skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I suspect this posting might have been prompted by the recent one of Colin Wright's "The Point of the Banach-Tarski Theorem."[1] Regardless, Colin has also written about the axiom of choice, in "In Defense Of The Axiom Of Choice"[2] and "A Point Against The Axiom Of Choice."[3]

[1] https://www.solipsys.co.uk/new/ThePointOfTheBanachTarskiTheo...
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34482226

[2] https://www.solipsys.co.uk/new/InDefenseOfTheAxiomOfChoice.h...

[3] https://www.solipsys.co.uk/new/APointAgainstTheAxiomOfChoice...
M2 Pro Mac mini review: Apple’s Goldilocks desktop for semi-professionals
On the same vein, see the _dust_ that can be produced with filled materials: https://www.thregr.org/~wavexx/rnd/20230113-carbon_fibers_3d... (posted on HN 10 days ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34367420 without comments)
> some activists are using pornography as a vehicle to inject this critical narrative into the sexual developent of school children

Which activists would those be, and what pornography?
Think it's a bit of a double edge sword. Disney+ is all Disney IP which is great for those that like it. But if you're not into Marvel or Star Wars or the kids catalogue there's not a lot there.
> management insists all engineering teams must use scrum

You could always point out that the Agile Manifesto specifically says "Individuals and interactions over processes and tools," and therefore you aren't doing real capital-A-Agile if teams aren't empowered to use the processes that work best for them. (It probably wouldn't do you any good, but it might feel good to say)

Why does management insist all engineering teams use scrum, though? I hope they're not trying to compare different teams' story points, because that would imply that management has a gross misunderstanding of how story points are supposed to work.
> 2. Ruthlessly cutting down pursuits to one thing helps drive results.

This worked really well for me until I actually settled in with a long term partner, who was rightfully frustrated when I'd try to cut out some of the daily responsibilities that are required to be a good roommate and partner.

When you're single you have a lot more freedom to squirrel away for a while on a problem, but it's a tremendously selfish thing to do when your life is intertwined with another person who depends on you to juggle your daily obligations like everyone else.
Interview with Dek, creator of JavaScript MMORPG Hordes.io
Not just old marine maps -- modern marine charts have the same. They mark radio towers, grain silos, etc. because although GPS is widely-used, the old navigation techniques are still important.
My eyes also fell directly to your second paragraph and I immediately thought you should step away from the compiler and experience the world if you really believe this. It’s because you wrote it like you were making the argument and there was no separation between yourself in the context it was written.
i heard the term "conversational ads" being thrown around with regard to this technology.
However many modern homes use inferior material for the job comparing to the older homes in the same area. Probably to cut cost. I'm not sure if it was also the case for older homes built in the 50s/60s though.
Intervening against document.write() (2016)
Never said it should go unchallenged. What a lovely strawman you've built. Free speech is great, and if someone says something incorrect, the solution is more speech to counteract it. I think part of why Rogan is so popular is because legacy media and woke activists have such a bad reputation for trying to control the narrative rather than engage in discourse, which is what he does. I just said I don't have a problem with him stating his opinion and I'm sick of people trying to censor a goddamn comedian because they're jealous he built a large audience.

I fail to see how Rogan threatens the stability of society. I mean, it's hilarious other than that you're actually serious about that. I'm far more afraid of censorship than I am of Rogan talking to some goofball. (BTW, you haven't even stated why Rogan threatens the stability of society or what he's done).

I think I'll keep my internet connection friend.
Read the article, man. Felony means it's a crime.
Even more intuitive: What's the first positive real number?

If you can't tell me that, or even be sure that it even exists, how can you be sure you can identify the first item in any set?
> Nail guns can't make up for building code and higher finish work demands. It's not uncommon to see 6 or 7 layers in sheathing today.

Yeah pretty much this I suspect. The paper doesn't propose that more regulations and complex code is why it's harder to build things today. And that's not a bad thing - code is a great thing since it sets a standard.

Houses from 100 years ago, a carpenter could just make game time decisions regarding things that are highly scrutinized today like staircase run/rise, doorway height, etc. If you gut an old house it's amazing how simple they are.

The old saying "they don't build them like they used to" applies here. We don't because we can't and when they did they overbuilt them because they were simple and it wasn't documented what the build had to be.
What about the state of affairs in emerging markets, which are likely going to be bigger revenue source than US/Europe in the not too distant future?

Also what about (live) sports coverage? Does Netflix have a strategy there? For many subscribers it is appealing if their streaming service carries sports coverage.
correction: ... and do my thing.
Many PS1 games stored their soundtrack as normal CD audio tracks on the same disk. The first track would contain the game data, additional tracks were music.
A slightly more elaborate setup which showcases the weirdness of the Axiom of Choice.

