skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
.NET languages are amazing. It's fairly easy to program in any style in C# now: imperative, or OO with massive inheritance hierarchies, or even functional-only with LINQ and things like switch expressions and primary constructors (mentioned in the article). C# now also has top-level statements, so no need for `public class Main { public static void main() {}}`.

The .NET standard library is by far the biggest I've ever seen—it's not merely 'batteries included'; it's 'everything under the Sun included'. NET also comes with a straightforward package manager for third party libraries (NuGet).

There are a variety of development environments available—VS2022, VS Code, Rider, command-line tools. Speaking of command-line tools, the `dotnet` bootstrapper makes it really easy to get started with any sort of project.

The compiler and static analysis tool set, Roslyn, is itself increasingly written in C#, having migrated from C++. With NET 7, code can now be compiled to native binaries ahead-of-time, and there's even an experimental LLVM backend[1].

One can write code for almost any use case (except perhaps embedded) with .NET. It really needs to be used more.

And needless to say: .NET is open-source and cross-platform.

[1]: https://github.com/dotnet/runtimelab/tree/feature/NativeAOT-...
Brain is a team inside AI, which internally is just called Research.
No, because most applications don't need layer 2 adjacency.
Wow you're right, only mention is way at the bottom of the main page, just a title "A Train Carrying Toxic Chemicals Derailed in Ohio. Here’s What to Know." No picture, not even a mini-summary like some of the other links.
A tad of Yes, Minister wisdom [1]:

"The Four Stage Strategy:
Stage 1. Nothing is going to happen.
Stage 2. Something may happen, but we should do nothing about it.
Stage 3. Maybe we should do something about it, but there's nothing we can do.
Stage 4. Maybe there was something we could have done, but it's too late now."

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSXIetP5iak
>just because some behavior is (in the future) considered a compiler bug or something

Unsound behavior is considered a compiler bug, and is liable to change if you accidentally rely on it. I would hope that having multiple compilers won't change that. The motivation to actually fix soundness holes is one of the primary differentiators of Rust.

That said, these are very rare.
At which point did the last, best game get made? Because great experiences are always coming out, for example, HiFi Rush just recently.

If all you look at is AAA experiences, then maybe I can understand this viewpoint, but this is absolutely not true in general.
What happened to that kid who programmed the first COVID tracker and turned down like $8 million for it?
How is this a detriment for both of you?

It's a lovely redeeming quality of both games, by far. Having the same voice actor for everyone is absolutely freaking hilarious, too, to boot.

I mean, how can you not love this lol: https://youtu.be/N6hVmn9FM7o
microsoft is impossible to dislodge because of the office monopoly.
But real chemical engineers are making these decisions

Are they? What proof do you have?

Personally, I've seen management and bean counters override engineers constantly, so I tend to assume that's standard.
It doesn't... there is none. Any reporting that says there is likely is confused about other stuff too. I'm open to finding out there was a tank of Fluorine (now that's hazardous cargo!) in a nearby car, but it just sounds like gibberish from here.
Timing being nice, Casey just started a series on performance / optimization [1].

The pitch is that it should be useful even for people not using "down to the metal" languages - although at this point in the series they have been essentially:

* yelling at the sky that software is slow (amen to that)

* making fun at python for not being C (which is, I mean, true)

* explaining why memory caching is important (which is both true and not obvious to most people)

* diving into the details of SIMD intrisincs of x86 using some form of vectorized quantum hardware-specific instructions, which I'm sure is going to help me avoid a few calls to render in my React app _any time now_.

(Just kidding, I'm pretty sure I'm going to learn stuff from the series, which is the point.)

[1] https://www.computerenhance.com/p/welcome-to-the-performance...
This is not a good article. In the same podcast they're quoting, Sam says something along the lines of "yes ChatGPT was not a good product, but Bing Chat is a huge improvement, better model, better features, ready for production release to the world and everyone should be using it."

That's the story, that he is now marketing Bing Chat as a great product totally different than ChatGPT, when in fact it seems to be basically the same thing but with search results fed into the prompt and some fake "citations" included to make it feel more legit.
The most dangerous communicators are those who/that make assertion with a confidence
tone that is not in proportion to their knowledge level.

A good start would be to get rid of ChatGPT's "Sure!" opening word. It's giving me real garbage at times with the implied confidence of certainty.
Before you mock the press maybe take a look at how they are being treated in Ohio. This is from a press conference given by the governor last week.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQMLxBpiSu8
> If I Google "What's the capitol of Illinois"

Probably a good idea to actually try that before posting.
> And it's hard to see how "certain particle masses (or other seemingly-free parameters) seem small/large" qualifies. Small or large by what standard? It's a lot smaller/larger than 1? OK, but what's "a lot"? Who's setting the scale here? Ultimately the universe's scale is the only one that matters here, and if we find its numbers unusually "small" or "large" that's just a matter of incorrect expectations on our part!

