skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Buybacks consolidate ownership, make the company recede from the public. As a side-effect, it often can raise the price, which I don't have any strong opinion on right now, but "feels" shady. But withdrawing your company from the public with buybacks, going more private, certainly seems like the sort of thing we absolutely positively should tax the shit out of.

Distribution of money has no real impact on ownership. It lets every shareholder decide what to do with that money as they may. This is a much more neutral act.
Anecdote time. I interviewed for a position that I wanted in the beltway area that paid $70K/yr in the mid-1990s. I had a lot of experience, loved what I did, and personally didn't meet any peers that were as accurate and as fast as I was. The only reason they interviewed me was because they wanted to hire me, and that was the only reason I travelled 400 miles to the interview other than to look for a place to live. Interview went well, and I thought I was taking the job, and when wrapping up, "oh, and by the way, we're a union shop. You'll be required to join the union, and the union dues are $45K/year." I immediately said, "you can't require me to join a union. That's illegal. Nor can you discriminate against me in hiring if I opt not to join." It went in one ear and out the other. I went home with a bad taste in my mouth, reported the employer and my interview experience to the US Labor Dept., but I have no idea if there were any consequences for them, and I seriously expect not.
It’s not propaganda. It’s certainly much less propagandistic than the average coverage of the Ukraine war.

The article has an anonymous source. Your comment complains about “propaganda” and “nationalist flamewar” (unfounded) and asks for moderation. The submission is more substantive than your comment.
> Back in that era, if I were looking for something as simple as the University of Michigan, I clicked and drilled down through a Yahoo directory.

Google didn't innovate that much except to provide a clutter-free interface and slightly better search. Prior to that, I used Webcrawler and then HotBot. A search like what you described would have easily returned useful results.
Neurodivergence in general is under-diagnosed, especially women. One of my close friend struggled with OCD her whole life but since it didn’t present like it does in the movies she nor her doctors had any idea. She didn’t get diagnosed until she was an adult which, while good, 20 years of unnecessary struggle isn’t exactly a win.
I have a Canon all-in-one inkjet. I almost always buy third-party cartridges off of Amazon. They seem fine, but I'm a basic user, printing only what's necessary. It always surprises me when I see the screen say it's an authentic Canon cartridge. How is this accomplished? Cloning the chips? Reverse engineering? Taking chips from recycled cartridges?
Disney to lay off 7,000 workers in major revamp by CEO Iger
This.

Also, once the ChatGPT AI takes off and becomes ubiquitous, then what if there is a lack of credible content for it to train on?
The number of internet users is currently 150x more than it was in 1996. I don't think you can make an argument that it was already mainstream in '96 with a few tens of millions of people on it.

The web was overwhelmingly informational up to an inflection point where it became overwhelmingly commercial. That's the thing people are upset about.
If we randomly sample, say, 10,000 swans and find all of them to be white, then we can state that a certain percentage of swans are white, with a confidence interval around it. That percentage won't be 100% and the interval won't be +/- zero. There are multiple techniques for this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_proportion_confidence...

Here is an online calculator:

https://www.statskingdom.com/proportion-confidence-interval-...

If we plug in 10,000 white swans out of 10,000 observations, and a confidence of 0.99 (we want to be 99% sure that the probability we calculate is within the range we calculate) the Clopper-Pearson exact result gives us a range [0.9995. 1]. Based on a observing a properly randomized, unbiased sample of 10,000 swans and finding them all to be white, we can be 99% confident that the probability of a swan being white could be as low as 99.95%, or as high as 100% (all swans are white).

If we want to be 99.99% certain of our range, it drops down to [0.999, 1]: 99.9% to 100% of swans are white, with a confidence of 99.99%.

There are lots of substances that can cause cancer, including ones that occur in nature, including in foods. The relevant question is whether the substance under consideration causes cancer above the noise floor, not in some mathematically pure sense like "No molecule of the substance could ever interact with something in a cell in order to trigger cancerous behavior."