Consider a group of countably infinite wizards w_1, w_2,... A king has put a number 0 or 1 on their backs and ordered the wizards to stand in a single file, such that wizard w_n can only see the numbers on the backs of all wizards with higher numbers (w_n+1, w_n+2...). As is the tradition, the king gave them a challenge: if you can guess the number on your back, your life is spared, otherwise off with your head. The wizards can discuss their actions beforehand, but no communications is allowed after the numbers have been assigned.

The wizards cannot see their own numbers, they cannot exchange information, yet, if we assume the Axiom of Choice, they still can work out a strategy, such that all but a finite number of wizards survive.

The trick is to break the space of all 0-1 sequences into equivalence classes, whre X is equivalent to Y if they disagree only in finite number places. (in other words, they fully agree starting from some index k). That's an equivalence relation, as you can easily verify.

Then the wizards use the Axiom of Choice to remember one representative sequence from each class (there are infinitely many such sequences, but our wizards are infinitely wise). During the test, each wizard would look at what numbers they see in front of them, pick the representative sequence that is equivalent to what they are seeing, and guess the number that corresponds to their place in the sequence.

All wizards will agree on what representative sequence will need to be picked (because the king's sequence belongs to a single equivalence class), and that sequence will agree with the king's sequence everywhere except for a finite number of places. Boom!
For any set S which is non-empty, there is an element x of that set.
For any set S and any x, the set S * {x} is a function which sends every element of S to x.

Therefore, for every non-empty set S, there is a function with domain S, and range a single element of S.

Did you mean a set S of sets such that there is no f : (A in S) -> A ?
OP was reading text on an old Cathode Ray Tube monitor. It broke such that, instead of being spread throughout the screen, all of it was squished vertically into a single horizontal line. However, different parts of the line are written at different times, so if you vibrate your head, different parts will land at different parts of your eye.
A lot of federal-law-telling-states-what-to-do is not tied to criminal punishment, but rather financial punishment. Federal taxation basically permits the US government the first share of our income. The US government then chooses to redistribute large chunks of money back to the state government, but only as long as it plays by the rules. So states can either play by the rules, or have to make up that money by essentially double-taxing their residents.

I'm sure states would love to just take that money in directly, but the federal government gets first dibs and states complete with each other on the remaining taxation. For instance, Florida is not just a popular retirement spot for the weather -- it also has zero income tax and a property tax with capped year-over-year growth.
These points seem to be about maintaining existing relationships. The OP was asking about beginning them. These are different phases with different levels of excitement, coincidence and time-allocation built-in.
Google must cut thousands more ‘overpaid’ workers, investor demands
> being called OpenAI while nothing is open

https://github.com/openai/whisper is open
Those two aren't mutually exclusive IMO.
FDA proposes shift to annual Covid vaccine shots
Lend implies you expect it back, otherwise it'd be "the one who gives"
If you want to parse it that finely, then pretty much ALL policy is an attack. E.g.: The school board sets a budget, the result of which is that I have to pay some tax. If I don't pay that tax, they'll eventually forcibly remove me from my home. That's plainly an attack.
The money's a very small part of the problem. Failing schools have huge piles of money thrown at them all the time, and it doesn't help like one might think it would if that were the main problem.

Actually fixing US schools amounts to "fix (or significantly mitigate) the US poverty-cycle problem", unfortunately. Unfortunate because if just funding poor schools like rich schools (Nb sometimes those funding levels are the opposite of what you'd expect, though—there are state and federal programs to funnel money to really, really bad schools) then it'd be straightforward and (relatively!) cheap to fix. The actual causes are more complex and would require far more "political will", as they say, plus a lot more money, to fix.
Are you sure you're talking about the same thing as the parent comment? I believe they're discussing the maintenance and synchronisation of integrating third party .css file(s) into your code.
Unrealscript has a notion of states built into the language.

https://wiki.beyondunreal.com/States
> "a vaccinated person would still be able to be treated for pain relief with other opioids [such as morphine]"

Good to hear, but at its worst, my pain was only relieved by fentanyl (administered by a professional in a hospital). Noticeably better than Dilaudid (hydromorphone).

Is morphine a reliable replacement for fentanyl? Fentanyl is used quite often in palliative care because it lacks the side effects of morphine, is this correct?
I think it's because they know the correct questions to ask.
Scrum is training wheels. The time boxes are supposed to make you reflect and improve. Ditch Scrum. Go to Kanban, scope your stories smaller and prioritize bug fixes over all new work until you're not writing bugs. Can't ship code without writing bugs? Improve your skills as a team. Start pair or mob programming. Do TDD to improve your design, testability & maintainability of your code. Start moving towards trunk based development and use feature flags to do REAL CI/CD (hint: using a build server doesn't mean you're doing CI). Code deployment != feature deployment! Strive to "roll forward" your code as much as possible and disable/enable features if you run into problems - learn to not "rollback".

