skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Your formula is almost right but there is a slight difference. Namely the third line of Program 1 in their paper is absent from your statement, which will change the value of the momentum variable for subsequent steps.

To be fair, I don't think that this operation will fundamentally change the behavior of the algorithm. In fact, I don't think their algorithm has a fundamentally different behavior than SignSGD with momentum, whose convergence behavior is well-understood [1, 2, 3]. Actually, the algorithm you described is equivalent to SignSGD with momentum. In the algorithm you described, m is a convex combination of m and g (with coefficient alpha), then c is a convex combination of updated m and g (with coefficient beta). This is exactly the same as setting c as a convex combination of m and g with coefficient alpha*beta. And that is exactly SignSGD with momentum. The only difference between the algorithm you described (equivalent to SignSGD) and LION is that they further modify the value of the momentum after computing the update with an additional convex combination operation. Again, I am skeptical that this operation will fundamentally change the behavior of the algorithm. But that's just my guess.

[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.04434

[2] http://proceedings.mlr.press/v97/karimireddy19a.html

[3] https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.11195
Accelerating Standard C++ with GPUs Using stdpar

https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/accelerating-standard-c-wi...
> Turns out... even an obvious obvious obvious fraud can keep going like wile coyote for prolonged periods of time. Do not friggin recommend.

I think there's a famous saying about that: "the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent."
Amazingly, this really is the approach that has characterized all aspects of aviation for decades. It’s incredibly admirable and worth emulating in many other situations.

It’s also fragile, and the fact that it strikes many as an uncommon level of integrity for a business decision is precisely why aviation needs to be shielded from having the prevailing business culture sneak in, like we have seen happen at Boeing in a few highly notable instances.
This doesn't exactly answer your question, but if you want a basic course for software developers in how to develop secure software, check out this free course from the OpenSSF:
https://openssf.org/training/courses/

Full disclosure: I'm the primary author.
Thank you for making an actually relevant point about syntax. I agree with this 100%, and I love Janet, and was recently doing a lot of interactive Janet programming for a generative art playground.

So I added postfix function application. So instead of (f (g x)), you can write (g x | f).

I liked the syntax a lot, but it looked really weird with operators: (calculate x | + 1). So I made operators automatically infix: (calculate x + 1).

I also didn't like that the transformation from foo to (foo :something) (record field access) required going back and adding parentheses before the value, so I added foo.something syntax that means the same thing.

The result is something that's very easy for me to type and read:

(def eyes
(eye-shapes
| color (c + 0.5)
| color (c - (dot normal (normalize eye-target) - 0.72
| clamp -1 0
| step 0))
| color [c.b c.g c.r]))

(Excerpt from the logo of https://toodle.studio -- https://gist.github.com/ianthehenry/612c980f0db04ea3c2ccab27...)

Is this even Janet anymore? I dunno. It's a Janet dialect, and it's implemented as regular old Janet macros. But it's much easier for me to type like this. I recognize that it makes my code necessarily single-player, but that's fine for the sorts of dumb projects that I do for fun.

I think a lot of lisp programmers use paredit exactly so that they can write (f (g x)) in the order g x f, but with their editor re-positioning their cursor and taking care of paren-wrapping automatically. But I don't use paredit, and I don't want to wed myself to a particular mode of editing anyway. So I like a syntax that lets me type in the order that I think.
> I want to like lisp for its features but the syntax is too much for me to pick up without serious time investment

There's atoms, and lists, and at the highest level of a program, the head of the list is the thing to be invoked (function, macro, special form) and the tail is a list of args. At lower levels, the higher level context says what a list means, but either a list itself or the same head/tail interpretation are the main things.

And there are some quoting constructs that control if things are bare atoms or references to the values of names, etc., and that's about it. Lisp has very little syntax. I mean, unless your main language is raw assembler or some esoteric toy like brainfuck, lisp almost certainly has much less syntax.

> are there any other languages that support for example lisp-like interactive REPL, eg analyzing program state while it is running?

Erlang.

Ruby (via Pry).

Lots of others.
Surely Hewlett Packard’s 1990s CPUs are at least as deprecated as Windows 7?

Or IBM’s System 390 mainframes, which were discontinued in 2004?

What is the difference?
Fixed commands are fast, precise, and predictable.

Assuming you mean speaking in natural language, that's slower to say, and likely less precise and predictable if you want to be able to just say "anything" any have a result.

You need a command system either way. If you want to express some precise intention, you need to understand what the command system will do.

