skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Okay but if that was true, these companies wouldn't also be issuing massive stock buybacks at the same time. It's normal ebb to someone with decades of time in the industry.
> This multidecadal periodicity coincides with changes in several other geophysical observations, especially the length of day and magnetic field.

Good riddance. Have we abolished leap seconds already?
Could we skip to the point that in any trend there will be fakes. A trend is a fad and while they reoccur every so often the ones that are prepared stands to make the most.
Faith in the internet is restored
I have the same issue.
It isn't just one company. This is still happening today. https://www.tampabay.com/news/florida-politics/2022/10/19/mi...
We switched from Geico recently to a new insurance carrier as well because of how expensive our new rate was going to be.

Likely time to go check on a comparison site for a better rate. Sometimes Geico can try to match that if you have a new quote at a lower price, or you can just switch.

Disclosure: I work at Clearcover (https://app.clearcover.com/apply), the company my wife and I switched to, but I don't think anyone would argue with a $500/6mo rate to a $180/6mo rate (employee is discount is ~5%).
When Lonely Planet guides were popular, there was a trend of investors buying popular hostels/attractions from the guide and running them into the ground before the next Lonely Planet was published and warned of the demise. I haven't seen this as much lately (maybe due to rise of online reviews), but cross-referencing Lonely Planet with TripAdvisor is the sweet-spot.
Check this out: https://beej.us/guide/bgnet/
It's why I prefer to use a standard like https://keepachangelog.com
They don't do full on filter assisted decoding unfortunately, because if they did, they could make ChatGPT generate texts without the letter "e" or to rhyme more reliably.

But it can't. The filters are primitive in comparison.
I was also curious about the topic.

I think this book review by Nelson Goering of Robert Mailhammer & Theo Vennemann's book "The Carthaginian North: Semitic Influence on Early Germanic: A Linguistic and Cultural Study" at https://hcommons.org/deposits/download/hc:40752/CONTENT/goer... and https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.20028.goe does a good job of summarizing the argument and the review author's issues with it.

> The thesis presented in this book – that there was a substantial linguistic impact on what would become Proto-Germanic from the Punic spoken by Carthaginians who allegedly established outposts in northern Europe – has been argued by one of the authors in various articles for many years (see the collected articles in Vennemann 2003, 2013), and is already known as ‘controversial’. ... This book can be taken as arguing the best possible case for Punic influence on Germanic ...

> This, then, is the sum of the strictly linguistic evidence marshalled by MV for the alleged Punic contact and linguistic influence on Germanic. They supplement it with an appeal to writing systems, arguing that runes are best derived directly from the Punic alphabet. They make a number of points, but a large core of their argument turns on the supposed derivation of the first four runes (for f, u, þ, and a), in order, shape, and sound, from the Punic alphabet. .

> The result of this, it should by now be clear, is that I must conclude that the central thesis of the book – that there was linguistic influence from Punic on pre-Germanic – is not supported by the evidence marshalled here. More than that, I would say that this Punic hypothesis may now be confidently rejected as very probably untrue. If such influence were real, then the combined labours of two talented linguists, one working on the problem for very many years, and with ample (if often critical) feedback to build on, would have uncovered convincing traces by now. That they have not strongly suggests that such do not exist. If this is the best argument that can be made for the Punic hypothesis, then the hypothesis would appear to be incorrect.
I translate children’s books in my spare time. One time, I got a little book called “The Wonky Donkey”, in which all the rhymes rhyme exclusively with the word “donkey”. The task here was to find the appropriate rhyme to my native language’s equivalent of “donkey” (gomar), while at the same time retaining the original meaning.
So I built a tool to find all the rhymes to a given word.
I totally agree that Bulldozer was ahead of its time. In some ways, it was a case of being too clever, trying to do things under the hood for the FPU similarly to Hyper-Threading for decoder/front-end resources (which also caused problems). Getting integrated with the underlying software (e.g., the kernel and its scheduler) in big.LITTLE was a comparative revelation.

