skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
No, if, and match, and most things are expressions, and thus have a (typed) value.

In a typical programming language we can write something like x = 5; assigning 5 to the variable x. That 5 there is an expression, we can write x = (3 * 2) - 1; with the same effect, that's a more complicated expression. We can call a function here: x = f(3); or if our language has methods we can even call those: x = some.function(parameters);

In Rust I can write x = if it.should_be_nine() { 9 } else { 5 }; // because if is an expression

Since Rust's loops are also expressions, x = loop { let stuff = get_stuff(); if stuff.is_good() { break stuff } }; // ... once the stuff is good, break out of the loop and we'll assign that stuff to x
The more time goes on the more I start thinking a clean wipe of the entire thing might be in order. Linux is great and all, but it's so full of old crap.

It's getting better, but all the old crap still just sticks around fragmenting everything, and there's still no container system that can match APKs, because there's no API level to build to, every system is different, and everyone tries to support 50 different configurations.

Nmcli would be part of the OS itself if this were android or windows, and there wouldn't be ConMan and others unless you fork the whole OS or use some plugin API.
What's the advantage of OpenCL if it still only works good on Nvidia? Because it has "Open" in the name? You are acting like it was Nvidia holding OpenCL back, but I'm not convinced that was the case.
In my experience if the authors get their wish then both will look 20-years-old.
Immediately followed by many, many pages recommending that you add asbestos for flavoring, or lead for color.

A disclaimer doesn't change whether something is done or not. And it's a rather small fig leaf compared to the rest of the book.
I'm not sure why you started with "This is wrong" and then went on to talk about a completely different game?

In any case, I'm not expert in MOBA AI, but they are much more complicated than go just as go is to chess. So it will take longer, but it's unlikely the long-term outcome will be any different as long as Google etc keep working on it.
Honestly, to me it is unreadable. Defining function inside a function inside yet another function where you use a for loop kind of function.

It requires a much different line of thinking to be applicable in the real world, which goes against historic human nature of following specific instructions, one instruction at a time.
I have heard a story but it could well be apocryphal. This happened during the second world war. A bunch of random people from different social classes were forced to be without food for a considerable time. Some overweight aristocracts died of starvation first. Somebody probably knows the actual source.
In other words, they’re asking for funding and a clear plan per project. OWASP does the Maven dependency scanner, which relies on the NIST db.

As a small software vendor, buying other security scanning solutions is very expensive, and they still aren’t as accurate as a pentester investigating our code.

Would it be a good idea if OWASP had a paid service where companies would pay for the verification of OSS libraries (hi NPM!)? and that would innocent you in front of EU’s diligence requirements?
I always refer to this link: https://web3isgoinggreat.com/
You're wrong.

if (cheapCheck() && expensiveCheck()) { ... }

is not equivalent to

bool cheap = cheapCheck();
bool expensive = expensiveCheck();
if (cheap && expensive) { ... }

unless we're in a lazy pure functional language.
Nice account you've got there
Boils down to “need balance”.
You cant but you can place a very high probability on it.

With genetic diseases often the difference between healthy and not is a single enzyme is missing.

If you can prove the enzyme level is restored and all the downstream effects match healthy individuals, youve basically restored them to what healthy people are.

Durability of the change is the big issue. Some gene therapies wane over time.

And of course if damage had occurred before the gene therapy, that may never go away.
https://cycle.travel/ for the planning but their Android app isn't released yet.

Next best might be komoot. I don't like the app's voice (personal preference) and it's very strict avoiding private roads which to be honest I tend to ignore when cycling, especially when cycling some remote forrest. Komoot is great with keeping history, sending you a summary.

I use alltrails.com (premium) for planning multi-day trips. Great online editor. While finding tracks it's a mix of alltrails and komoot lately.

For inner-city navigation I'm happy with https://organicmaps.app/ It does have voice output, saving places, finding nearby restaurants. But it doesn't have the advanced features like knowing which roads are cleared of snow in winter (does any app have that?)

For off-road and multi-day I use a dedicated Garmin Edge devise. Mobile phones have most features these days but I find a dedicated devise less distracting. Also battery lasts several days.
Hm. Maybe get it from Anna’s Archive and send the author a tip if you like it. It’s an old book. And he’s responsive.

There is an article by the author that covers some of the topics of the book, which is freely available as a PDF:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1284070/pdf/jab...
Ive been in situations like your drunk director and usually it just caused a power vacuum followed by power struggles. The headstrong people contested high level decisions and without some sort of final arbiter the result was a mess. It never ended well.

I'm kind of suspicious about this story. It sounds either apocryphal or like a key piece is missing.
The best practice is to write the test by knowing all the scenarios.

