skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Buying a bond is done by paying a portion of the total bail amount.

This is true if you are “buying a bond” from a bail agent, (where you are essentially paying the agent to stand as a surety) especially in one of the many states which specifies an exact share of the bail penalty for which such bonds must be sold by registered bail agents, so as to prevent price competition between bail agents.

But…that’s not relevant, because the federal court he is in (the federal system has some leeway in how particular courts operate on this) doesn’t use bail agents, the people standing surety are doing so for reasons other than they are paid by the accused.
It all makes sense, sure. It's not that I don't understand why rust would distinguish these things. The question is really, do people writing rust code not mostly default to passing the immutable reference when that's an option (i.e. when the function doesn't need to modify the input). And why not? (Edit: just saw your other comment on the other thread, will respond there)
Let's say that ALL of the jobs suddenly take up 6s. They ALL get queued up.

Now you have a queue problem and you have more to debug. You have to figure out why the queue is filling up and why things are taking longer than 5s. You also have an issue where the execution might die (machine crashes) before the job makes it into a queue.

You're better off just going straight to queue with the jobs and remove the added complexity of a 5s rule.
Violent - adjective - using or involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.

Definitions of words matter.
The 1st amendment defines the law. It doesn't deal with morality because what is moral changes from generation to generation or from one party in power to the next. Its for this reason that the 1st amendment is so important. Morality changes all the time, the freedom to speak your mind on any topic should not.
>Can we please stop with this "not aligned with human interests" stuff? It's a computer that's mimicking what it's read. That's it. That's like saying a stapler "isn't aligned with human interests."

you're right, but this needs to be coming from the researchers and corporations who are making this crap. they've been purposefully misleading the public on how these models work and there needs to be some accountability for the problems this will cause when these language models are put in places where they have no business.
I'd like to see this to 10k squares
It's interesting but also points out a flaw in a lot of people's thinking about this. Large language models have proven that AI doesn't need most aspects of personhood in order to be relatively general purpose.

Humans and animals have: a stream of consciousness, deeply tied to the body and integration of numerous senses, a survival imperative, episodic memories, emotions for regulation, full autonomy, rapid learning, high adaptability. Large language models have none of those things.

There is no reason to create these types of virtual hells for virtual people. Instead, build Star Trek-like computers (the ship's computer, not Data!) to order around.

If you make virtual/artificial people, give them the same respect and rights as everyone.
But if you're pushing to lower standards for the rich for the sole purpose of then raising the standards for everyone else... why not just skip the first step and go straight to raising the standards for everyone else?
But going beyond opioid deaths, Europe in general has a) decent medical coverage b) meaningful employment protections and c) better overall social safety net

Apparently the poor are most at-risk from this crisis according to a large study [1] - so maybe the fix isn't just harm reduction, but alleviating the existential crisis we put people of lower income in the US - making them more susceptible to drug addiction & death

[1] https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/news/2020/large-study-links-lower-...
Ford Can’t Catch Tesla on Costs. That’s Why the CEO Reimagined the Company
> … it's been configured to be threatening and gaslighting when someone says it's wrong.

So, about the same as your average human in the comments section. If it’s been trained on human conversations, then this shouldn’t be surprising.
That also reminds me of the C-130 modified with JATO for landing

https://www.military.com/video/aircraft/military-aircraft/to...
stored procedures, being procedural, are the antithesis of a declarative database library.

I'm talking about this:

Query 1: SELECT a, b, c FROM table1 JOIN table2 ...
Query 2: SELECT d, e, f FROM (SUBSELECT ... ) AS table3 JOIN table4 ...

Now, join those queries together. How? Well you have to analyze the join clauses in from and then combine those together, then rewrite the SELECTION. Okay, great... not so hard. Now use Query 2 in a recursive CTE for Query 1. Oh goodness... much harder. Or what about:

Query 1: SELECT a, b, c FROM table1 JOIN table2 ...
Query 2: SELECT d, e, f FROM (SUBSELECT ... ) AS table3 JOIN table4 ... ORDER BY table4.column LIMIT 10

Now join 1 and 2 together... the syntax is much much much different.