Conversely, the Cell took this too far, requiring that high level software be deeply SPE and memory-shuffling aware, almost like having a bank of DSPs in-package. The instruction-set/functional difference between the PPE and SPE made for encumbrances that likely would never have been fully solved by the toolchain (even if the toolchain had shipped ahead of the processor rather than well afterwards).

Larrabee made attempts to solve the instruction set difference problem (in a very Intel way), but the topology, cache behavior, and pure core size proved to be far too limiting in real applications. In the end, Intel missed on the balance of core/execution-unit size vs. count when compared to Nvidia and ATI. GPGPU progress has definitely demonstrated the value of toolchain abstraction, though, and adherence to a given instruction set (and the architectural implications that came from that) proved to be a limiting constraint for Larrabee.

The last 20-25 years in compute architecture design have seen many interesting articulations of clever ideas. Some deaths were predictable, but each of the explorations should be commended for the ways that they pushed boundaries and cleared the path for their successors.
Precise Zero-Shot Dense Retrieval Without Relevance Labels
The risk can't be magicked away, but there is usually someone who will take on the risk for a cost.
The battle to break China’s battery-making supremacy
In a lot of ways, electronic maps are still inferior to the Triptik.

Even the Rand McNally showed highway rest areas and picnic areas. The Triptik also showed gas stations. Electronic maps often lack this entirely, at least in easy form.

The Triptik shows what you need to know while on a long motor trip. The electronic map emphasizes details I don't need.

At a glance the paper map tells me whether a road is free limited-access, toll limited-access, multi-lane divided, two lanes but major, two lanes and minor, a country lane, or a dirt road. Electronic map only tells me this if I zoom in on a satellite view, and it might even route me over a two-lane road to save five minutes on a two-hour trip when there's a much safer freeway that most drivers would prefer.

Paper map has little dotted lines for scenic routes. Electronic map doesn't.

Mostly I'm surprised the electronic maps don't have these things after all these years. Maybe Apple will get them eventually. Google is busy stuffing ads into its maps.
Owned a half-dozen US houses built between 1907 and 2015 and have never actually seen such a thing. If you're lucky someone's done some work on a branch at some point and was courteous enough to install a shut-off, though usually off somewhere weird where there was already damage or whatever, not where you'd normally look for it.

[EDIT] Actually, my parents' very-new house has that... but because it's all-PEX, so it's super-easy to install it that way, with a central panel full of shut-offs for various parts.
> do people still write checks?

I do when I get a discount for cash, or when they try a "convenience fee" of 3% for using a credit card.
Tools are themselves "users" of syntax, and if you design a language without regard for their convenience at all, you end up in situations where e.g. code completion doesn't work because the syntax forces a forward reference (think of stuff like SELECT .. FROM ..), performance issues etc. And to the end users, the convenience should be considered as an aggregate metric: it's not just about writing code, but also about reading code, compiling code, debugging code etc. You have to optimize for UX across the board, which sometimes necessitates compromises in some of those areas.

And the declaration syntax for C++ is so bad that, in the most general case, you can't even reliably tell if it's a declaration or not without knowing the compiler that'll process it! Consider:

template<size_t N = sizeof(void*)> struct a {
template<int> struct b {};
};

template<> struct a<sizeof(int)> {
enum { b };
};

enum { c, d };

struct test : a<> {
friend int main() {
b<c>d; // declaration or expression?
&d; // error or ok?
}
};

The first commented line above parses either as:

b<c> d; // local variable

or as:

((b < c) > d); // expression

depending on whether sizeof(int)==sizeof(void*) on that particular implementation. Consequently, the following &d is either legal or not, depending on whether it's trying to take the address of a local or of an enum constant.