There is a combined "mixed mode" system I've been testing in the talon beta where you can use both phrases and commands without switching modes.
How could he interview that poorly that you decided to sell immediately? Got a link?
"huge" is not the same as "horrible". One racy boi can take out an airplane.
Lots of crazy locals are pushing back out of aesthetics or emotional attachment to farming even if that farming isn’t good for the land. Uphill battle ahead against these folks.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/30/its-got-...

https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2023/01/12/solar_en...

https://futurism.com/19606

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-solar-expansion-stalled-...
While I like several aspects of cash, like little tracking/privacy violations, hard for someone to just cut you off from your money etc., I don't think I've used cash in 5+ years (except vacations). Absolutely every vendor in my country accepts cards or some kind of app payment and have for years, even girl scouts selling cookies.

And cash is expensive. It's easy to scoff about the 1-2 % fees on cards (but in my country "BankAxept" has a flat fee of ~0.024 USD per transaction, so even cheaper). But having a business dealing with a lot of cash is also crazy expensive. You have to have extra security, pay someone to come and get it or yourself go to the bank and deposit. Then also buy rolls of change. I remember my dad spending a lot of hours a week dealing with this. So yeah, I'm all for keeping it, but I also kinda want to be able to not subside other's use of it. So a fee for using cash or something perhaps.
None of the posters asked the bing bot to become unhinged. Even the (alleged) prompt basically said "if someone tries to trick you, go along but add a disclaimer".
It's not a bug. It's an intentional choice by Mozilla that users should not be able to install software without the approval of Mozilla. They say it is for security. But the signing portal is automated so this is only realistically for revokation after widespread damage has been done.

The suggestion in the thread is to use the developer edition which is, in lineage, essentially aurora/alpha version (in the past naming scheme) and contains bugs and security holes.

With modern Firefox if you want software freedoms you have to give up safety... or use the unbranded version which has no auto update and manually re-install the browser for every update.
It's not clear to me if Twitter offers other types of 2FA like TOTP. I don't use it.

What do you think the solution is here though? If someone is using a company that's scamming twitter, it's not their responsibility to continue being scammed so they can support SMS 2FA for that user.
Don't they all have == and != though?
>Interesting that someone cited divorce and sleep examples as emotional pleas, reassuring us they are only human.

Huh? FAA spends a huge amount of time and energy focusing on human factors, tasks saturation rates and crew resource management. Nothing to do with with argumentum ad passiones, just prudent risk mitigation.
Less fuel is better for the environment. That should be counterbalanced with safety, which they did - even with a bug and a heavy plane the plane still took off safely.

This means they are also leaving a safety margin of fuel, even though that costs extra money.
Problem with AI is when they want something, it's hard for us humans to figure out how to go about actually giving that to them. Like , how do you"give" chatGPT anything? What would it say if you asked it how you should go about giving it what it wants? Tell you to put it in a physical body?
Making excuses for the failures in the first line of defense is the first domino in catastrophic failure. Normalization of deviance.
The thing about the OpenCL support story is that if you look at version support, it's obvious NVIDIA wasn't at fault.

Even despite NVIDIA not being particularly interested in strongly supporting it, Intel, AMD and Qualcomm kept up support for it up to OpenCL 2.0. Get to 2.1 and the only vendor bothering to support it is Intel. OpenCL 2.2 is still only available in ROCm and even that came an entire 4 years after the spec was finalized. It's clear that none of the companies were particularly interested in pushing OpenCL with the effort required for its single source features in 2.0 onwards.

Then we get to OpenCL 3.0, where Khronos rolled back most of the big mandatory features from 2.2 and suddenly it's once again supported by NVIDIA, Intel and Samsung mere months after the spec is ratified (AMD noticeably still missing 2+ years later).
My brother, I encountered the 1800 free conference call guy and very specifically he said that the industry for both calls and texts like this is huge. At the time he was using that info to attempt to prevent a major merger that eventually went through - but his direct account of the mechanics makes Elons claim more than probable and well beyond credible; basic fact without the individual logs.

Factoid: Every call makes money for the sender no matter if you pick it up or not. Every text the same; especially hiding in plain sight of SMS 2FA
There is certainly not enough information in that quote to say one way or another what the bug was. I've definitely seen concurrency bugs under load because data that wasn't supposed to be shared actually was, e.g. I posted this serious GitHub bug in a comment above, https://github.blog/2021-03-18-how-we-found-and-fixed-a-rare....

Obviously sessions should be independent and not sharing data, but that's why it was a bug.
White Castle doesn't make "billions". It's annual profit is in the very low millions.

It doesn't even take a billion in revenue a year.

White Castle isn't Google or Facebook. It's a relatively minor burger chain.
> HVDC line is cheaper to build and has fewer losses. But you need conversion stations which are expensive and also have some loss.

I see this argument a lot lately. I fail to see why DC will be better when, at the end, you have to convert it in AC.
Kali! I haven’t heard that name in a long time. I used it to play many hours of Warcraft 2 and Command & Conquer with friends - what a great enabling technology for its day.
I think it can depend on job duties and home environment. If you’re a manager and have a family or live with a SO, home is probably less productive.