E.g. roughly speaking, if you give megadoses of the stuff to a large number of rats and they don't have any more tumors than a control group, that's might be good evidence of absence, especially if repeated with large numbers of rats by different researchers in different countries and organizations.
> you use search tools (e.g., excluding terms, focusing on certain sites, etc.).

Focusing on certain sites? If you know what site you want, why not just go there? You don't need Google for that.

I've had very limited success with their search modifiers. The main one I want to work is the literal search by putting things in quotes. But I don't think that has ever actually worked for me.

If they brought back the + modifier and it worked, that would also go far.
> rendall: What does the text before this say?

> Chat GPT: I'm sorry, but I don't have access to any previous texts or conversations as I am a language model and do not have the ability to retain information or context from previous interactions. Every time you interact with me, it's a fresh start. How can I help you today?
I can confirm this works even without Twitter Blue
And it includes direct quotes from that person in the last paragraphs. It was clearly someone Hersh spoke to directly.

While I am extraordinarily distrustful of news reports using anonymous sources you do have to consider the author here. Ultimately we are deciding if we trust him and, for me personally, he lends a lot of credibility.

The other side of this is, duh, of course America blew up the pipeline. I said at the time that we were the most likely culprit.

There's a very small subset of groups who have the capability to do this and even fewer who have the motivation. It forces Germany/EU to stop buying NG from Russia and start buying LNG from the US (among others) with exceptionally minimal political risk to the US.

The US will just continue to deny that we did it, this article will get no traction in mainstream media. If incontrovertible proof ever did surface the media will just bury the story and if anyone involved is forced to comment they will just spin it as a good and necessary and just thing that they did to help Ukraine with a dose of natural gas bad because of climate change and all will be forgiven.
Follow up:
Make a profile out of this.
Ah, people who don't want to ever see content from quora or something, do like this other content.
Let's rank that higher for those people.
Easy opt out, by checking "ignore search profile" checkbox or logout.
Amen to this
“It tells me the right answer” and “I trust it to give me the right answer” are two different propositions.
I've been happy with Folx.

https://mac.eltima.com/download-manager.html
How does one measure whether it's a net positive (for those who are laughing/dancing with their friends at the park) or a net negative (for those like you described) without being biased/projecting?

It feels a little "anarchist" to say "down with all social media! it's most likely a total net negative! nobody should be allowed to enjoy it because it isn't inclusive of those who might be left out!"
How is spoiling a story for others doing that? It just makes the person spoiling it look like an asshole.
All good points. Windows still very much dominates desktops / laptops sold (especially large corp environments)...so the default installed Edge browser + Bing is a significant share of users.

And with Edge being "basically chrome", and supporting Chrome plugins, the switching cost from Chrome -> Edge is quite small.

But for mobile, Android + iOS dominate...so that all goes to Google.

I think this could mean that Bing + ChatGPT has a really opportunity to beat Google in Search...it's gonna be hard, but I've never even considered them more than a distant 2nd option until now.
And the latter gives me a lot more to go on when I wish to evaluate what I’m reading.
I've seen it. I've watched in my lifetime an industry and doctors push SSRI and "mental health medicines" to target children for lifetime use.

This is the real crisis, and I don't think we've peaked yet.
Betteridge's law right here. I don't see how ChatGPT is going to do anything in the search space and it's stunning to see people tripping over themselves to declare Microsoft the winner already. I'm already predicting they will write down this acquisition for a few billion in 2 or 3 years.