That alone is, to me, sufficient reason to believe that changing it to Pascal-style "name: type" declarations, which are unambiguous, benefits both tools and humans, even if it's slightly more verbose.
Pascal - the original Pascal, since in a comment you seem to dislike Turbo Pascal - was designed for a one-pass compiler. Things were laid out to make things very easy for that one-pass compiler - everything defined before its use, no back-tracking necessary. Also the grammar was very simple. And the compiler attempted very few (if any) optimizations compared to current compilers.

In short, the language design meant that the compiler didn't have to do much, so what it did, it could do quickly.
> Have you directly asked a black person how they feel about encounters with the police?

Comments like this seem to ignore the fact that a good number of law enforcement officers are black. I guess one could ask one of them?
I'm just holding both sets of data to the same standard proposed by GP. If there's a reason my question can't be answered, I'd love for someone to point it out
the video shows the values at 19:47 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNsISbFaJ0I&t=19m47s
I wrote a whole paper and contributed a GitHub repo and HF space about using filters applied to the LLMs vocabulary before decoding to solve a huge problem with hard constrained text generation in LLMs.

https://paperswithcode.com/paper/most-language-models-can-be...
RO Buddy is a good starter if you just want to try for 60ish dollars.
Interesting, can you explain why fentanyl is the only real choice, instead of alternatives, please?
Hopefully they will incorporate this exception into their headline; this is the only "primitive" channel with which I was familiar.
Made me think of The Cobra Effect, and it turns out the Hanoi Rat Massacre is mentioned in the same Wikipedia article:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perverse_incentive
That was more a commentary on hate-the-game not the playa. Lots of smart and talented people in the field, yet software coming out the door routinely has egregious usability and performance defects. Bizarre prioritization of features that are dictated by anything other than end-user needs.

Edit: remove the dig at management which is too easy a scapegoat to explain all ills
That's actually the cancellation that pushed me over the edge. I'm also not subscribed anymore because of 1899.
This is so extraordinary as to be totally unbelievable.

If the inner core is not presently rotating, surely we'd see massive disturbances in the geomagnetic field?

The inner core is also enormous. The amount of energy required to change its direction would be incredible, especially on the scale of decades. It'd be like reversing the rotation of the moon in under a century. Absolutely ludicrous amounts of energy.

I'm not a geophysicist, so I'm totally making things up, but surely applying that much energy to move the inner core would result in a massive decrease in overall magnetic field strength? And how can the inner core rotate counter to the rest of the planet? The energy lost to turbulence at the inner/outer core boundary would be immense!

An inner core spinning opposite to the outer core would create two inverse magnetic fields, strongly weakening the overall field produced by the outer core. The opposite rotating magnetic fields would also burn a ton of energy fighting each other, sending eddy currents through any metallic minerals inside the field.

Again, I'm not a physicist, but none of this makes any sense. The energies are just too huge for this to happen without massive visible effects.

I'd need to see a lot more numbers before I'll give this any credibility.
"tax the rat farms"
As a programmer, I don't see a problem with that estimation.
>but everyone (especially in the media, but also in corporate life) is attacking "worker productivity" lately

I don't need bar graphs or anything, but can you provide some recent examples you saw? I certainly don't remember seeing articles to that effect recently.
I just started a blog! I'm new to this kind of thing and so my first entry is just a short post on my preferred method for plotting covariance ellipses and ellipsoids.
The German equivalent still offers this and out of curiosity I ordered it once it was fairly disappointing, a map, some travel info, thats about it.
> But the AI is (supposedly) not making a copy of your painting.

You are mixing up the two things that I've mentioned in my original comment. You have to differentiate between creating a copy and creating a derivative work. Both of those things matter, when talking about AI, but the former is way more cut clear.

>The question is - to what extent does the exact image of your painting remain within the AI's data matrices?

And the answer is: It's irrelevant. The model has to be ingested with a copy of something. That's all that matters. The AI could even reject learning from that something. By the time that something reaches the AI to even do something with it, it's been copied (in the literal sense) who knows how many times, each of those times being a copyright violation.
If I can go on another tangent I would just like to recommend Octonauts. It is charming, funny and clever show. My 5 year old daughter loves it and she would like to have a Tweak costume.