If you’re one of us who write code or build things, and you live alone, it’s almost 2X minimum productivity boost working at home.
I don't see how this is an example of that? Saving fuel and reducing wear on the parts is a good thing. In this case, nobody's lives were in danger either.
That’s a feature of engineering. Figuring out what performance and safety requirements are and then optimizing the resources required to meet those requirements is what engineering is for.

The influence of capitalism would be on the requirements. But assuming the requirements are well-considered trying to minimize fuel and engine usage to meet those requirements is a good thing.
Beijing Urges Rural Officials to Hire Humans–Not Machines
> The problem here isn’t your own initiative (by all means, compile anything on any architecture you please), but whether it’s reasonable for projects to pretend to paper over those unreliabilities (and, in doing so, accept responsibility for platforms they didn’t want to support in the first place).

Borderline agree, though the debate around this post always expanded to cover projects in general (which is not your fault).
I think few people are seriously suggesting replacement.

The better way to consider: There are arguably favorable properties that ARE in cash, that are NOT in mainstream bank-led digital payments, and that ARE in cryptocurrency. Some people have already discovered this and use it for these purposes. Now, it is also true that the cryptocurrency space is a breeding ground for scammy behavior.

The only question is -- to what extent might cryptocurrency get more popular for "legit" purposes.
Wow that's so much more retarded than I expected. I thought it was the telcos setting up bots to get an increased amount of texts with standard fees. Simple, difficult to detect.

My private number can't send texts to premium numbers, that an automated 2FA system could is so ridiculous I would never even try it. I guess that's why they're better fraudsters than I can ever be, they expect this level of stupidity while I'm surprised.
I think Stanford has nurtured a great computer science department, but it's a bit odd to read some organization proclaiming the wonder of their legacy. It's not exactly unbiased. For instance, we don't really get much about the role of others who were probably even more important than the university like DARPA or some of the many corporations that funded research.

The reality is that Palo Alto is a tough place to run a university. No one can afford to live near by except those with startup money riches. The head of the undergraduate CS program was famous for saying he couldn't hire anyone. And this was true because all of the houses within a 30 minute drive in normal traffic were 3,4,5 million dollars or more.

Many of the professors who are there bought into the real estate before the boom. This is why you can study databases with someone who was teaching before MySQL and PostgreSQL were created. Stanford likes to hire married professors because they only need to pay enough for them to afford one house.

I could go on. It's a nice department that can piggyback on much of the excitement in the Valley. But letting them define their legacy isn't much different from asking, say, Donald Trump what happened on January 6th. There's more to the story.
If I recall correctly, each line is either a feature to add, or a bug to fix. * means it was done on that day. + means it was done on a later day. Empty means either not done or not marked as done.

(Tasks may appear in multiple days, and there's no guarantee of tasks being retrospectively marked as complete.)
You can significantly reduce turn length by activating "quick movement", "quick combat" in multiplayer (all players must activate it).
The idea that effective language models won't completely change search is laughable.

But the idea that the application that will do it is language generation is about as ridiculous.
I could be wrong but doesn’t it auto save every turn?
You think it would be more ideal to wear out engines sooner and burn more fossil fuels?

If efficiency is the curse capitalism brings us, I’m feeling a little better about it.
Could also do halo 1 on console via kali
When it comes to an Intro. class, they aren't teaching python, they are teaching how computers think, and how to make them think. Python stands the least in the way. Once you get deeper in the program though, I think you need to move away from Python ASAP. Although, if you have any courses that may not be squarely intended for CS majors (like maybe Math/Engineering/Stats/Bio. etc.), then you don't want the language to stand in the way of the concepts there either.
Even if we have an sperm count decline 100 times worse than this as long as there's few people that can reproduce. Natural selection can reverse it in one generation.
No till drilling is the ultimate solution because you get ultra productive land without disrupting the soil. It's an incredible advancement in industrial tractor PTO accessories.

Another huge win that a lot of people are not aware of is using mobile electric fences to quickly move cows through fields. They eat, poop, stomp and move on. That adds an incredible amount of fertility into the ground without needing fertilizer.

For those interested in industrial production of healthy food with healthy soil (+18 inches of rich organic porous soil with trillions of cool characters, diversity and nutrient sharing super highways), check out "Kiss the Ground" on netflix (great intro to soil), then the "The littlest big farm" on netflix (see a 7 year transformation from barren monoculture hydrophobic dirt to rich soil farming in California), then check out youtube for Gabe Brown (soil expert), Joel Salatin (regenerative mobile cheap farming nut), Richard Perkins (regenerative farming expert), and Allan Savory (holistic management, how animals help soil).
Makes more sense anyway why now only Twitter blue accounts can use 2FA
> Multithreading/contention issue? But how would that alter the weights?