I see what you mean and agree that talking about "small" or "large" fundamental constants doesn't make a whole lot of sense - but that's not what's going on with particle masses or other hierarchy problems.

The effective masses we actually measure are not the (presumably fundamental) bare masses we would measure at infinitely high energies. They're adjusted by, in a very rough sense, the energy content of a particle's interactions with surrounding fields - an electron's effective mass is its bare mass, plus the contribution of its one-loop self-interactions, plus the contribution of its two loop self-interactions, and so on. Naively we would expect those contributions to be mostly uncorrelated, and the effective mass to be of roughly the same order as the highest-weight terms in the perturbation series.

When physicists say that a mass or coupling constant is too small, they mean that it's small compared to the terms in its perturbation series, which means that something is causing them to very nearly cancel out. It's as if we had what we thought was an ordinary random walk (which we would expect to have a magnitude scaling as sqrt(N) after N steps)... that reliably hovered around 3.
I don't know if it has a nice ring to it, the title is a bit unwieldy to say.
I hadn't heard that one, and having read all 20 of the Aubrey/Maturin books twice, I'm not unfamiliar with the Royal Navy. Thanks!
This is a great idea, but I noticed all the components I tried ended up looking very similar: a wide rectangle with (sometimes) an image on the left, and two sets of text captions, one pair left-aligned and one right-aligned.

My custom prompt,

> files in a file system

gave something almost identical to the predefined prompts:

> comedian shows in a comedy venue's booking application (which has an image too)
> zany brainy stuff (has a centered label too)
etc.

Is it more that it's not a UI component, but specifically only list items or cards, that it can generate? I did notice that it got the order of priority (eg filename first, size secondary) correct.
Subjectivity is all you have, there's no extreme version of it. And ethics is also something we define. In any case, you have to make a jump and make a metaphysical claim that you can't prove.

There are two possible claims:

1) The belief that the world is out there and is intelligible and I have the means to know about it. Which means whatever I think I know, must be based on some absolute truth that was there before me knowing about it.

2) The belief that whatever I think about the world, defines the world and whatever I think about the world is something I am making up right now.

If you adhere to 1, then all of your actions are justifiable for you, because the only place to lookup for confirmation is still just your own mind, and you believe that the mind reflects "a world that is out there and is intelligible" then whatever you do or think must be based on some truth, including harming others. Wars are a perfect example of that. In the minds of the people conducting it, it is justifiable because that's their version of reality and they believe that reality as something concrete and unchanging. Nations, ethnic categories etc. are all things that people made up and hold strong beliefs about them.

If you adhere to 2, then you are more humble in how you approach matters. Whatever you might imagine, you know that is just a product of the mind, and is malleable, since the world isn't intelligible and therefore can't be known. The lack of concreteness creates doubt, and in doubt you (usually) don't take actions. You allow the space for others experiencing their own version of reality however they feel like, as you do yours, without an inclination to indoctrinate them into your own version, since the metaphysical claim is that anyone has their own, and that's how things are. You could say this makes you catatonic, but i claim that it better directs your attention to the things you find interesting, rather than others telling you what you need to pay attention to. You are free to create your own ethics, based on your own experiences of what's good or not according to you, for your own space.

When you adhere to 1, the ethical framework is already given to you and imposed on you by other people hallucinating their reality, and if they say "lets go to war" you go to war, because that's what you believe must be true. There is no doubt, since there's no subjectivity, it must objectively be the case that you need to go to war. That's the only possible outcome of a belief that the world is out there and is intelligible.
On a not so fresh install it boots in 13 seconds here : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgltFQss3yU Pretty sure mine would boot even faster
From how you described it GRAD seems like a downgrade....
This project never made any sense. Move on.
That's less of a distinction with 32- vs 64-bit for me (though I know that does also pose issues for, say, users of any Raspberry Pi other than the 4B/CM4) and more that there just aren't any first-party ARM builds for Linux.

(That said I can't really speak to macOS here, as I really only use Macs when workplaces require me to, which also doesn't necessarily translate to having sudo access.)
I spent the majority of the last 30 years in Florida, and the theme parks were a regular past time. Disney World, but also Busch Gardens Tampa, SeaWorld, and Universal. All of them have gone down this path, though Disney is probably the most insidious. At the other parks, even with a paper ticket, your fingerprint is scanned to prevent people from sharing tickets. Disney used to do this too, but they stopped a few years ago. I didn't pay much mind to it, but the article reminded me: they can just use facial recognition.

