skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
SEEKING WORK | Remote | Contract/Freelance (based in Italy UTC+1)

Full-Stack Software Engineer specialized in .NET/Blazor and the usual web technologies with 7 years work experience in industries such as bank investments, assurance, HR services and gambling.

I can either join your effort in building your already running product or build a reasonably sized project/web-app for you.

Contacts:
yevheniy.hvozdikov@arasaka.software
https://arasaka.software/contact
The main divide I've observed is whether you are encouraged to use JavaScript's built-in control flow and code reuse mechanisms or a less expressive DSL.

Hooks are pretty sweet but I think they should have launched with higher order hooks that used the same lifecycle as original React. That way you wouldn't need to think too hard about things like object identity (which I think is the state management issue you're getting at -- it wasn't a huge issue in the pre hook days)
I remember it well, I was on a trip in Australia and I saw the news photos in a newspaper in a shop in Glenelg, Adelaide. One of those things so shocking that you remember (not 9/11 or Kennedy shocking but still)
I would argue #3 is obviously better, especially if it's done as Svelte has done it. It's hard to look at a Svelte component and see much more than a <style> tag, a <script> tag and some lightly annotated HTML for data binding, event capture, and control flow etc. Compared to JSX, it's a breath of fresh air.

Are you dependent on IDE integration for syntax highlighting? Yes, of course. Same with HTML, CSS, and JS. And if Svelte were not already six years old, I'd be more concerned. But the simple truth is that every major IDE I'm aware of for front end development supports Svelte already.

• VSCode
• Jetbrains Webstorm
• Neovim
• Sublime Text

I would be shocked to the core if Emacs didn't already have something mature as well. Compilers are better than humans at managing rote boilerplate, of which React has no end of. I can only see how output improves by removing that recurring cognitive load. It's Assembly vs C all over again where folks have a hard time accepting that the easier path also leads to demonstrably better results. If I can do in 10 lines what previously required 50, that code I contribute is far less likely to have as many bugs or suffer from performance problems.
> E.g. "How is *GPT taking in data and producing an output different than a human learning a skill and making prose/code/art?"

It can go the other way too, like proof that diffusion models memorize heavily repeated training examples being used as evidence they aren't creating stuff at all and just copy pasting, but artists can memorize whole works too, especially artists that copy style really well.

Many English classes will have you verbatim memorize poetry as well, to show how things were done with memorization in oral storytelling traditions.
Wow, great resource. Do you know who put it together?
Roy Flynn
A more logged approach with IDK all previous queries in a notebook and their output over time would be more scientific-like and thus closer to "Engineering": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineering

> Engineering is the use of scientific principles to design and build machines, structures, and other items, including bridges, tunnels, roads, vehicles, and buildings.[1] The discipline of engineering encompasses a broad range of more specialized fields of engineering, each with a more specific emphasis on particular areas of applied mathematics, applied science, and types of application.

"How and why (NN, LLM, AI,) prompt outputs change over time; with different models, and with different training data" {@type=[schema:Review || schema:ScholarlyArticle], schema:dateModified=}

Query:
(@id, "prompt", XML:lang, w3c:prov-enance)

QueryResult:
(@id, query.id, datetime, api_service_uri, "prompt_ouput")

#aiart folks might know
Agreed, relying on ChatGPT to do work is like using Chegg for answers, we can tell ourselves, "oh yea, I could write that no problem, or I can just do the same method later on..." until you can't.

It's called learning without a crutch, aka learning. (obviously I'll do things like use CMake on large projects, but I've forced myself to write Makefiles by hand for exactly this reason).
> Much like lifting weights or running are "bullshit" activities.

> like the lifters using bad form to make the mechanical goal of moving the weight easier in the short term.

I don't know about you, but this would actually be the perfect excuse to do a sport like judo that you can't bullshit through but can still get the same end result from.
Ultrawide monitors (I'm using the 49" Samsung Odyssey G9 at 5120x1440) would also suffer from having a taskbar on a side of the screen -- I currently have my Windows bar at the top of the screen, but honestly, the MacOS dock might be the best usability route for this monitor setup to keep things nice and centered.
So hard to tell if HN is telling me to buy Bitcoin or to sell Bitcoin, sometime.
The teacher (or developer of the curriculum) needs to decide both 1) what they consider to be cheating and 2) how important it is to establish a certain level of confidence that students aren't cheating. If writing grammatically without any external help is deemed to be extremely important, and it's far too easy for students to cheat on take-home writing assignments, then suck it up and use some of your in-class time for writing exams. Your in-class time is finite anyway, so deciding how to use it is already critically important.

If electronic earpieces become commonly used by students to cheat on in-class exams, and that's important enough to the teacher, I guess they better figure out a way to screen for those devices.