Usually this is the practice I have seen successful in all the big projects

- unit test for each function

- Functional Integration test to test the building blocks and functions together (for example rest API with business layer and database

- BDD Behavior driven development where you write automated test to test your business scenarios by initializing the seed data in the test systems

- Performance testing

If you have freelancer who charge per hour or if you have consultants which are expensive - they will write too many test and there code will be so complex in the end that when you want to hire permanent employees or other freelancers they will say "I would like to rewrite it"

The developers now a days like to do clean coding and for simple things they discuss too much even for a program of 2 + 2. there will be endless discussions and in some companies (diverse or multi culture) developers are always under mining each other with what they like and don't like
It would be a major breakthrough if the AI could plausible adapt to the human players.

Every one gets a challenge (or not if they chose so). We are probably not quite there yet.
It's a shame the new Lisps tend to not rip off Common Lisp's type system, being able to declare my types and having SBCL admonish me when I'm doing something stupid is something I would hate to lose.
"Twitter to remove 2FA by SMS for non Twitter Blue users" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34846257) is a better non-clickbait title.
I agree you get better return from seniors, which is why everybody wants to hire seniors. But we get new seniors by training juniors/letting them get experience. I think 5 juniors + 1 senior isn’t the way to do it, you should have at least 1 senior per junior (better still more seniors than juniors). Then you still get stuff done (maybe a bit less than if you didn’t have the juniors) and a few years later you have a couple new useful intermediate developers (and a few years after that they’ll be experienced seniors).
This is a gem! Can someone confirm if this is safe? I couldn’t find indication of my information shared with the servers but want to be sure I didn’t miss something
The information provided is a little sparse but I would consider hiring a person for a fixed term contract of 2-3 months and then use the freed up time to split 50/50 between QA'ing their code (and perhaps picking up some tips and tricks) and studying/MVP'ing.

After the 2/3 months is up - Re-Evalute the situation.
the turing test is a test of intelligence, not consciousness and certainly not self-consciousness.
The blog post explains why it's the opposite, not using recursive locks kills two birds with a stone because you know which invariants are enforced at locking boundaries. Therefore, functions that take the lock know exactly what invariants to expect, those that are called with the lock taken don't.

It's the opposite of spaghetti code.
Literally a one-liner that is way more readable than whatever that was in the OP example.
For gene therapy?

The economics would never work out unless premiums were sky high or the insurance is mandatory or across most of your population.

It only works if premiums are spread across a large population so a $2.5M therapy becomes a $1 increase in premium for 2.5M people.
If you like htop you'd appreciate btop as well
This is why in Europe it was the government that took over private museums and collections.

In the Netherlands they have recently opened a giant storage complex with all the art that the country has acquired over the last 200 years.

https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/nl/over-ons/wat-we-doen/ccnl
Exploiting your opponent's weaknesses seems like a perfectly cromulent strategy to me, whether your opponent is made of meat or silicon. Go humans!
> Maybe get it from Anna’s Archive

Yeah I looked for it there and in other places, but there doesn't seem to be any digital copy available at all (legal or otherwise)
Nvidia delivered a good solution with cuda. You are whining about them not investing as hard in opencl. What if focusing on cuda was what they thought would let them deliver a good result for users? Lack of focus and sustained investment is part of issue w amd and others. If openCL is the hot thing that nvidia supposedly purposely delaying was a great opportunity for amd and intel to eat their lunch. Where were they?
I think this is a great point thats not being acknowledged. There's a distinction in psychology between intellectual understanding and insight. Insight involves "the expansion of the ego by self-observation, memory recovery, cognitive participation, and reconstruction in the context of affective reliving". i.e.: Realising on a deep emotional level that something is true and integrating that into our core understanding of the world.

In this case we have a dissonance between an intellectual understanding that these models are in some sense just predicting where the conversation should go, and our false insight that they are persons. The illusion of emotion and engagement is strong and getting stronger.

It starts with folks like Blake Lemoine, but ultimately we're all vulnerable. Just as we're vulnerable to increasingly tailored and sophisticated forms of media manipulation. An understanding of the mechanics of media narratives, broadcasting etc is not a strong enough defence.

The 'insight fallacy' is the idea that understanding the nature of a problem will be enough to solve it. In this case we have a whole bunch of people studying alignment, and attempting to understand the kind of interior models LLMs form. While simultaneously improving them and commodifying them.