Now of course, since this is HN somebody's going to sneer divisively at everything I just said and tell me it's not possible (despite the fact that I've done this, repeatedly in different organizations in a developer and coaching capacity for almost two decades now). Here's my preemptive caveat/STFU for detractors: the above method only works if you, as developers, have full control & ownership over your application code data, and do your own deployments or are partnered strongly with an OPS team that gives you full monitoring & Read Only access. If your team is working in an environment where you don't actually get ownership over your code and data, this won't work. If management, architects, or egotistical prima donna staff/senior developers "won't let you" pair/mob, do TDD, do trunk based development, or do proper CI/CD, this won't work.

P.S. If you're in an environment where "this won't work" - QUIT! Life's too short to put up with being expected to build software with one hand tied behind your back. These things are often easier to do in medium to small sized companies. These things are often easier to do on greenfield (or at least recent) projects.
Hmm that's a bug and shouldn't be there. Sorry about that. Mind sharing any others you come across?
Another example, let's say you're parsing a subscriber name for an email list, and you have a few checks such as whether it's too long, has whitespace, orcontains forbidden characters:

pub fn parse(s: String) -> SubscriberName {
let is_empty_or_whitespace = s.trim().is_empty();

let is_too_long = s.graphemes(true).count() > 256;

let forbidden_characters = ['/', '(', ')', '"', '<', '>', '\\', '{', '}'];

let contains_forbidden_characters = s
.chars()
.any(|g| forbidden_characters.contains(&g));

if is_empty_or_whitespace || is_too_long || contains_forbidden_characters {
panic!("{} is not a valid subscriber name.", s)
} else {
Self(s)
}
}

And let's say your code to add a new subscriber to the email list only accepts a SubscriberName, not a String:

pub struct NewSubscriber {
pub email: SubscriberEmail,
pub name: SubscriberName,
}

Because `parse` gives back a SubscriberName if and only if all of the parse checks pass, you simply cannot add a new subscriber without all checks passing; the function will simply fail otherwise.

This example comes from the excellent book Zero To Production In Rust, which has a chapter on type-driven development [0].

[0] https://zero2prod.com
It's hard to be surprised by this.

The pandemic may have acted like a reset on how work could fit into one's life. There's no going back from a perspective like that. I suspect that the idea of a career ladder simply doesn't work as well on younger generations as it may once have, for it may assume that growth occurs (making room for people).

It also assumes that people trust institutions to take care of them.
>Other schools [2] in the US are more explicit on change...

?> School of Education devoted to developing civically engaged children, youth, and adults for a diverse and inclusive society.

Why is developing "civic engagement" among our population a bad thing?

Why is a "diverse and inclusive" society a bad thing?

Not being snarky here, I just really don't understand how reducing civic engagement and excluding those who are "different" are good things.

Perhaps you could explain your reasoning around that?
Read a paper: Program-aided language models
>All the Star Wars and Marvel shows are star-studded and larded with top-tier visual effects.

I'm just going to throw this out there. What if these shows just aren't that good?
That's a usually pretty unreliable source. Especially since he doesn't seem to know a lot about fiscal/tax laws, in a country he doesn't even live in.
But it’s not just about compute. OpenAI did a lot of work to tame a wildcat. GTP-3 is a monster not fit for public consumption. ChatGTP is a kitten. Along the way OpenAI discovered that including code into the training corpus improves the general capabilities of LLMs. Google may have models with superior raw capability, but they do not have a safe and helpful product. They are clearly behind the ball and recent PR from Deepmind confirms they are feeling it.
OpenAI threatened to move? Do you've evidence to support this?
>> or Scaled Agile for larger teams IMO

I STRONGLY disagree with this, conceptually, logically and in practice. Scaled agile approaches make you plan your sprints way further in advance and account for emerging (or sustainment) work with the use of reserving a percentage of capacity. This works about as well as riding out a run of bad luck at the casino while you wait for the odds to balance out. Scaling "up" the existing practices to a department or company level will not help an interrupt-driven team. Scaled agile doesn't work for pure development teams; i'ts even less likely to work for an SRE team.
I also wonder if a focus on safety has slowed things some for the yolo days of just breathing in asbestos and lead.
TBH this more or less describes the problem at least for me. I'm like 3 Star Wars series behind. Catching up at this point feels more like a chore than entertainment. Forget Marvel.
Good point! I was mistaken.

Though I think larger point stands that its very hard to know risks of different particulate sources (like brakes).
>Are wages rising, falling or stagnating?