Visiting Disney parks without using the app is a distinctly inferior experience. This is no accident. It isn't possible anymore to book a dining reservation sans app, likewise to check queue times (unless you walk to the ride entrance), likewise fastpasses. The app is more convenient, but only because they actively make the parks less convenient. The quality of the rides, the scenery, the staff/cast, and the mis en scene have all been slowly degrading over the past 10+ years or so. Despite that, prices nearly doubled I think.
People lose their traditional physical wallets all the time. Rarely does that result in total destruction of their wealth.
Amazon Zoox autonomous e-shuttle begins operating on public roads in California
I will say the same thing about an environmental professional on the company payroll.

The problem I'm concerned about isn't ignorance, it is cynical CYA-ism and a giant conflict of interest.

You need a culturally-trusted institution to handle this sort of thing. I am not sure Ohio currently has one that can handle this, so I expect to not know anything until the lawsuits settle over the next decade.
I guess I'm one of the few developers that like Jira. If you can keep management from going wild with permissions and workflows, it isn't unpleasant to use. Granted, since it needs to serve everyone, it's not going to be amazing for anybody.

Amazing solutions tend to have narrower focus. They tend to exclude complex workflows, forcing simplification. And there's an added bonus. The more admin tools you lack, the less likely management or other departments are to use your system. If they don't use it, they are less likely to be meddling with its configuration.

In short, Jira isn't a terrible product. It's a product that doesn't protect you from terrible people. ;)
Andrej Karpathy talked about how our DeepLearning11 build (8x 1080 Ti's) had a ~3 month payback period versus AWS

In 2017. Currently you can rent 8xA100 server for $8.8/hr: https://lambdalabs.com/service/gpu-cloud

At this price the payback stretches to about 3 years (taking into account average energy costs in US, and assuming 24/7 operation for the whole 3 years).
There were no severe acute effects - there were no hospitalizations, the vast majority of the vinyl chloride was intentionally burned, and the little that remains has very low environmental or biological persistence.
Microsoft could brand name their ChatGPT => Silvertongue.
Wait what? You want ACTUAL journalism...?
Google launches first Android beta for ad-tracking overhaul
The most dangerous communicators are those who/that make assertion with a confidence that is not in proportion to their level of certainty.

A good start is to get rid of ChatGPT's "Sure!" opening word. It's giving me real garbage at times with the implied certainty.
There is also a cool idea about building robots that use things like ice to build themselves bodies and can build versions of themselves.

You likely still have to send along a whole lot of electronics pars because making those on the spot would be difficult.
That's not the correct way to do security vulnerability analysis. If an API call can cause a disaster then fix the API. Whether the API consumer is an AI or some other type of system is irrelevant.
The parent comment refers to MS at 2000s, not to the one today.
Definitely not a good product with frequent "ChatGPT is at capacity right now".
Well, your example is not a generic closure, since inside `adder`, you already have a generic type `T`; it's introduced by the `fn` keyword. If we try to do the same for a closure, we would face a type error. This issue has been discussed on SO [1].

I haven't claimed that closures are not working, since well, they are working, but under a very limited set of circumstances. Again, I see nothing sensational, since the trickery of using closures has been discussed elsewhere.

[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/34814423/possible-to-def...
CRDTs are simpler and more common than you think
I have zero issue with this.
> removing humans from kill decisions

Hard pass.
That sentence doesn't make any sense. People can become merchants whenever they want for example at flea market, then suddenly they receiving at taler works for them?
> one-off reproduction cases of bugs

I had never considered this case before. I'm going to start doing this!
These aren't actually stats! You can't take a bunch of opinions and put a number on each one and call the result quantitative! Murders per 100k is a statistic. Violent crime rate is a statistic.

Pick a statistic that is a reasonable representation of danger (I think homicide rate is a reasonable one) and show that Moscow is lower on that statistic than Brooklyn.
That statement should more accurately target "US allies". The US is at the top of the system and can largely do whatever it wants, no one's going to slap sanctions on us over landmines. However our (western allies) strength gives our allies the confidence they need to voluntarily give them up, and we can coerce other nations to give them up to be part of our club.

It's all a power play at the end of the day, the ethical argument is window dressing. Some people take window dressing very seriously, but don't mistake that for being the decisive factor in policy.
VW is using Rust in the entertainment system. There is both interest and a bit of actual adoption.
I've worked at a number of big companies that have run experiments on TTI & response times and they've all shown statistically significant results that responsiveness impacts revenue, engagement & retention.
Sometimes it's easier to accept an "out-of-the-box" idea than to accept that your defence has failed.
Because the accident released a ton of nasty chemicals in one spot. However they are pretty volatile and naturally dissipate. If you see recent pictures from the crash site, nobody is wearing PPE and the EPA has deemed the area as safe to be in.
Similarly, can you imagine the media not objecting to Madoff using euphemisms like SBF does, e.g. how he "just needs liquidity" or just needs some support for his "capital position"?
To get on the gripe-fest:

When I use the quotation marks "xyz" to ensure that the result contains the string "xyz", goog no longer gives me results that have "xyz" in them.