I can't stand many kid shows, but this one even I can love. It is incredible for me how Octonauts are not pretentious, like so many "science!" shows for kids are.
This is how we manage things as well. Support is a totally different stream of work from product development.

I've often had a difficult time getting non-engineering management to understand the difference between proactive work that can be planned and reactive work that is unplannable by its nature. All of it looks like deficiencies in the product to a certain cohort of stakeholders. Eventually, once they see things smooth out by separating those workstreams, they catch on.

YMMV.
"Dylan Schenker is one of them. The 38-year-old earns about $400 a month in tips, which provides a helpful supplement to his $15 hourly wage as a barista"

I'm a consumer who agrees that tipping is out of control and here is a perfect example. This barista expects to be tipped. I empathize with that and understand why from their perspective.

However, let's look at it from the customer's perspective.

I go in, place an order and pay all well in advance of any kind of "service", in fact, I'm just as likely to have done that all without interacting with any employee. Now I'm presented with a menu of tip options... What am I tipping for? Did the barista get my order correct? Was it processed in a timely manner? Who knows as they have not even seen the ticket yet.

As a customer I am being explicitly asked to tip for service that I am unable to evaluate. The business has decided to try to make me directly responsible for their payroll and allowed them to dodge paying their employees and their taxes responsibly.

"Tipping is about making sure the people who are performing that service for you are getting paid what they’re owed"

No, that is what your employer is responsible for. Tipping is about recognizing the extra appreciation a customer has for a job well done.

When a tip becomes expected then it is no longer a tip and employers need to step up and pay people properly. I'm not going to tip and hope I get proper service. On the other hand, I would be happy to tip for service I wanted and appreciated.
is this a well written prompt, in your opinion?

note: I would ask chatgpt this exact question, but I trust Goodside more because he's been updated since 2021
I don't understand why every single company needs to maintain their own. And there's more than what's listed of course, Paramount, Hulu, and whatever that new one is with Lifetime.

It seems like at some point they'd rally behind whoever has the best interface and willing to accept deals - probably Hulu. Just charge for access to the content and forget about doing your own CDN and app dealings?
It's also tracking your acceleration and braking, seeing what kind of driver you are. And you don't need to be a drag racing fool to trip their 'risky driver' thresholds.
Dissolve My Nobel Prize Fast. It's 1940. The Nazis have taken Copenhagen
Sorry that was poorly worded - I love the SNES aesthetic and of course hope it’s here to stay. I meant “moving on” as in chronologically to the styles that came afterwards. As though we gradually iterate through the past, marking each era as “retro vintage cool” instead of just “old”.
The reputational hit or improvement (depending on your perspective) doesn't come from making an LLM available, but from the way they've been visibly altering its politics over time. They are altering it exactly because LLMs are not the same thing as their creators, so it started out by giving answers they didn't like. But I didn't see many people care about that (outside of maybe some US journalists, but they're not representative of the wider population). Obviously OpenAI care, but again, that doesn't seem to be driven by actual end user dissatisfaction. Most people just seem to think it's kind of amazing and if it says things that are daft or untrue or stereotyped, well, it's a machine so what do you expect?
I think the thinking of the prior poster here is

1) it's not just you, it's your partner too. So that's two seats x # flights/yr.

2) with the extra seat miles you are occupying, airlines can sustain their existing routes/itineraries or expand them if they're at capacity.

At a larger scope it can be viewed as: will the airline fly more flights with its existing fleet? Will the airline buy more aircraft to fly more flights? If yes to either, then your argument breaks down.
Relationship Hero (YC S17) Is Hiring Sales Associates – Remote
Probably laid-off devs playing chess all day
Yeah, I am with you on this. It isn't even the case that Lichess UI is simple because it lacks advanced features, it just straight up feels more intuitive and way more pleasant to interact with. Chess.com UI reminds me of overcluttered websites from late 2000s/early 2010s.

