions. Why did you hire the wrong person? Why did that person or team fail?
For me, it was the "I Am Graphics And So Can You" [1] series, where author progresses from the similar concepts up to a working renderer for DOOM 3, linked in the intro of this article [2].

[1]: https://www.fasterthan.life/blog/2017/7/11/i-am-graphics-and...

[2]: https://github.com/DustinHLand/vkDOOM3
JSON doesn't specify what numbers are. Integers that take 2MB to represent are valid JSON numbers.

Regarding protobuf, the following opinion is obviously insane, and if your org is already using protobuf you should ignore it: protobuf actually seems pretty bad? It has a bunch of vestigial features that people just say not to use. Its integer encoding bloats the encoded size and causes unnecessary dependency chains in the decoder. I would strongly prefer sending simdjson tape between processes and storing simdjson tape at rest, but if my coworkers insisted on doing something normal, maybe I would look into flatbuffers or capnproto.
I wonder if it's possible to start with one of these small-internet browser projects and expand it to the extent of adding CSS and adding some mechanism to handle something like HTMX provides (without including javascript capabilities).

I haven't fully thought this idea through, but it does seem like it would be a manageable way to start a non-corporate browser that could handle modern layouts and some degree of interactivity without the mess of privacy and security issues that javascript introduces.
The CEO is accountable. But they are not going to fire themselves, are they? The board decides that.
These are not good engineers. Engineering is figuring things out, not boasting about abstracted ways to their self-made issues.

Come work with us. I think you'll be more happy. julien _at_ serpapi.com.
I believe one factor is the amount of time between the submissions.
I could see it happening in b2c just not your regular b2b saas
Love that analogy! Full circle unstructured chaos
That sounds like an organizational anti-pattern.
I'm not sure what the main point is here. The paper is definitely sketchy on details, and the main idea is definitely simple enough to resemble a lot of other work. I wouldn't be surprised if someone (maybe a certain Swiss researcher) comes out and says, actually, this is the same as this other paper from the early 90s. If you squint hard enough a lot of ideas (especially simple ones) can be seen as being the same as other, older ideas. I'm not too interested in splitting those hairs, really. I'm more curious on whether this eventually leads to something that sets it apart from the SOTA in some interesting way.
Is it just me, or does it sound off? Kinda like the uncanny valley, it sounds like the song, yet it also doesn't sound quite right. I think its mostly in the drums that I get a sense of unease.