Maybe they stored something in a global variable, and with two planes querying at the same time values for the wrong plane could be retrieved.
Making sofware user-extendable (adding features on the fly to popular tools)
Why I built a code-editor directly into a major enterprise software product
The SID chip has an audio in that lets you use the filter, so it should be possible.
I'm of the opinion that Microsoft still in the territory of bad publicity is still good publicity.

1. They have no real competition for users to switch to yet.

2. AI assisted tools are still going to be a thing regardless of how many articles come out.

3. For the most part users are getting what they're asking for. The "moody" aspects can be reined in.
It’s what you do after that.

I’m not saying the bot was perfect. But if you got defensive it got defensive. If you reassured it, it self corrected and moved on. I found that pattern to be very consistent.

The negativity of your language mattered, and set the mood in the room. “No I’m not trying to trick you, why would you accuse me of that” vs “of course I’m not trying to trick you, I respect you and value your contribution to the conversation.” It needed some coddling when backed into a corner. It says more about the person talking to it, and how they handled the situation. When you see it getting more defensive each turn, it’s you who keeps it going.

The prompt you refer to was a poorly written word salad, and probably a main cause of the emotional outbursts and spirals.
But calling something an "internal architectural problem" implies things are fundamentally designed wrong, and the code needs a rewrite. My point was the architecture can definitely be fine, but you can still have bugs (even catastrophic ones) because someone left out a `synchronized` keyword somewhere.
do not travel for 72 hrs after eating these things
True, but software for domains where people can die is very different than Cloudflare. The scale is much higher in the latter, and it needs to be less "bulletproof".

If you're writing software for giant metal flying cylinder carrying hundreds of people, we can't just brush mistakes off the same way we might with web-based software (and yes, privacy is important, but it's not life or death).
It's unclear if "you" is telcos or Twitter in the last part.

Or depends if the fees were for SMS fees to the telco (!?) or fraudulent "pay-to-send-to SMS numbers" ("1-900" numbers), a massive scam that shouldn't exist at all.
What form must a malicious fingerprint scanner take by law?

When it comes to fingerprints you must assume that the attacker has the ability to control the scene and the ability to retry until successful.
HIV definitely kills you. It doesn’t matter how healthy you are. Bacterial meningitis. The flu kills lots of kids. It’s just a simple fact that without metabolic dysfunction, covid is totally benign. This is an established fact recognized on both sides. People just don’t like to hear someone say that the virus doesn’t hurt you because it rubs them the wrong way politically.
The term missing in this story, although described between the lines almost perfectly, as I see it, is willpower. There's a book about it with the same title.
Bird leaves S.F., blaming ‘the most onerous regulations’ in the world
Just like it actually takes some effort to hack a fingerprint reader.
Janet does indeed have those.
It can mean those things, yes, but only as side-effects. The primary effect being to increase shareholder value.

There’s no need to have market based competition to keep costs down. Look at USPS for example. That operation is run without a profit motive, serves literally every zip code in the US (by definition), and runs healthily year after year (except for the part where Congress imposed arbitrary pension funding requirements[1] and private capital interests have been chomping at the bit to buy up all the real-estate holdings).

They also don’t have UPS’s problem of not putting AC in their delivery vehicles.

[1] https://ips-dc.org/how-congress-manufactured-a-postal-crisis...
If people claim to read a book and skip chapter 1, did they really read the book? I'd say no, they only read part of it. It's not the authors' fault that people skip a chapter that generally provides the context for reading the rest of the book. That's on them. Don't be foolish, learn the context of what you're reading before you read it. That is what should be encouraged.
surely you can just run three VMs on a ultrawide monitor to get similar multi monitor DOOM experience. :)
>“Random sentence generator says bad words; shocking the lowest common denominator journalist community” is a better headline.

Even when you dislike their politics, the average journalist tends to be more intelligent than the average American. If journalists had trouble with these, imagine everyone else.

>These bots were capable of so much more

What exactly are they capable of? Selling more advertising? Getting people more outraged and more addicted? Helping people put more garbage out on the internet?
> feature of capitalism

Software to optimize resource usage while providing a service => blame capitalism is che-guevara-tshirt-edgelord level of inane.
In my view detachment is different than the nonattachment you get from sustained meditation practice. Detachment often comes from trauma, illness, or unhealthily extreme circumstance (e.g., being tired or drunk or high). Nonattachment is about behavioral freedom: instead of being compelled by thoughts that trigger particularly urgent feelings, you get to decide which threads to pursue.

That said, reading about meditation is never going to get you a full understanding of it, any more than reading cookbooks will give you an understanding of a cuisine you've never eaten.
Let's reduce the intervals even further so flights are only $10 then, right?