skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think trust is somewhat transitive, but it's not domain independent.

I have friends whose movie recommendations I trust but whose restaurant recommendations I don't, and vice versa. I have friend that I trust to be witty but not wise and others the opposite.

A system that tried to model trust would probably need to support tagging people with what kinds of things you trust them in.
TikTok’s Transparency Campaign Echoes Effort by Huawei to Ease Security Concerns
Since men are inherently unequal (differing in so many ways, including their so-called luck) it follows that equality of outcome is a myth. That is why you’ll need power and abuse to ensure an equalitarian society. Which is quite easily verified using historical examples.
You are the first person I’ve ever seen talk about how a surround sound speaker system is better for competitive shooters than stereo headphones, but I might be showing my age here since you are talking about the 2000’s :P
Be mean about K8s, it can take it. I don't think any of the criticism of it is unreasonable. It's a huge, convoluted beast. To me, K8s makes most sense in terms of creating a swiss army knife that lots of people know.

You can do far better than K8s for specialised cases like yours and/or with people who has the right skills. But for a lot of people with simpler needs it's better to just stick to what is easy to hire for than look for an optimal solution.
Great way of stating my opinion on it as well. I will also say that out of any site that I post on, I take the most care here. I try to always ask myself if I am adding something worthwhile to the conversation and more importantly, do I have enough background to speak to this topic. I might not always hit that mark, but I would bet that 1 out of 10 times I go to post, I re-read what I wrote and realize it hasn't hit those marks and either don't post or delete immediately. I value my time and I don't want to waste the time of others.
Unique training samples only makes the problem less frequent, it does not eliminate the problem.

The curve can still intersect a unique point.
And Jack Benny is Secretary of the Treasury!
Meta shares rocket 25%, on pace for the best day in a decade
My Valve Index exposes the cameras seemingly as standard Windows USB webcams. It will accidentally show up in video calls sometimes.
Go 1.20 Experiment: Memory Arenas vs. Traditional Memory Management
Stackoverflow already has a pretty solid reputation system with pseudonymous users.

What it means is the bar for becoming a new StackOverflow contributor (or Reddit admin, or Wikipedian) might become much, much higher. "Oh, you want to contribute your first post? Show me the bicycles in this image, find the letters in this image, and provide the names of two existing Stack Overflow users with over 1000 karma who can vouch for you, and also you see a tortoise on its back, baking in the sun. You're not helping it. Why aren't you helping it?..."
As someone that rarely shies away from speaking my mind, even if it's unpopular - I would say just wait it out...

There's an extremely vocal and downvote happy minority of users on HN that try to force everyone into agreement or cowardice. They will change language definitions and weaponize them against you, or try to turn you into some sort of monster for having differing opinions. Basically anything to silence opposing opinions.

There is also an extremely quiet majority of users on HN that do not wade into those conversations out of what I presume is fear of the brigade or just being exhausted from it all... but they will support your arguments via voting (the only tool at their disposal).

So... just wait out the extremists and allow the normal users to judge the quality of your arguments for what they are. Over a several hour or day long period, you will have a more accurate representation of what HN actually thinks about your arguments. It will be a roller-coaster of ups and downs along the way - that's normal.

Stop caring about the points and start caring about the quality of your arguments or unique perspectives you can communicate. Stop downvoting simply because you disagree, and start downvoting for poorly crafted, provably incorrect and/or poorly communicated arguments.

Speak your mind, no matter what it says. HN should be a place for open discussion from people of all walks of life unified by a loose commonality of a love for technology. It should not be a cesspool of unidirectional thoughts - and those who remain quiet contribute to that just as much as the brigade.
Good to see Lit called out here, I love the lit-html approach to using tagged template literals to define views.
This is an essay [1] and the paragraphs you’ve quoted are exploring the question set up in the preceeding paragraph:

> The classic statement of the problem [that objectivity journalism is a problematic concept] is Walter Lippmann’s book “Public Opinion,” published a hundred and one years ago. Lippmann’s critique remains relevant today—the Columbia Journalism School mounted a four-day conference on “Public Opinion” last fall, and people found that there was still plenty to talk about. Lippmann’s argument was that journalism is not a profession. You don’t need a license or an academic credential to practice the trade. All sorts of people call themselves journalists. Are all of them providing the public with reliable and disinterested news goods?

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essay
So your first 6 paragraphs have nothing to do with anything I wrote – you're just arguing with some other post you've made up in your head.

> The appeals to pareidolia are wrong. Synthesis of ideas from past data is natural. But the AI does not choose things. What you’re really complaining about is creation of art from apparent randomness. Not the AI model alone but monkeys on a typewriter getting something compelling from the AI.

No, you've failed to understand what I'm saying entirely (because, again, you've responded to some other post that only exists in your mind).