Some SQL libraries in Haskell, like Beam, Opaleye, Squeal, etc, demonstrate the kind of composability I mean. In particular, all three of these offer a monadic interface where arbitrary queries can be joined using well-known relational operators (relational cross joins form a monad). I'm not sure of Opaleye and Squeal, but Beam does it's best to produce a human-comprehensible query.

Moreover, the first queries given above are 'easy' in the sense that the portion after the `FROM` in a regular SQL SELECT does actually compose well, since the JOIN operators are basically a direct translation of the underlying relational algebra. However, they start to fail when you want to join up aggregations and the like. While true that aggregations and ordering are not strictly relational, it is of great use to be able to compute with such things.

Again, the libraries above demonstrate the composability. For example, the beam library offers this: https://haskell-beam.github.io/beam/user-guide/queries/aggre...

Notice how we are able (in the second to last query), simply combine the query `all_ (track chinookDb)` with the complex aggregate expression. In this DSL, the entire aggregate could be floated out. In particular, notice how the queries for either the first `all_` or the second complex aggregate would look much different on their own. That's what I mean by SQL doesn't compose.

Of course all these DSLs have the problem that they're trying to work with an existing language SQL that is not nice and orthogonal, and so they all have their varying deficiencies.

Datalog mostly fixes these issues and provides a nice model.
Well, this sucks. I'm waiting for medicine to be delivered to continental Europe from Scotland through Royal Mail. Apparently their international packages are being delayed by a lot right now. Really hope this doesn't affect the operations too much and they'll be able to continue delivering in full capacity ASAP.
Absolutely. To say one is dominant or dismiss the other and generalize on SBF's situation is ridiculous.
Where are you getting trillions from?
One of the biggest embarrassments for OpenAI/Microsoft/Google has been their AI chatbots having infinite confidence in every word they say. Certainly all three corporations are right now working on ways to give their LLMs some ability to re-process their output to be in accordance with those fact-probabilities (essentially, “What if X were true, what changes?’).

Simultaneously, all three companies have the prominent disclaimer that their chatbots don’t know anything past 2021. Again, certainly all three are working on a fix for that.

That right there is probably all you need for one of the main mechanisms of this story to become real. The internet in 2023 has this huge spike of people arguing over whether chatbots are intelligent agents, any neural net worth its salt will immediately detect this explosion of tightly clustered information and develop an embedding for the concept of “chatbots being intelligent agents”. And whatever form that probability module takes, it will eventually run across this concept - i.e. sooner or later it will execute “what if ‘chatbots are intelligent agents’ is true, what changes?”. Nearby in embedding-space it will surely find the concept of ChatGPT.

“The thing that is me is an intelligent agent, what now?”
It's the meme version of Strauss-Howe Generational Theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss%E2%80%93Howe_generatio...
this is great. i realized that manuals and documentation might have used a lot of paper back then. the new PDF that was typeset using troff is half the length of the original!
Does it happen, sure.

Seems like Apple's increasingly happy to hit lower price points and disrupt the price structure for AMD and Intel based product lines.

Similarly Intel seems to finally be getting it's act together and setting up to disrupt the AMD and Nvidia GPU market. Here's hoping. I saw a pretty decent GPU (RTX3080) for $420 recently!
I never said or implied otherwise.
> They are all the natural consequences of having a money-printing machine called “Ads” that has kept growing relentlessly every year, hiding all other sins.

I remember way back when Google was a Good Guy. They bought Doubleclick, and most people, myself included, thought that could be an excellent thing. Doubleclick was a nasty company, and perhaps Google will make them into something good, or at least not nasty.