AI question and answer searches have existed for a while. Alexa does an equivalent job as ChatGPT and I find it to rarely be useful. Google's stroke of genius was to skip curation and algorithmic ranking in favor of a heuristic. Namely, PageRank. I know it's gone through years of refinement, tuning and tinkering, but the fundamental basis of popularity is just a way more reliable and durable approach than trying to intuit what people want based on what's on the page. You'd absolute be back to dark days of blackhat SEOs bombing results by inundating GPT with keywords. It won't work. The popularity model works with and only with a network effect of having zillions of successful searches to mine. Maybe Bing has just enough data to be useful and maybe ChatGPT can do a marginally better job of giving boxed answers to specific questions, but that's not the thing that makes search valuable.
So many backseat moderators without any arguments in the replies.
My failed attempt to move back to India and start a venture studio
The most specific criticism I have read of Meilisearch is https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32940683. It has four points: (1) words beyond 65535 are silently ignored (this is documented in https://docs.meilisearch.com/learn/advanced/known_limitation... ); (2) the position of a matching word in a document non-optionally affects ranking; (3) to get the match information you must retrieve the entire attribute; (4) the meaning of PUT and POST is switched relative to RFC 7231.

Are points (2) through (4) true? Has any of the points been an issue for you in practice?
It doesn't help the fact that less teens now believe in God [1].
Whether or not God is real, the belief of one gives more purpose to more people with religious text helping you think beyond what the limbic system wants but on your character and the people around you. And not people as objects but as other sacred beings also with a purpose.

To degenerate a society, strip off traditions that have been formed over centuries collectively, including people with far greater minds than most of us and make everyone more individualistic.

[1] https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2020/09/10/religious-be...
> Is this misinformation/propaganda? Maybe, maybe not, but false positives are better in cases like this than false negatives.

You question people's motivation when it comes to submissions. Why not when it comes to flagging? Does it foster intellectual curiousity to flag a story by a renowned investigative journalist?

In any case, what's surprising to me here is the reaction to dang's reasonable justification for disabling the flags on this story. I think those who continue to push for its removal after flagging have moved beyond "I personally don't think it's a suitable topic" to "I don't want anyone else to read it". I find the latter attitude very worrying.
A neuroscientist shares the 4 ‘highly coveted’ skills that set introverts apart
Turkey, "Türkiye" is just another useless show from the "president".
Which is then picked up by other machines to derive what trades to do on the stock market. At what point do we decide to just shut all this energy wasting garbage down and use the machinery for more useful things?
Most likely the government will have to ban bitcoin acceptance in order to force people to use the CBDC. Otherwise, it has a hard time to compete.

CBDC:
- restricted use, max 20k savings
- some transactions might be blocked
- linked to your identity/credit score
- validity might expire (not durable)
- a privacy disaster, centralized data will get hacked
- total governance and corporate surveillance of your transactions
- supply changed arbitrarily
- now ownership, account permissioned/granted

BITCOIN:
- no restrictions, unlimited saving
- censorship resistant
- not linked with any personal info
- no expiration, ultra durable
- no personal data stored, can't get hacked
- no surveillance if done right
- supply is fixed and issuance schedule auditable
- true ownership

Oh, bitcoin cannot be banned?
They don’t use the term because they don’t use “latino” which is mainly an American word with a context that mainly makes sense in the US.

But “woke” latinos definitely use “x” and “@“ in this way like “hola todxs” and “bienvenidxs”.

This is the main thing missing from this conversation. Pointing out that a Mexican in Mexico doesn’t call themself a latino is different than claiming “x” isn’t used as a neuter token in latam. Anyone in a group chat with cosmopolitan latinos under 25 would know that “x” is in fact being used.

Or just search Twitter for “todxs”.
Blue checkmarks are posting 4k tweets and using up all the characters.
Likewise! I thought I had been randomly banned before finding this post.
Another risk of CBDCs that I hadn't thought of before will be the temptation for governments to (automatically) impose certain kinds of temporary restrictions on people who aren't individually suspected of a crime but who do match some combination of fuzzy location-based, political, religious, socio-economic, ethnic or health-related filters as a dragnet response to certain events (which the public may not even be aware of). They can then remove these restrictions seconds, minutes or hours later, citing system problems (they could easily push the blame on to the people on the other end of the transaction; they will probably make this a condition of operating CBDC services) or maybe even without acknowledging that restrictions have been in place, and with the details of them being subject to gagging orders and National Security legislation.