It's not for all cases, but is most noticeable when trying to debug a program. I'll get an error, then search for that error online, putting the outputted error in quotation marks. Granted, these tend to be obscure errors and I'm not exactly expecting to find an answer.

But goog will return a bunch of SEO spam, ads, and then ~2/3rds of the way down the page, finally some real answers. But! These 'real' pages/answers don't contain the string that I made sure to specify to return. Often, it's very badly related to what I'm searching for to begin with.

Like, I'm okay with goog not returning anything. That helps me know that the thing I'm trying to do is headed in the wrong direction.

But goog is very much not okay with not returning anything.

I imagine that some KPI was set by some manager at google that they have to decrease the number of pages that don't return anything. So to do that, some check was implemented to strip the quotation marks away if a query doesn't have a result. And I just so happen to get caught in this a lot. I understand, google get more money when that happens, as it makes sure to show a lot more ads to me when it does this (pretty certain of this, but not 100%).

Still, yeesh!, it's so frustrating when I try to use the tool and it just ignores me!
Microsoft Word 97 might have felt laggy when I ran it on a first-generation Pentium CPU, but the race to the GHz bailed it out. Now that Moore's Law is running out of room, what's going to bail out this generation of software bloat?
Morrowind is similar, with map markers for major landmarks and diegetic fast travel, but still requiring the player to explore and orient to find quest objectives.
> parents should have the final say what their kids are exposed to

What do we do when a religious fundamentalist objects to learning about evolution in biology class, or a neo-Nazi parent objects to teaching about slavery?
I still can’t get used to Confluence exiting edit mode upon Ctrl+S.
The art of the shadow: How painters have gotten it wrong for centuries
Or like the USA's Computer Fraud and Abuse Act which everyone violates at least once a day. It's a felony too. But they only enforce it when someone with power or money gets upset about something. Like when weev used wget instead of browser to look at AT&T's public website and was sent to prison for years.
Can you really trust photocopiers with the microdots they encode nowadays?
I mean thats being pushed onto the Chinese domestic population, probably to drown out any coverage of the balloons for them. Maybe its bleeding over to US media but I suspect its more propaganda for them than a concerted propaganda effort for foreign audiences.
The porn you watched as a kid was fine, but the porn you watch today isn't acceptable for today's kids. Is that your position?
My wild prediction is that it will help.
Why does Microsoft keep trying to compete with search. 2 decades of endless money and time wasted. At least it cut its losses with the Zune. Microsoft has tried every possible gimmick to entice people to use Bing..all have failed. This has to be driven by ego and sunk cost fallacy if nothing else.
We aren’t going to modify our security protocols so a handful of people can mod their STB, sorry :P
It doesn't seem like a good thing for Google in that they are trying to sell Pixel phones at iPhone level prices without having the fit and finish, battery life, or app ecosystem that iOS has.
What’s in a Hedcut? Depends How It’s Made
Also feel like if there was more then one way to interpret a query, it used to try and give an example of each on the first page. Like it used to be if I searched "ford", I'd get both links relating to Ford Motors and President Ford. Trying today, the first link to Prez Ford is on the third page.
It’s doesn’t. Stay in target.

I responded to ChatGPT being NFTs and chatbots all over again.
So, its the SubDucktion Zone? Seems like Turkey falls into that category.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34758402
I agree. Chesterton's fence doesn't mean that if you don't know why the fence is there, don't ever move it, under any conditions. It means try to find out why it's there before moving it.

In many cases in my career, I've seen code that doesn't make sense or seems like a bad idea. The person who could explain why it's there has long left the company. Am I afraid and leave the screwy stuff there, while citing Chesteron's fence? Hell no. I'll change it to do the right thing. This results in either exposing the reason why it's there, or showing that it really was unnecessary/bad. If something breaks from the change then it's good that I can finally document what wasn't documented before. So either way it's a win.
The C++ Killers (Not You, Rust)
It is snake oil crypto. It is not safe for cryptographic use. I didn't see them claim that it can be used for cryptographic use on OP's page but they do claim it is a CSPRNG in the header in their js implementation: https://www.grc.com/js/uheprng.js

>This is GRC's cryptographically strong PRNG (pseudo-random number generator)

Don't use it for security or crypto. A CSPRNG should not allow the internal state to be determined from observing the output. The hash function Mash() they use is not one-way and this break can reverse it. It does not provide prediction resistance or backtracking resistance.
> absolutely NOTHING, good can come from this

Possibly NAS sales will be up as people do massive downloads instead of "watching online?"