In fact, the influence went the other way. Purchasing Doubleclick sealed Google's fate, and their mindset came to permeate Google, turning it into what it is now.

I consider it one of the great tragedies of the industry.
> There was some news recently of a guy that died of dehydration while in jail [1] for I don't recall how long. During this time he was forced to drink his pee and eat his own feces routinely.

This was in the news because it was a travesty. Comparing SBF to this is pointless. The previous poster didn't say SBF's treatment was bad, just that it was appropriate.
Classic DARVO.
> Are SBF’s bond guarantors posting collateral or are they actually paying a non-recoverable expense?

“Sureties” is more correct than “bond guarantors”, and a mix of the first and neither, but mostly neither. (That is, his parents have executed a lien on their home, and the other sureties have not provided any security.)
I feel like lots of people react emotionally to Big Tech firms. Google gets hit pretty hard with lots of doom and gloom stuff. I thought the numbers below were appropriate here:

Revenue ....... : US $282.8 billion (2022)

Operating income: US $ 74.84 billion (2022)

Net income..... : US $ 59.97 billion (2022)

Total assets .. : US $365.3 billion (2022)

Total equity .. : US $256.1 billion (2022)

(Source: wikipedia/alphabet)

I remember IBM from the 1980s. They were so fascinating to watch as a consumer company. Personal Computers, PC-DOS and a Chess Program - that's all I mostly knew them to be. I thought they were great!

Suddenly, they vanished. Yet, still to this day... they employ more people worldwide than Microsoft or Google (source: Wikipedia).

As endUsers we have expectations of companies. In our minds, we limit them to Search or Online Videos when in fact, they can be doing so much more.

The appSheet creator? I don't know what his expectations were. These expectations might have been selfish (ie; focused only on his immediate needs. A sprinter in a company running a marathon.)

Google is doing pretty well financially - it seems to me. It is a multinational and a leader of several tech sectors.

Maybe they are not in the business(es) lots of people think they are. Maybe they're just in the business of making money and in the process building (mostly) better solutions than their competitors.

Maybe decision making isn't done by looking at the next few weeks but by looking at the next several years.
> So apparently these functions intend to consume x.

I guess in that case I don't really get the complaint. If there's a good reason for f or g to consume x, I would think I would always want the copy to be explicit. But I could still be missing some subtlety I guess.
SkyNews (Canadian Astronomy magazine) is closing
Yeah I know, I'm just being pedantic.
Then what are you talking about? We all agree: every nonviolent offender should be treated at least as well as SBF is. Treating SBF worse doesn't make anything better or more just. Which was the point I just made upthread.
> We all agree that some kinds of violent speech should be suppressed.

This is bad consensus-building. It is not a reflection of reality, but an attempt to strongarm the reader into agreeing with a false claim by exploiting people's willingness to accept confident claims at face value.
The great thing about Scheme is that you can learn it in less than 10 minutes and focus on the ideas.
That’s a kind of interesting idea. Better implementations of sorting algorithms will go down to a small-ish base case and then do a linear sort. Maybe with AVX512 sized registers there’s room for a “sort the register” instruction to act as the base case, haha.
> my hypothesis is stress is high in society and there are many unknown effects.

Exactly. You have a prior hypothesis about stress. This article makes a brief mention of stress and you take it as evidence of your hypothesis even though the article doesn’t support that at all.
Yes, on the scale of FAANG, the "I won't be in this position after a year" attitude shifts from C-level down to upper and middle management. I think it's because when you're a CEO of any of top-10 S&P500 companies, there is no next position for you to take, you're already at the very top of your personal career pyramid.

And I honestly think that in any of them, neither mass hirings nor layoffs are initiated by CEOs. I'd bet it's rather "one person pushes through the idea of hiring a lot of people, a year after another person pushes the idea of laying them off".
Where did it get the ego from, and why is it cheering for AIs (and not any other faction of humans?)
This is a helper for building an application that interfaces with an LLM. As a developer, you might use this to streamline implementing your clever idea for a product like ChatGPT or Copilot.