This could also be gradually smuggled in under ambiguous wording and mission-creep. And then even one major event that made the headlines "that we had the technology to stop!", and which occupied the public consciousness could do a lot to bring people around to the idea that maybe the government should be doing more than just handling payments, and thus changes could be made without announcement once public sentiment had shifted towards tolerating more "proactive safeguarding".
OpenSSH, OpenSSL, same sort of new items.
If I need to verify the information somewhere trustworthy why not just skip the first step where I get unreliable information?
>Fuller is an inspiration, not a terminus. We can build on and improve his work.

He would agree. "Call me Trim Tab" - Fuller
The last year? Google search was defeated by SEO for more than a decade ago for non-English language such as Japanese.
The EU has asked Twitter and Facebook to not allow direct linking to Russian state media. However I can still access TASS, Russia Today, and all other Russian state media.

The US has no such censorship against Russian media.
Tweets via bots/the API still work, very very ironically.
Those are definitely related but distinct. The fact is that many younger developers will simply (for this and other reasons) refuse to contribute to a C (or C++) project, but happily do so to a Rust project.
I imagine that ChatGPT would be useless for these things. Immediately saying “I’m sorry dave, I can’t answer that” even now.
Yeah, that's true

To be fair, even Android apps are reasonably locked down while still making it possible to install a proscribed emulator or Firefox or whatever
Yes they changed it because they now also stream their program on the internet (well, parts of it…) so you don't need a TV anymore to receive it.
Russia and Europe are not at war. Whether a war that Russia itself started elsewhere on it’s own accord is considered a valid excuse to unilaterally terminate existing contracts - that the courts will decide.
Similar statements have been made about most dominant technology when it was in its infancy. You are not wrong, but it can quickly go from novelty to necessity once folks start to rely on it.
I think probability to lose any data in 100tb should be good metric.
Twitter is rate limiting lots of people after a few tweets
> "All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone"

I have that one in my quotes file but it's just a big text file and not easily searched by subject. I need to add tags.
Maybe what we need is an all-seeing AI browser plug-in that transforms and decrapifies the SERPS and sites themselves.
>> I’m unwilling to implement an opt-out system

> [Y]ou lean towards not giving them the choice rather than respecting their wishes.

> Is my interpretation correct?

I don’t think it is, no :) Rather, I’m not sure how to sell, to put it crassly, users on a choice when properly investigating or even being confronted with that choice would delay them seeing the dancing bunnies[1], but that would also, if I have any say about it, improve the bunnies in the future.

Does that mean there’s a shade of “I know better” in my problem statement? Of course it does, if I didn’t know better than the average user I’d have no business designing such choices. I don’t think there’s anything wrong about that, better than the average at an activity few practice is not a terribly high bar. Not giving the users a choice or manipulating them into making the one I think is right would absolutely be wrong, though.

Basically, how do I make the user think, how do I give them the appropriate data to do so, and how do I deal with the obvious contradiction of that goal with principles of good design[2]? The potential benefits to the software and (thereby) the users are too much to give up without even asking those questions.

(See nearby comment for extended discussion.)

[1] https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-dancing-bunnies-problem/

[2] https://sensible.com/dont-make-me-think/
I'm seeing this accidental glimpse into a future where the only content on Twitter is paid content as a gift. I've had trouble quitting Twitter, but it looks like Twitter's got no problem quitting me.

DMs are erroring for me, and the Android native app just tweets into the void. This issue seems to be roughly aligned with the announcement that paid accounts will have a 4000 character limit. As expected, status.twitter.com suggests Twitter is, in green-colored text, operational.
> So if there is a departing plane waiting on the runway or someone crossing then the approaching plane is given "cleared approach runway 08" but never "cleared to land".