What I'm talking about is intention and its relationship to meaning, in the philosophical sense (and not... copyright or whatever it is you're rambling on about).

Witness: when ChatGPT famously mis-asserts the number of characters in a word (say, that there are twelve characters in the word "thirteen"), it's not that it's trying and failing to count, because it's confused by letter forms or its attention wanders like a 3 year old or its internal representation of countable sets glitches around the number 8 or something – it never counted anything at all, it's simply the case that twelve is the most statistically likely set of tokens corresponding to that input prompt per its training set. And when it produces a factually correct result (say, "there are 81 words in the first sentence of the declaration of independence"), it produces it for exactly the same reason – not because it has counted the words and formed an internal representation and intends to mean its internal understanding, but simply because 81 is the most statistically likely set of tokens corresponding to that prompt per its training set.

And yet when it produces these correct results, people ooh and aah over how "smart" it is, how much it has "understood", how "good it is at counting; better than my son!", and when it produces incorrect results people deride it as dumb and so forth, and and all of this, all of this, is pareidolia; it is neither smart in the one case nor dumb in the other, it does not learn in the sense the word is normally used, it does no counting. We're anthropomorphizing an algorithm that is doing nothing like what we imagine it to do, because we mistake the statistical order in its expressions for the presence of a meaning intended by those expressions. It's all projection on our end.
I only played WZ1, so didn't experience the in-between iterations, but the current WZ 2 experience is such a miss. It baffles me how that was playtested and no one said "this is a massive regression in both fun and functionality". I understand wanting to mix it up, but to introduce tedium (looting system as designed), boredom (map size + mobility), and frustration (ping system / loadout changes / general bugginess) seems so misguided. Instead of leaning into what made WZ1 a massive initial success (an arcade-style, generally high-action BR) and try to emulate what other BRs are doing better.... it makes no sense to me.
That's January sales. Sure, they'll fall off, but it's not suddenly zero additional money
I think listeners or news consumers need to work harder. Every day somebody comes to me outraged with some news that they've inadvertently filled in the gaps on.
Yeah the range of CRT quality was huge and visible. Those were a type of product where price actually correlated to quality. With an LCD you could pay $1000 for a "gaming" model and still get something that has basic issues like high input lag or strong overshoot. With CRT it meant the screen is now flat, the image is now bigger than 17", and the focus is now sharper.
From personal experience, I got the impression that Amazon was not even that interested in hiring experienced developers. I think they decided that churning through early-career engineers was ultimately more effective for them.
Ex falso quodlibet
Absolute freedom is impossible in a world where people interact with and affect each other. Me having absolute freedom means that the freedom of others must be limited.

The goal should be to maximize freedom for everyone. To accomplish this goal means that nobody can have absolute freedom.
‘Required’? Why?
> because code is download-once, use-forever, but data is continuously changing and costs perpetual money to update and maintain.

Not just the data, but also hosting the service and keeping it available.

Open source works because the marginal cost of code is essentially zero. But the marginal cost of serving users is definitely not zero.
HN has karma?
I would suggest add lateral eye movements.

souce: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z25f6qy361Y&ab_channel=MEDsp...
Also doing my part to discourage inane comments like "awesome".
The most worrisome part of about this is the amount of power we give young clueless social workers who usually have never actually parented a child. Many of whom have never been in real relationships. All their knowledge comes from college classes dealing in theory. Same exact thing can be said about teachers.

There should be very serious pushback against allowing people like that near any levers of power.
“The mission for Ubuntu is both social and economic. First, we deliver the world’s free software, freely, to everybody on the same terms. Whether you are a student in India or a global bank, you can download and use Ubuntu free of charge.” - https://ubuntu.com/about
Digital rental is less wasteful.
A little bit, along the lines of:

- okay, so this comment has positive karma, which suggests that the overall sentiment towards this point of view, technology or approach is favorable
- hmm, this comment resulted in negative karma, which suggests that it might be something controversial, perhaps this view needs to be re-examined and not held as strongly

Public opinion isn't all, of course, but if I were to suggest that every application should be serverless with no room for variety (just an example), then such a comment would most likely not have too many proponents, possibly prompting me to re-evaluate whether that's a good stance, or whether there's more nuance to it. Same for discussions of self-hosting, or containers, or programming languages or anything, really.

Thankfully, people here actually share interesting details even about the things that they agree with, or provide constructive criticisms a lot of the time, so there's many learning experiences to be had. In that regard, I haven't found many better communities.

I don't really care much for losing karma, but perhaps that's because most of the things I say aren't that controversial, or are offered in a relatively grounded manner. At worst, people might just not care and I wouldn't learn what others think or have experienced.
Yeah, I'd guess HN is a pretty 50/50 split left/right.