If eventually nearly everyone has some sort of brain link that can whisper grammatical phrases directly into their brain and cannot feasibly be detected in the classroom, well, then either your entire curriculum is on the honor system, or maybe you'll need to update your thoughts about what tasks are important for your students to be able to perform without "external" help.
Interesting! I'm running a three monitor setup and have the taskbar only on my most right display in the right side of the display, that way I have two entire displays entirely free for use and on the third display I think having the taskbar in the side takes up less space. (My displays are 16:9, 1080p each)

To me having the same thing on every display feels redundant. But that's probably just me, because my brother has the same setup as what you described.
>Where are all these ads, movies, and TV shows depicting non-monogamous queer relationships?

Are you kidding me?

https://www.hbomax.com/collections/lgbtq-voices
https://www.netflix.com/browse/genre/100010

>How is the government providing this "top-down" support?

https://joebiden.com/lgbtq-policy/#

This is not "edgy counterculture"
This sounds great, even a moral obligation! Does anyone know if a similar course of action exists in Spain?
Counterculture doesn't cease to exist just because you are full of hate.
I think the filler SEO pages rubbed onto ChatGPT giving it a sort of roundabout filler tone.
I did work on the Inertia Upper Stage (IUS) project. That was the booster that would take satellites from the shuttle bay into their final orbits.

A lot of the IUS specifications were classified because of the payloads that were intended. Even the name of the program that made those specifications and the name of the organization that was behind the program were classified.

Of course, that all kind of fell apart when _Deep Black_ was published, and a lot of code names (the uttering of which were absolutely verboten) were suddenly being bandied about on the evening news.

I was in the weird position of pretending to not know code names that were being discussed on broadcast TV.
Take my money!!!
> Musk has some extremely talented individuals under his employment at his other properties.

Generally speaking, that's what I consider being a good CEO.

> And to be clear, the only thing he has ever founded is SpaceX

I didn't use the term founded, but this is a silly argument. I don't really care about it, though. We can ignore the bulk of his wealth and limit him to SpaceX and it leaves him looking...well, really impressive. SpaceX is fucking awesome, they're doing badass work.
> ((a -> Void) -> Void) -> a

> However, this is exactly the type of Cont Void.

Defined where?

Not here:
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/monads-tf-0.1.0.3/docs/C...

https://hackage.haskell.org/package/mtl-2.3.1/docs/Control-M...

The closest I find is

cont :: ((a -> r) -> r) -> Cont r a

so
cont (a -> Void) -> Void) :: Cont Void a

There is nothing "out of thin air", since `a` is the input, not the ouput, unless you just misread the type. But that can be said for any higher-order type, like

map :: (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b]
I agree.

Data being placed on a map often has a hierarchical element (country, state/province, county/district, town/city, etc) and many of the data standards allow nesting such as GeoJSON.

While R can handle hierarchical data, it does much better with rectangular data sets.
Look I'm willing to accept on preponderance of the evidence Ross probably did that. But lets examine things criminally.

What conviction found he must have been involved in the murder scheme? I know his conspiracies alleged that could have been a possible overt act, but did the jury actually ever convict him on anything involving murder or state the overt act for the various generic conspiracies was actually the murder allegation?

As far as I can tell the prosecutor said, here is a list of a bunch of possible acts that cover the more generic drug and kingpin conspiracies. And the jury found him guilty that at least some of those happened, but not necessarily the murder-for-hire one. He wasn't found guilty of an actual charge that required murder. It looks like the judge just short-circuited to sentencing him for it despite as far as I can tell no evidence that's what the jury convicted him of.

I find it pretty chilling you can just use a generic conspiracy charge, have the prosecutor say "coulda done any one of those things" and the jury say "well he did at least one of those things, not necessarily the murder bit" and the judge just short-circuit to sentencing like he was guilty of paying for the hit. If the charge is so vague as to not know which elements of the crime he actually guilty of then IMO the sentencing should not be able to presume it must have been the worst thing the prosecutor alleged.
Static types for example, it is one of the few things where the trade-off seems to be worth it, so I agree there are times where the improvement of tools can improve productivity more than expressability of the core language.

But those things are already widely popular, someone saying "we need less powerful languages" means they want even more than that, I'm not aware of any things that aren't currently popular that would improve these things by a lot.
America hasn't had a culture of universal personal ownership of high-capacity semi-automatic long guns for it's entire history, or really even a significant portion of its entire history. The culture of firearms has absolutely changed, markedly, within our own lifetimes.
AGI was here all along, humans were just too self important to realize it. Any network with feedback loops and memory is intelligent, there is nothing special about human intelligence compared to a mouse or a bacteria other than the size of the network and the fact that humans can work together at scale.

The search for AGI will die quickly because of this.
> Are we really separating and helping the more intelligent or just cutting loose those children with poor study skills or a lack of motivation to do their homework.