It goes beyond a perverse profit incentive. As a species we have a deep desire for non-human companionship - be it in the form of spirits, aliens, A.I. or even pets. We seem determined to create it, and wildly emotionally vulnerable to it in even the most primitive forms. From ELIZA on down, when people have engaged with conversational agents, they have overridden our better judgement. False insight and false friendship, is a major social vulnerability.
Yes, it does. But not user-generated data files.
Surely an organisation the size of twitter runs their own SMPP gateway or SMSC? Which would make each text cost a fraction of a cent?
C99 with code generators written in python or lua for the engine. Implementing templates in the C preprocessor goes pretty badly, but implementing them as a normal language that writes valid C to #include various places works just fine.
aw hey thanks. I'm glad you weren't offended.
It's pretty crazy how many things are competing to turn us into machines these days... into consumers and addicts in so many parts of our life. Definitely no judgment here. I'm an alcoholic; I understand. You sound like your rational brain wants to put up a wall between you and that flood of happy chemicals, to preserve itself. Self denial is a life saver. Weirdly enough, the same happy chemicals show up again pretty soon in a new form after you get off an addiction to something. (hopefully they attach themselves to something productive... not always, but it's worth rebooting when you know you're trapped)
Postgres Unlogged Tables
Why in the world would they invest into such HVDC project when they already have a huge synchronous grid (unlike the US and Canada, which have 5 grids in total) shared by other countries, especially on the southern border. I think there are even plans for Iran to join this grid. They have absolutely no trouble sending energy across their territory to smooth consumption peaks. Add to that abundance of coal/gas/oil (FYI during winters they use thermal power stations to generate both electricity and heat for homes), robust atomic and hydroelectric generation, and almost zero (in relative terms) solar generation.

They only need relatively short HVDC links to be able to send energy from their hydroelectric installations in Siberia to China and maybe to South Korea and Japan, though with the current geopolitical climate the latter is quite unlikely.
Personally I'd like fish, git, jq, a neutral editor that isn't too polarizing, and a good package manager.
Why is this such a ridiculously bad page on mobile?
Being a computer museum is also an open standard, and there are any number of competitors. But it is still a problem when a large computer museum shuts down.
I don't know where I'd fit. I'm very brain-process oriented. I want people to explore hypothesis / plans in a smart and organized way.. the rest I don't care. I feel people around me are being tired of that .. while I'm tired of all the back and forth due to improper discovery or information passing.
He very likely not be "irrelevant" for the foreseeable future when people speak about behaviour.
> It's basically people taking it upon themselves to take other software and repackage it for their distribution. That made some sense 30 years ago when you had to install linux from a CD (or floppies) and people necessarily had to package things up to fit on those CDs.

That might have been the original reason, but another has emerged in the meantime: distro maintainers are simultaneously unattached enough to the software to make decisions to make for the users instead of the authors and technical enough to actually implement those decisions[1]. OK, no, not really, they also very much implement their own vision of what users should want, but there are (still) enough distros that a user can choose one that fits them once and not be forced to pick or abandon individual programs. In that respect even Flatpak et al make things worse—unsurprisingly, given that Flatpak (AFAIK) is GNOME people saying they should make distro-style decisions, and nobody else should be able to. (Of course, in other respects—such as being able to install arbitrary things from the ’net—Flatpak et al do make things better.)

https://drewdevault.com/2021/09/27/Let-distros-do-their-job....
> The named booleans suggested here help adding clarity, but more often than not they'll end up being single-use (const) variables that just paraphrase their definitions.

That's ok. The worst tradeoff in the "named booleans" pattern proposed in the blog post is that it misses the whole point of chaining predicate evaluations, which is leveraging short-circuiting to prevent further predicates from being evaluated.

Chaining logical comparisons and the way they short-circuit is specially important when a predicate has preconditions and/or is expensive and/or has side-effects.

If your predicates are hard to read you don't fix that mess with "named booleans". You fix them by extracting them to a pure function like

isNotUnknown(_someLongNamedVar) && isNotEmpty(_someLongNamedVar)
Posix recursive locks were invented as a dare:

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.programming.threads/c/tcrTK...
I think the discussion is silly.

99.9% when the condition is "too hard to read" it's because the condition is too hard to read, period, and the correct fix is to restructure the code to have readable branch conditions, not to throw parentheses on there to make a monster expression slightly less confusing.

It's like discussing the chemistry of air fresheners instead of taking the trash out more often.
Similar for me but with Crusader Kings 3.

I can't imagine playing Civ now without murder, marriages, a dynasty to care for etc. Crusader Kings has prompted me to read dozens on history books due to how engages you with real historical events in a way that no Civ ever has beyond checking a wiki page on a world wonder or some such.

My perfect game would be Crusader Kings with a bit of Civ flavour: add the tech tree, world wonders, exploration and more freedom for where to found cities and I would be over the moon.
Nevermind! I see is WebRTC
> so in A and B you do lock(_mutex) but in C you do assert_lock(_mutex) which either panics or continues? What would that look like?

Make "lock being held" into a resource, which can then be passed down to callees to assert (at compile-time) that a lock is being held. Even better if the lock itself is associated with (and lends on locking) values, then just having access to the protected resource indicates that you hold the lock.