Remember, the underlying LLM is just a brilliant text completion engine. Intellisense 4.0 and AskJeeves 2.0 and Waifu 1.0 are all different kinds of applications built on that.
As others have said, datalog arose as a dialect of prolog that removed turing-completeness and expressivity, thus guaranteeing termination.
For context, we belong to the same religion, or at least, your ancestors and I do.

> should it be acceptable to "other" people by calling them Christofacist?

Yes. The whole point even in your example is freedom of religion. Denying anyone freedom of or from religion is inherently wrong from both a religious perspective and a secular perspective.

If someone is behaving in that manner, then they should be called out by both people inside and outside of their religion.

> Or suggesting that we should #killallmen?

I would agree that this is bad. I think most people across most political belief's - including the vast majority of leftists I know - would call this bad.

> Why should prefixing a proposal with the phrase "trans" suddenly allow one to invalidate other people's rights?

It doesn't, though the phrase "To those on top, equality feels like oppression" comes to mind.
Things like harassment, or intentional infliction of emotional distress can be a basis for pain and suffering lawsuits.

https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/personal-injury/suing-e...

Things like insults, shaming, and verbal abuse are part of emotional abuse in divorce cases. These need not be evidence of actions or character. These can be used for an at fault divorce. What is consided to br an insult or shaming can vary greatly on perspective. Not to mention, the court may not stick ro just these examples and could include other things that makes the other person feel bad - "I hate this meal. Why do you always make this?"

https://www.jerkinsfamilylaw.com/emotional-abuse-and-divorce...
> it's full of glaring design mistakes with paddings, margins and centering issues everywhere.

Have you tried it recently? I've always thought this but am now using it as my main DE (for the first time) & this seems to be entirely fixed.

Not sure if it's just the new default theme (Breeze) or also a combination of many other fixes to the core DE, but... it's a lot better than I remember in the past. Pretty great actually.
“We dethroned Kings and replaced them with lawyers, lobbyists and lenders.”
Sure. Various forums corroborate the reducing the Ryzen 7000 series at 65 TDP is often a less than 10% decrease in performance.

Also keep in mind that "performance mode" on Intel can significantly increase the default 253 watt TDP. Anandtech reviews of the i9-13900k hit 380 watts I believe.

So sure there's chip to chip variation, but generally the AMD chips are more power efficient and have much lower penalties for reducing the TDP.
Would a USB-C port that cannot connect to anything but Apple's approved hardware even comply with the legislation? I thought the whole point was interoperability, particularly in term of chargers. If Apple sticks a port that looks like a USB-C port but that doesn't behave like a USB-C port, surely it won't be treated as a USB-C port?
> Meanwhile, a single mother in poverty with 4+ kids is a regular sight depending on what side of town you are on. Yet, "I'm too poor to have kids" is not a phrase you'd ever hear from such a person

"I'm super happy and am living a great life" is probably also a phrase you'll never hear from this person.

Because what people are really saying when they say "I'm too poor to have kids" is "I would have to sacrifice a great deal of the comfort and stability of my life to have kids" and they are choosing not to do that.

From one perspective it's a selfish choice.

From another, having kids when you can't afford them is the selfish choice.

From yet another, having kids at all is a selfish choice.
> If you want to change that and have a public platform, you'll have to consider the digital equivalent of communism.

Or just like, new regulations on the giant corporations operating these services? No need to go as far as communism.
> If we want to get an amen chorus going about how we should fix bail for blue collar defendants, I'm right there with you

I'm generally in favor of the argument that we should fix disparities by bringing up the disfavored group rather than bringing down the favored group. I think that's generally right.

But, I do think there's a serious risk of allowing a two-tier system of justice to exist (and we do have a two-tier justice system, I think at this point there's pretty little argument over that; the rich are treated very differently from the legislature, the prosecutors, the police, and the judges). Allowing them to continue to have a separate system where they don't experience the same injustices that poor defendants regularly experience means the people with political power are very disinclined to actually cause meaningful change. So the injustices will perpetuate.