Does it then follow that we should keep those students all together, or perhaps should those students with low motivation and/or poor study skills get specialized programs/attention that can improve those qualities that lead to success?
I am against constrained DSLs in general unless it buys you something. In the general case, with a DSL you sacrifice expressivity in order to gain security guarantees or improved performance. In this case you are sacrificing expressivity to gain performance but I don't think the performance gains are meaningful enough to be worth sacrificing all of that expressivity. So to answer your question, I am generally opposed to constrained templating DSLs for web frontend applications overall.
That argument seems to rationalize 4chan behavior by simply saying 'it's counter-culture', as if that makes the behavior better or worse, more or less bad or justified. It changes nothing; it's posers imitating counter-culture (by that definition).
$20/month is too much? When I filled in the "pro" survey, I said I'd pay $200/month. This thing is a cheap-as-hell technical writer, fact checker, information cruncher, and more.

It's like an employee, but for $20/month.
Ask HN: Is DragonflyBSD capable of actual cluster computing alread or is it WIP?
Anyone here have any experience with building any clusters with it? What mechanisms are being used to do so? Can you run multithreaded/multiprocess applications on these clusters without need to change applications or constantly tweak the system before running different applications?
I find that it saves me at least 20 hours a month. I'd easily pay 500/mo for it.
We now know that receptor density/expression/sensitivity can vary wildly among different people and is influenced by medication, especially substances that target them. Just measuring the levels of any kind of receptor binding substance and comparing it among individuals is only half of the picture.
I'd guess Fever is implemented because even though Fever itself closed, others support the same API. https://bazqux.com/apps mentions it, for example.
They could just... not use tracking cookies. Then no banner is required. The real idiocy is every website wanting to hoover up data.
I for one, welcome the error wrapping change.
The DOS SDK
The excuses made for flu vaccines (there are many strains of flu after generations of different strains circulating and diverging), don't apply to COVID.

It's pretty obvious they started to redefine what vaccine does right around the time the COVID vaccine failed. The tests used to authorize the vaccines supposedly showed 95% efficiency doing just that.

The narrative shift was extremely sharp.
If you've written off yourself as "competent enough" or things "aren't relevant to future goals" you might want to think about the phrase "you don't know what you don't know"
Rethinking Reactivity by Rich Harris (2019)

https://youtu.be/AdNJ3fydeao
> It's not a counter-culture but just counter-productive

IOW, reactionary
Not the parent poster, but I suspect this may be pointing towards humanities-based subjects, where I've seen regular assignments in the form of essays on fairly subjective topics.

I do think there will be a challenge in handling use of GPT in some kinds of essay questions, even in objective and "right/wrong" type disciplines - I asked a friend to grade some answers to an essay style exam question, and they felt the GPT output was considerably better than many students in the class - ChatGPT was producing markedly better output than weak students. This wasn't a properly blinded or double-blinded test, but the output from GPT was so much better than weaker students that there was little need. You could tell from glancing at the text that it was better.

ChatGPT had far better grasp of the English language, and the language model meant what it wrote was more coherent, structured, and better flowing than a weaker student would write. It had a significantly better vocabulary than many students, and the GPT output appeared to always use words correctly. Sentences were fully-formed and coherent. They had proper grammatical structure, made proper use of punctuation, and advanced a cohesive idea (as the essay asked for). This wasn't true of weaker (human) students' attempts.

The content that ChatGPT produced was not always factually perfect, but when compared with anyone who wasn't "top of the class", there were fewer factual errors in the Chat GPT output, since it was mostly regurgitating fairly simple text. A paraphrase of part of the Wikipedia article would probably have beaten many students though.

Where GPT output falls apart is references - even when asked to produce references, they are generally non-existent (plausible paper name, plausible author, plausible journal name, just that paper doesn't exist and that author didn't publish anything in that journal, etc.), and do not actually support the statements which cite them - this still seems to be a fairly robust way of detecting non-human output at present.

It would be interesting to see this kind of experiment carried out at scale in a controlled environment, where the examiners are unaware that GPT outputs are interspersed with real students' work, in order to make it a fair assessment.
5-10 years? Expect it in 5-10 months.
Exactly. I see this being eclipsed by the Stable Diffusion equivalent for ChatGPT. You could then have cloud providers offering whatever specialised compute you need to easily run one of these as a server. Host your own instance in other words.

Obviously a lot of people will just want a simple SAAS product still, we won't want or need everyone, hosting their own apps (too energy intensive for a start). This can then be a SAAS offering, but backed by the same open source software.
> Microsoft, really scraping the bottom of the barrel with that move.

They have been there at least since Candy Crush appeared in the Start menu.
Yes! Yes we can, we have fabulous Windows Subsystem for Linux and we hang out with the OpenAI chaps.