Maybe on economics (I'd say closer to 2/3 left), but on social issues it's overwhelmingly left. What percentage are anti-abortion, for example?

The main split seems to be between old-style liberals who support free speech as a fundamental principle and progressives who believe that speech should often be restricted in order to protect marginalized groups.
This is a great example of an executive regulation that should have just been a law before they tried to repeal it. By the time Congress tried to make it a law, it was already a political issue and of course Reagan vetoed it, because the whole thing was orchestrated by his FCC appointees in the first place.

See also: same-sex marriage rights, abortion rights, net neutrality, right to repair, et alia.
> that builds trust. To say nothing of applications like therapy, or personal coaching...

I hope (naively?) that we never have a world with actual LLM therapy.

> open-source LLMs that can be estimated efficiently, and run on local hardware, is an urgent need

It’s really quite expensive otherwise, but considering Alexa et al aren’t truly on device yet, and LLM are much more complex… it’ll be a while.
I guess I should have given a warning.
Yes. But as soon as the charges got to the department, they dropped it. The police department did nothing egregiously wrong.

It is the individual police officers that I would like to see be liable here. And if they were, then it would do a whole lot more to dissuade other police officers than any official department policies.

And that is exactly what qualified immunity keeps from happening.
seems more complicated than the following elixir code.

Val
|> SomeFunc()
|> Func2()
|> Func3()
It essentially is, sorry. Having to amortize your R&D credits across five years is deadly to cash flow. The only EU country with a law like this is Belgium.
This is basically the argument that Margaret Sullivan makes at the end of the article in question:

Sullivan’s conclusion that the press should take sides put her in conflict with the Washington Post’s editor during the Trump years, Martin Baron. She quotes from an e-mail he sent her: “When we’ve done our work with requisite rigor and thoroughness (also known as solid, objective reporting) we should tell people what we’ve learned and what remains unknown—directly, straightforwardly, unflinchingly—just as people in lots of other professions do when they’re doing their jobs correctly. That’s what ‘objectivity’ was intended to mean when the term was developed for journalism more than a century ago”—that is, when Lippmann wrote “Public Opinion.”

Sullivan’s position is an appeal to the original rationale of the First Amendment. We have a free press in order to protect democracy. When democracy is threatened, reporters and editors and publishers should have an agenda. They should be pro-democracy. Reporters should “stop asking who the winners and losers are,” Sullivan says; they should “start asking who is serving democracy and who is undermining it.” The press is in the game. It has a stake.

Also according to the article she has a "memoir slash manifesto" called “Newsroom Confidential: Lessons (and Worries) from an Ink-Stained Life” (St. Martin’s)

https://www.amazon.com/Newsroom-Confidential-Lessons-Worries...
Only infsofar as it's a loose measure of how much my contributions resonate with the community. I generally think very highly of HN so if I say something that's widely accepted, that's affirming.
> along with how he fairly-commonly used "fake news media" to mean all non-explicitly-conservative news sources

I think he left things like this generally vague, so that his fans could fill in whatever details they personally found the most compelling. The very "make America great again" catchphrase is a perfect example of this; what exactly constitutes "great" and what era is he talking about when he says "again"? Discontent millennials could think he was talking about the 90s while boomers who thought the 90s were shit could conclude he was talking about the 50s.

tl;dr classic demagoguery
Sometimes

When people learn that those whose work/passions they find interesting absolutely despise them & their ideologies

Something clicks in their head. “Why does somebody who leads such a cool life/does cool things not like me/my views?”

In this case, we’re talking about transphobia.
If one person who’s transphobic goes on to find out that Foone, who does cool/interesting enough things that they regularly make it to the front page of HN, is trans - they may finally realize “maybe I’m the bad guy” & change for the better.

This, in theory, leads to less hatred of trans people- which, in theory, leads to less trans suicides/murders.

This probably wasn’t the explanation you were after, nor is it amazingly well articulated, but it’s all I can offer you in this instance.

Not going to reply to anything past this in the thread as a whole - I have posted what I wanted and spent my karma.
Spot check the Post's database of 30,573 lies. It's a joke.

*This very sentence, if uttered by Trump, would be entered in their database: a joke is an amusing action or story with a punchline; our database is an objective list of lies.
>How are you going to hire amazing devs when the devs you have left are kinda mediocre or working due to coercion (h1b) rather than more positive reasons?

There's a lot of companies shedding tech talent right now. Those people are looking for jobs.

The tech industry has always been cyclical. It's just been on an up for a long time, so people who have recently started have never been through a downturn and have an inflated sense of themselves and their worth. During the dot-com bubble in 1999-ish, ask how valuable tech workers were.

I'm not saying tech isn't valuable, but I think tech workers overvalue themselves and it is most likely time for a market correction.