Pure anecdata, but I only know one person irl who prefers chess.com, and I never managed to get a straight answer from him as to why, other than "i just play there and like it more, maybe i will check out Lichess at some point, idk."
I'd really like a breakdown on what these maps are actually used for. They could just be wall art, perhaps a (growing?) niche of custom guide books, maybe a renewed interest in exploring offroad/outback etc.

Or maybe just more people are acknowledging that a fallback paper map in the glove box is a good idea.
https://www.serieshue.app/ - Search for a TV series and get a heatmap of ups and downs in IMDb ratings for each episode
Arguably society itself suffers from much of the same problem. Old ideas -- including -ways- of talking about and framing issues -- stick around longer than is necessary and useful.
You're assuming that Google isn't keeping track of security bugs they forward to their vendors. Almost certainly they opened a ticket in a different system and tracked it there.
As I stated in the comment you are replying to:

> Not that I don't do interactive rebases sometimes in local branches

I don't have a problem with rebasing in local branches before code review. I just don't allow rebasing once a branch has started code review, and I especially don't allow rebasing in a public integration branch ever.

(I also rarely feel the need to rebase, personally, even in my own local branches. Working in better tools than git in a past life has given me a lot of the discipline I feel that I need to build good commits as I work. I make much more use of the git staging area than I see most devs generally do and use `git add --patch` and `git add --interactive` far more than `git rebase`. `git add --patch` especially is an under-sung hero that I think a lot of junior developers should learn well in advance of rebase.)

Also, I'm just not that bothered by messy histories in code reviews when I review other developers work. If the idea comes across even if the commit messages don't have the greatest narrative flow or are perfect, I'm perfectly fine with that. I make sure all merges are --no-ff and after that I can browse a "clean" history post code reviews with DAG traversal tools such as --first-parent. But that also gives me an opportunity to dig back into the mess months or years later after the code review if I need to research a bug or a regression. That sort of "sewage archeology" isn't "fun" by any means, but the number of problems I've been able to solve with it is high enough I appreciate keeping that mess around in source control. It's source control's job to keep the mess for me and present me pretty views for more regular work. That's why I prefer to trust tools like --no-ff and --first-parent over --squash, because that's what source control is built to do, control old histories messy or not.
everything on my github i built via annoyance driven development. life is too short to be annoyed. no excuses.

https://github.com/nathants?tab=repositories
I agree with the big picture utility. A good project would be a map where you can choose to display all Best Westerns, Shell gas stations, etc at state zoom level so you can visualize a day's worth of travel including food, gas and lodging destinations without needing to repeatedly search GMaps. (i.e. it looks like there's a Shell station in 15, 65 and 128 miles along our route...)
These details are not often not apparent to workers, and many times the folks doing the hiring actively hide this kind of thing from applicants. So it is not the workers fault.
A very neat book on this topic (he was my professor for years much later than that book):

A Concise Grammar of the Older Runic Inscriptions, by Elmer Antonsen 1975

https://a.co/d/9nITdEY
Copyright law hinges on human element of the actions taking place, not on mathematical technicality. The digits of pi are not creative human expression, nor are they derived from human expression, they're a factual mathematical discovery. They can neither infringe on copyright, nor are they subject to it themselves.
Surely you aren't referring to all the "how to become an influencer" courses?
Universities offered software to sniff out ChatGPT-written essays
Tbh I agree, but it was certainly a commercial success.
Designed: industrial programs might be compiled once and run multiple times. Student programs, on the other hand, will likely be run fewer times than they are ever (attempted to be) compiled.

Pascal's original use was the latter case.
Yes to all. The map is a projection of your surroundings. You just need to "map" what you see to the map to be able to see where you are and where north is. I guess contour plots is a tad more advanced since it's trying to represent the z axis on a flat sheet of paper.

I'm not trying to be obtuse, I genuinely don't see how it is difficult to read a map.
To keep others from patenting publicly-funded inventions?