I'll rant. MS can go to the ninth hell with Zuck and Larry Page et al for all I care, the only part I cannot swallow is Bill Gates now wants to play the good old man. Everything MS does today is exactly as he would always have done it. I'm sorry bill but the precedent immoral fools like you and jobs set is worth more shit and shame (and damage to culture) than your old age could ever make up for, you're a disgrace unto this world and may the memory of these men rot in a dungeon up to par with their ethical hygiene. I hope this is the year of linux on the desktop.
I used to work at an organization that shipped a Go binary that supported Linux 2.4 kernels, which afaik Golang never supported. There was nothing in the toolchain stopping us from building on an old kernel, but we were on our own for testing and worked around some libc issues in the runtime and stdlib if I recall correctly.

I imagine there's some enterprise customer somewhere on an old version of Windows that will throw money at vendors to make a similar effort.
I absolutely adore this book and its approach to information theory.

I will also note the author made available the (non compilable) latex source [1] of the text for easy searching!

[1]http://www.inference.org.uk/mackay/itprnn/booktext.txt
If you eat to lose weight and keep that up for a long time you will end up weak if you do exercise
I kinda like it honestly. Programmers have been so high on the hog, earning doctors salaries and thinking they are this special class of people where their jobs are totally unassailable. I know many who were earning 200k and have nearly no savings.

I don't think this will eliminate all jobs in the short term but it's going to have an impact very quickly. Hope these people are saving up
I thought C did that?
When I was a kid, one afternoon we heard a siren go off in the nearby village. What do you do? Well keep doing what you've been doing before. Because it's just a test certainly. Then a voice came on: "This is not a test, not a test." So what did I do then? Scan the houses. And sure enough, there was smoke billowing from a skylight.

If I'd been one of the municipal firefighters, I'd run home to grab my gear. Likely my training would have stressed to start running at the first sounding of the siren!

Nowadays, if a siren went off at another time of the day, I would leave the building to make sure it wasn't mine being on fire. Maybe that's when I'd get swept away by a flood because I can't distinguish the signals.
I actually left the page and came back in private mode, so I am thankful they asked.
Many compiler devs want the most complex language as possible, because it increase exponentialy developer/vendor lock-in.
Learning isn't just remembering, it's also reflective of skills. Someone with considerably higher IQ can arguably understand how to program computers faster, and thus start writing programs on their own sooner. Would we not say they learned programming faster?
I'm sad you are getting downvoted for this. This was my first thought as well. You are not a party pooper and you live in reality.

I like the atmosphere/branding of aviation and prefer flights over train travel as an experience, but after my wife recently wrote an article about the handling of emission information by the sector and I read many of the more science- and engineering-focused studies she is referencing in her work I am now officially horrified by flying.

It's just so damned inefficient and the industry is so disingenuous about it (layers of fraud related to carbon offset schemes, lobbying, etc.) and tries so hard to talk customers out of caring that stunts like this do not read as the heartwarming celebration of the engineering crafts it once would have. Instead being this wasteful and callous makes a mockery of trying to engineer a better world.

It's a misuse of a magnificent tool we should respect more surgically for its utility and risks.
Without a more granular solution in apt, this seems to require Ubuntu to halt the practice of allowing maintainers to provide their own updates for those packages. In other words, they seem to be taking away the community maintainers ability to provide updates for those packages. I am not sure how they can claim nothing is being lost here.
I think majority of jobs are low wage with no future prospects, and quite a lot of jobs have bosses or—worse—shareholders taking away the profits for their own private climate devastating opulence. Why would you work hard for these people? Why would you do anything more than the absolute minimum?

I think this supposed American dream was only ever a ruse, a Hollywood propaganda. If it ever existed it only applied to a certain demographic and was never actually a possibility for majority of Americans.

In the past decades (since the late 70s at least) Hollywood has slowed down it’s propaganda machine in favor of more independent film making (or the propaganda has shifted elsewhere; mainly the military during this century), so the illusion of the American dream is slowly but surely wearing off. In the meantime our jobs suck just as much as before, possibly even more, and are paying even less.
Infinite partial sumsets in the primes
I'm not sure as I've never followed how OSS projects get patched w.r.t security in particular. I've always groaned at my employer for running EOL operating systems and tell them about upgrading to a supported OS to prevent getting into this type of situation.

My reasoning was that if we were running a supported version of $oss_project then we'd get security updated naturally.
I like Boeing and the 747 is a great aircraft and a fantastic technical achievement, but, really, this is pretty atrocious. Couldn't they have just paid FlightAware to add some data to the track?

Until we get our population down to a sustainable level, this is unconscionable.

Get it under a billion and we can probably afford this. Until then, definitely not.
I think it's actually very close to a human, and is already better than a lot of developers I've worked with. Many are mailing it in producing 20-30 lines of code a week. This will absolutely destroy the low end. Now one JR developer can massively eclipse them.