Obviously without language support for ownership and borrowing this has limited safety as you can stash a lock token and reuse it later, despite not holding the lock. Then again, even in Rust if you really wanted to fuck someone's day you could probably `transmute` garbage into a lock token.
Isn’t it more accurate to call that unspecified SBCL behavior than “common lisp’s type system”?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammoth_steppe
I learned lisp (well, mostly scheme) just enough to be dangerous - and to have a lot of fun.

I don't end to find myself -writing- lisp very often but in a lot of cases I end up -thinking- in lisp and then translating across to whatever language I'm implementing in before I start typing.
There have been many proposed solutions to the so called "hard problem" of consciousness. We can easily find some with a quick google search. Even its' existence has been debated by multiple scholars / philosophers - wikipedia has a list with some: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness

> There's no way to know if/what an AI experiences

Getting the state of neural net, at a given point in time, is easy. There are many ways to see exactly which neurons activate, why they activate, how much they activate, etc. For smaller neural nets, this is actually easy to do - here's a blog post about it:

https://distill.pub/2020/circuits/visualizing-weights/

As neural nets get larger and larger, interpretability gets harder and harder. However, I wouldn't say it's impossible.
Apart from not being "fun", I believe writers don't write summaries because they don't want you to skip their article. It's the same as "this book could have been a blog-post" issue.

Regarding headlines, sometimes I think they are intentionally cryptic/clickbait-y because that's how authors intrigue us and make us click them. So a summary it's useful in those cases, unfortunately.

But there are other kind of titles which benefit from summaries. Say, "Postgres 16" is released. In that case, I'd love to read three sentences describing the highlights instead of clicking it and reading the detailed release log.
I don’t see this as bad. Platforms invest on what impacts their pockets, so today they do restrict/boost what you see on the basis on making you engage more and click on ads more. If they are liable for the content they make available to you they might spend some more real money on moderation.

We have all seen what the effects of those platforms, and the smart an evil use of their rec engines, were around the world.

We didn’t have this effect pre recommendation engines because the dark content would stay hidden and you had to search for it, while today it is brought to you on a algorithm silver plate by youtube, facebook and tiktok. As long as you engage with the platform, whatever makes you happy/angry mate!
Yeah it seems pretty disappointing to be advocating for invariants protected only by thoughts and prayers (i.e. comments, naming convention) in a statically typed[1] language like C#.

This bit me in Rust when I was goofing off / exploring with one of the AOC'22 puzzles back in December. One of Rust's selling points is supposedly "fearless concurrency" but it turns out deadlocking is trivial to do: did you know a mutex is not re-entrant in rust? Just acquire the lock again in a nested function and blam, at runtime when you reach that codepath you'll learn you have a deadlock.

I'll probably never stop trying new approaches, I love exploring languages for how they can open your eyes but so far Clojure's approach to this problem - by that I mean immutable everything by default and then using atom's, I'm not talking about the richer STM stuff, I haven't played with that yet - is peak concurrency handling in the context of writing business applications.

[1] As I wrote this the 'dynamic' type jumped into my mind, would its presence mean its technically wrong to say c# is statically typed? It's not "only" statically typed I guess is what I'm uncomfortable with.
It seems like there is a conversation happening between "andsoitis" and "jparkgreatest" about a comment that "andsoitis" believes to be spam and a scam. "jparkgreatest" disagrees and believes it to be a great opportunity. The conversation takes a turn, and "jparkgreatest" makes a joke about "andsoitis" being like a feedforwarding layer in neural nets. "andsoitis" responds with a reference to a computer saying no, which could mean they are not understanding the joke or are not finding it funny.
> If this is true, why do you think your recommendation holds any value?

Well, it isn't true, sorry to disappoint heh. My suggestion for him to go to a red lights district (preferably in another country) is for exposure therapy as he is afraid of human contact in all of its forms.

> This is not about sex per se, this is about absolute sexual beauty

No, it is not about "absolute sexual beauty" or whatever flowery language you want to dress it up in. Porn addiction is a real thing, but people with actual sex lives rarely fall down that rabbit hole.

If you're going to watch a ton of porn you will inevitably get bored and seek out more extreme or niche forms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedonic_treadmill

"Top Quality AI Porn" does not have magical powers nor is it some sort of perfection or ideal, it is simply novel. Don't worry, you'll get used to that too with time.

> And MDMA has a pretty bad seratonin depletion hangover, if you tried to do it even for a couple days straight, this would be an obvious negative experience and the reason why people actually rarely overdose intentionally.

I said overuse, not overdose. Certainly don't do it for days on end but rather space it out by months.
> It seems like the people living in the 80% single-family zoned areas of Toronto are not unhappy/inconvenienced enough with the state of things to leave.

How could they be? They externalize all of their noise and traffic to the denser neighbourhoods. And the people living in denser areas are subsidizing the immense amount of roads and public infrastructure consumed by those suburbs. They are having their cake and eating it too.

I may not be able to afford moving to a nicer place, but I can sure complain about it!