Elon Musk has always been known as a hard-driving manager. He does squeeze every last drop of productivity out of people. I've read all kinds of articles on this and SpaceX and his other ventures. The fact of the matter is that, believe it or not, some people thrive on this high-pressure cooker environment, and not the ping-pong playing, foosball playing, getting massages every day environment. Hard for coddled techs to understand, I know, I know.

But he has kept a LOT of techs for SpaceX, which fuck....talk about tech and the ability to land the rocket and get rockets to the ISS, fuuuuck. So he knows a thing or two about it, unlike us armchair quarterbacks.

>What do you think Twitters sales pitch is to potential new hires?

"Be part of a team that can re-build this great company from the ground up. Be part of something great. You will work hard and I will have exceptionally great expectations of you, but consider what Musk has accomplished - Paypal, SpaceX, Tesla, etc,etc. Do you want to be with a wishy-washy company that coddles you or be with a someone who transforms society. Yes, we got rid of a lot of people, we had to in order to pare down everything so there was not a lot of bloat. That is what Musk has always done and he is successful so he will be successful here."

Again, maybe YOU wouldn't like that sales pitch, but there will be a lot of techs out there that will. That's all that matters. Everything else is just blah, blah, blah.

>Reliability/security/etc are all types of maintenance where most of the time you don't have a problem,....

Musk runs SpaceX, Tesla, solar companies, etc. He knows a thing or two about it.
In goriest form, I think of this as the drone argument.

Is it better to put boots on the ground, some of whom may die and who may cause collateral casualties in executing their mission, or a (hypothetically idealized) drone that kills only the target?

Still haven't decided if I have, or there even exists, a good answer to that.
I remember this when I was a kid. Most amazing was that the federal goverment didn't had a protocol to deal with things like that, even at the time we where building our second nuclear power plant.

But the military was aable to perform a fast response for the incident. And shows that even if nuclear energy is the future, we could never understimate it.
Coincidentally today we are launching the Paine Accelerator: we are going to fund local, public domain, print-at-home newspapers. (Our early prototypes are LongBeach.pub and Hawaii.pub)

The newspaper industry will rise again like a phoenix from the ashes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqDTJfabAGs

https://pd.pub/paine
Sorry it's hard to hear this, but you are definitely lacking some skillset of persuasion or communication. There are always "fights" in the beginning I guess, but if you are confident, know your shit, it should be very easy to convince less experienced people.

One thing you might not be aware of is "social capital", "setting expectations", "assertive communication" and things like that.

Sure, in an ideal world, wisdom should always win over loudness, but until that happens (never), you have to learn these soft skills to be the reasonable voice in a team.

I always found my voice in every team very early on, due to my knowledge, my high quality of work and being confident (in my abilities and my work.)
The free part was super important because, if the buyer doesn't know much about the game, those text graphics are a huge deal breaker when combined with payment.
Yeah, I remember one article (I think on Fox) whose entire source was a tweet from a random guy with 2 followers.
> Customers stopped wanting that

That's not true. Reagan's Republicans stopped wanting that, and then non-fairness was forced onto the masses until people didn't know the difference anymore.
I do and I spend a lot of time adding value. It used to be possible to hold contrarian views and have great conversations and debates without downvotes.

These days that's mostly impossible.

I really think downvote should come with the requirement of a comment rather than just downvotes as these days they are not just used to push down things that are not relevant but things people don't agree with. If you are forced to explain the downvote at least it would make it possible to have a debate.
Oh man you gotta turn off scroll switch and have specific key binds for every weapon
> but I think it's useful for de-emphasizing irrelevant or inflammatory comments as well.

Isn’t that what flagging is for?
This doesn't produce any physical harm, so I see no problem in developing it. It will not spiral out of control.

There will be a break in period, but the conclusion will be check the source of the information.

Making this easily available will make the break in period easier.
Do you have a way to see active players? I started up 1.6 in steam a week ago and tried to find servers with active players.
"But at least we have the 2nd, to protect our freedom. Seems to be working great. (I actually also think folks here overestimate how hard it is to get guns in some countries with effective gun control—it doesn't have to mean "no guns", and often doesn't)"

We have elections... but everyone is so terrified of the LOLWTF numbers of guns in society that we never leave the house
I almost did to Berlin, but I'd have moved from Brazil. At the time I was being probed by some companies, one of them in the US, and another from Germany. Upsides of Berlin were low housing costs, rich cultural life, excellent public transportation, schools, and healthcare. Downside was that the compensation was on the lower than the American company, but considering expenses and H1B shenanigans, Berlin came above the US offer. Downsides were language that'd prevent my wife from working (an issue the US would have as well).

At the last minute a recruiter from Ireland pinged me and made an offer that was much better than either, so here I am.

But I still have a soft spot for Berlin.