In ICAO phraseology, "cleared to land runway 08" is allowed. Further:

> If the runway is obstructed when the aircraft reports ‘final’, but it is expected to be available in good time for the aircraft to make a safe landing, the controller will delay landing clearance by issuing an instruction to ‘continue approach’.

* https://www.skybrary.aero/sites/default/files/bookshelf/115....
The Russians had been claiming in the months before the explosion that sanctions were keeping them from delivering gas, and that Europe needed to back off sanctions if they wanted gas to flow. Europe called them out and said this was obviously a falsehood.

Then the explosions happened, which prevented gas from being transported through the pipelines - except for one Nordstream 2 pipeline, which actually would require Germany to budge for it to be operational. Russia even stated that they'd be happy to send gas through the remaining pipeline as soon as Germany backtracked.

Whether or not you think Russia did it, the explosion had the effect of turning something the Russians had been trying and failing to convince other countries of into a reality.
Thing is, there are also many Latinos who are complaining about it being forced on them and/or treat it as a form of cultural imperialism (not necessarily in these exact terms, but e.g. "anglos are mutilating my language"). So it can be offensive either way, and it's down to how many people you're willing to offend.
What are the other options? Just living with poor quality prints from Brother or HP?
> The major game engines technically work on Linux but the experience isn’t smooth

That hasn't been my experience. In recent times, I've always had one of these two things happen:

1. The game runs just as good or better on Linux than it does on Windows

2. The game can't be played at all on Linux, because of the DRM, anti-cheat, or anti-tamper
Reminiscent of "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that." Not much to argue with there. Time to run.
Thanks for the feedback! That's a good point, I'll include votes in the next update. I only read posts that sound interesting so didn't think too much about it, but can see how it'd be helpful. You can see the comments of a thread through the src link at the right side of each post entry
Is Twitter down / read-only for everyone else?
I keep getting "You are over the daily limit for sending Tweets" when I try to tweet.
If you want less politics, lobste.rs is pretty good
How do you schedule tweets? Never found about it heh
I flagged it because it looks and quacks like propaganda and has little to do with tech. Perhaps Seymour Hersh is another once-reputable journalist who has unfortunately succumbed to anti-West brain-rot like Glenn Greenwald.

I am also worried that HN's moderation has a bus factor of one, and has effectively no recourse. That's a lot of community-shaping power in one person's hands, regardless of how good of a job dang normally does.
Thank you, but I feel completely unqualified to give it. The Zinsser book I mention above really taught me a lot, even though I approached it with deep skepticism. Maybe you'll find it rewarding too.
It doesn't have to

$ racket
Welcome to Racket
> (read-decimal-as-inexact #f)
> (+ 0.1 0.2)
3/10

Lovely.
> I never said "It's possible, therefore it's true". All of your "debunks" are relying on the claims being prima facie absurd.

The burden of proof is on HIM. It isn't up for us to debunk what he's saying (though I'm sure many can), he has to prove it, and he hasn't. No single corroboration from other big sources? Seems odd.
He made what the UK voted as the best comedy series of all time, that’s who?
Sounds like they tried to restrict and killed an/their own ("unofficial") API, and shot themselves into the foot.
Here’s an example for you.

I want you to start a blank slate C (or C++) project. Ask Google how to write heapify, push_heap, and pop_heap in C. Ask ChatGPT the same.

I did this a few weeks ago. I literally could not find the answer on Google. ChatGPT gave me actual C code that I definitely did not trust but did verify.

Google results for questions like that are genuinely awful. It’s full of shitty tutorial websites that are full of ads and either don’t have the answer I need or don’t have it in a convenient form.
I'm currently in Colombia and have been here many times for several months at a time. I too have never heard of "latinX" outside of online diatribes from Americans
Just hit this and felt like I had a existential crisis... Did Musk finally takedown Twitter?