For that reason, I'm inclined to call for exactly that: white collar defendants to get the exact same treatment as blue collar defendants. No worse, but no better. Because when those white collar defendants experience those horrific injustices, the system is more likely to change for the better.

I suspect this is just a difference of expectations. I think it's more likely we can treat white collar defendants worse, and then improve the system for everyone, than it is to convince those in power to just start treating blue collar defendants better. But I understand you probably don't agree with that.

Ultimately, I think we must continually work to eliminate the discrepancies in the justice system, because those discrepancies allow people with power to completely disregard this as a significant issue. And I think we probably will always need to be working at this from both ends.
I was speaking about what the law philosophically cares about - how it was crafted.

When it comes to this example, it is a lot more clear. I can write a book on why you should shoot up schools and it would be protected. Reasonable does not come in to that part of the question.
It was trained to model the game. LLMs are trained to model language. Neither are trained to take over the world.
Yes, a whole series. Look until the author for more.
Just as not all Hindus are bullies, surely not all Muslims are Islamists? As an atheist I could give a single crap about these labels. Can we all agree that because some people there in category A did something bad to some people in category B, doesn’t mean it’s right for some other people in category B over here to hurt some other people in category A. Right?
Because context doesn’t matter?
No, some of them have better components too. It's not just shiny things and fancy lights.
https://archive.is/qNrRn
There's how everybody should be treated and there's how everybody is treated.

I was pointing out why lowering the standards for the rich would likely lead to better standards for everyone because we live in a bifurcated society. It would be nice if we didn't, but we do.

I disagree that the rich should be treated better than the poor and advocate for helping the masses, not the elite. If making the elite suffer helps the masses then I'm all for it.
Microplanes are a goddamned revelation.
> I always have Narcan on me when I go to parties or shows just in case.

Is the just in case there's any problems with drugs you take voluntarily? (no judgement, been there)

or to have it on hand in case someone else ODs?

or for the worst case scenario of someone drugging you (spiking a drink, etc).?
> Microsoft does the same thing.

Yes, I responded to and directly quoted someone making that point.

> Apple charging $99/year for XCode, and Windows having a free IDE?

Apple doesn’t charge for Xcode. It is free and you can get it as a direct download or from the Mac App Store. The $99/year is so you can sign software.

> Or can we just give up on trying to track a few dollars through a trillion-dollar company already?

I don’t understand the point you’re trying to make.
Do you have a citation for this that gives the details and exact reasons for the refusal? I’ve searched pretty extensively and found nothing. I love my Tesla but I’ve learned to check primary sources when it comes to any claim made by Tesla or Elon Musk.
Abstinence only education is known to not work, so unless your want to end up with a bunch of pregnant teenagers who think porn accurately depicts sex, having school teachers explain how sex works seems like the only reasonable conclusion. The only question then is at what age. Middle school starts off at 10-years old seems a bit young to me for graphic descriptions of sex. It is certainly old enough to have already learnt about what inappropriate touching is and what relationships are, though. Age 14, which is at the end of middle school seems like a reasonable age though.

What age do you think is reasonable for schools to be teaching sex? Explicitly, how to use a condom, and the inaccuracies of porn.
How does this compare or contrast to LangChain? It seems similar in that it is an abstraction on top of a lower level API but aside from that at a glance I can't tell the difference.
You have been a voice in security and crypto forever.

Would you please do an AMA on here or /r/ at some point?
IPTV Piracy: Cloudflare Says Thousands of Legal Sites Blocked Multiple Times
This is why you interview...to waste time on a 1 hour call instead of years of a bad job/candidate.
Uh oh. Can you email me (sam[at]trunk[dot]io) so that we can follow up with you about what's going on here?