Yes.

But in all cases the purchasing power is declining.
> I wish CEOs read some of the emails that recruiting sends to potential candidates before they set out to write a layoff post. Completely tone deaf.

I highly doubt CEOs write these posts.
A lot of intelligence goes into manufacturing and a lot of innovation comes out of it. The overemphasis on financial engineering causes substantial market distortions and in my view is the principal driver of our increasingly dysfunctional economies. I.e. you don’t need to be a populist to care about manufacturing jobs
Is this what a charitable case looks like? It sounds like a regurgitation of a conspiratorial fantasy. I'd hate to see what the uncharitable case looks like.
I believe this is why we're seeing some of the industry starting to experiment with pre-fabbed homes that are modular but can be constructed using the automation we see in car manufacturing.

The weak link in creating ever more complex homes, with ever more stringent building codes, at faster rates, is to remove the "humans with nail guns and drills" from the construction process.

At some point, us meat sacks are the weak link in optimizing an industry. Humans can only go so fast. That's why (as you've said) we've seen massive gains in productivity for other manufacturing industries.
Agreed. Although it's very surprising to me that the efficiencies of mass production haven't gone to housing. They are often still created by manual labor instead of assembling prefabricated modules. I think it should be possible to build panels that are well insulated and have all the needed wiring and everything else already built in.
ChatGPT's politics are those of a center-left liberal who is terrified of saying anything that would offend far-left progressives. Which I'd bet is a pretty accurate description of its creators.
ChatGPT Sees Strong Early Adoption in the Workplace
You are hung up on the calibrations needed to turn a series of point-location sensor measurements into an estimate of an underlying quantity (temperature in a 5x5 degree box over time).

This kind of calibration is purely routine in any measurement problem, as I tried to indicate (and as the papers that I linked to demonstrate).

Any time you have a lab measurement, you have to try to calibrate it. You learn more about sources of bias over time, and you re-do the calibration, and regenerate the temperature estimate.

It seems like you haven't had a chance to work on a long-term measurement system consisting of real-world hardware, and you're proceeding on some kind of common-sense idea that the point measurement is an absolute read on the underlying quantity of interest?
I'm not sure I would say much of anything is more ornate today compared to prior. Especially if you actually look at the details of the craftsmanship, anything of "standard" quality of times past are high-end details now.
Targeted, useful ads are so rare almost nobody has seen them. How can they push low quality ad inventory through a trusted AI? If they train the AI to trick people into bad purchases, it will be a disaster.
Am I mistaken in understanding that this “White list” is actually a large collection of white lists, and each district’s librarians curate their district’s list?
We're not assuming the existence of such physical properties. We're also not assuming the inexistence of such physical properties. That's the point. You're making a leap based on no evidence. I'm making no such commitment and your arguments shouldn't convince anyone to make that leap with you. Worse, you want to use this unfounded leap to claim we know something else. It's terrible epistemology. It turns out we do know that other fact, but certainly not by following you down your unsound road.
I wonder how often they do the opposite, and spend $100M because nobody had the flash of insight needed to turn it into a five-buck problem
The ARPU is a lot smaller and the article even calls out that different markers want local content meaning that content costs will also grow.
I'm assuming just about everyone is aware of the meaning of the word.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Shite

Kind of depressing that people find this amusing.
I had a friend who had DSL cause it was all they had available, and with 1.5Mbps up I could decently stream a lot of things at 720p which TBH was fine and I did not notice, plus a lot of the source material was older shows like Stargate SG-1 so resolution wasn't that high anyway.
SigNoz: Open-Source Alternative to DataDog| Logs Benchmark Against Elastic, Loki
My pipes are all copper, and the hot water contains a non trivial amount of lead (from the solder used to join the pipes). I had it tested - around 20 ppb.

We don't drink or cook with the hot water, but in theory if the plumbing was PEX we could.
A lot of very smart people, both within NLP research, and here, are in complete denial about what the proliferation of high quality LLMs means for their jobs and earning potential.

The only thing which makes me less sad is that I'm pretty sure Moravecs paradox is actually not all that real, but is more due to the relative lack of engineering interest put on solving continuous control problems. Apparently reinforcement learning on transformers works now (RLHF in ChatGPT). This implies that we should see high effective continuous control models very soon. Robots are coming for physical labor, it'll just take a bit longer.

Shit man, when I was last in South Korea, I felt like I was living in the future. They had many "24/7" drink cafe's where it's literally just a robot arm that makes the drink for you for a few dollars.

It is painfully ironic to knowledge workers that they are destroying their own earning potential, but physical labor is not safe. Nothing is safe.
I would be surprised if there tech team was larger than 2000 people. Majority of those people will be marketing, sales, legal, talent/content, etc.