skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I strongly disagree that increased law enforcement capabilities will lead to ever more perfect policing. I'm pretty sure that's what you're arguing.

That is not what I'm arguing. I am saying that if law enforcement capabilities are separate from the safeguards against their misuse, then a cut to resources will lead to a degradation of the safeguards much faster than the capabilities.

Computers aren't better because they decrease the cost of law enforcement, they are better because their safeguards can't be independently cut, at least not without substantial, coordinated, and publicly acknowledged effort. Sure they might be used to investigate more crimes, but they will investigate those additional crimes with the safeguards in place.

Automating toll roads may have made it easier to create toll roads, but that hasn't lead to the mass conversion of roads to toll roads. It has eliminated the possibility of toll booth worker saying "the sign is wrong, you owe an additional $2" and pocketing the difference. Now either everyone gets charged the toll they're supposed to, or everyone is charged an incorrect amount and there is a massive public outcry leading to the error being fixed.

If the police start prosecuting lots of things that were previously impractical, then either there is large public outcry and we change the laws to make legal something that never should have been illegal in the first place, or people believe it's a law that should be enforced in which case it's good that now the police are able. This is, in my opinion, a massive improvement over selectively enforcing a law against those who are too powerless in society to fight against it under the guise of "conserving resources".

Computers are not scaling up the existing system, they are a fundamental change to the system. I'm the first to acknowledge that this new system will still have flaws, and sure those flaws will be magnified by scale, but they are different and in my opinion at least, much more tractable flaws.
> The pieces I talk about having nothing to do with the constitution, and they aren’t really a part of any explicitly planned design.

Huh?

Congress derives its authority from the constitution, at least in the U.S.
How much of that financial anxiety is caused by would-be grandparents taking a "you're on your own, kid" attitude to their children and then wondering why they choose to focus on career instead of reproduction?
Really? I have found that like most sports it all comes down to mass and height.

Winning is an entirely different case (because resisting getting thrown too much results in points loss), but if you just want to avoid falling, just be in your upper end of your weight class, don't be short, and pay attention to footwork. You won't win any competitions this way but you won't get thrown easily during tachi-waza either.
Survival of the longest...
I saw a post recently about a bike stolen in Germany ended up in Khakrov.
Zero Trust certainly has its benefits over the old perimeter-based model, but it also requires new, and massive, trust in third-party cloud providers. A bit more on that:

https://invisv.com/articles/zerotrust.html

What we need to move towards is something more like Oblivious Trust -- you rely upon third parties but they have nothing sensitive in the first place.
Of course, if all you do is profit maximise you will be fine. But if you divert from that you get to spend years and millions of dollars in court proving you were not wrong...
> My team is all over the world. Am I supposed to drive 4 hours to the nearest office to sit in a meeting room for a remote meeting?

I wondered about this too. My previous role (before the pandemic) I went into the office daily and almost everyone I met with/worked with was in other locations - even if they weren't remote themselves. There was almost no point for me to go to the office but I did anyway as that was the expectation.
Entertainmnet app idea, looking for feedback
Working on a concept for an app to collect moments from tv shows and movies. If you have time to check it out and share any thoughts or feedback would appreciate it.
They do sound like a grumpy old man.

As a recovered TikTok addict, I can supply that it was the jokes for me. There was a lot of content that got delivered to me that hit my sense of humor just right. I’m sure you could track increased oxytocin in active users just like with narcotics.
I'm not into crypto, but I sure don't want their malware if I mistype "selenium".
Yes.

Also also, Cavendish is a "dessert banana". Most banana varieties are more like plantains -- they're savory and are usually cooked.
Yes. In fact, it's standard enough that it's a little odd that they specify "autoscaling" and "21 nodes", when they could have simply said "we use the kubernetes executor".

Even if you are using SaaS GitLab, there are still good reasons to have custom runners, and kube is one option for running them.
pragma journal_mode = wal;
pragma synchronous = normal;

I think it's worth noting that this combination loses committed transactions on kernel crash / power failure / etc. That is, your app replied "OK" to the client, but the data still gets lost.

> A transaction committed in WAL mode with synchronous=NORMAL might roll back following a power loss or system crash.

https://www.sqlite.org/pragma.html#pragma_synchronous
Another aging millennial. I don't, and never have owned a car. But luckily, I don't only live in a German city with good public transport, but also in the city center. I hate driving, during COVID, I rented a car 2 times to visit my parents for Christmas, but I far prefer being able to take the train. Just the ability to read during the trip makes all the difference for me. Or for a longer trip, to sleep ;)
The problem with bananas specifically is that if you don’t have a seedless product, you don’t have a product to sell at all.

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Banana_cross_secti...

And that means monocultures propagated from cuttings.
What I find weird is this is (basically) in San Francisco which is where Silicon Valley and related places got their start.

They have SO MANY rich tech mogules (mogulettes) that it's hard to imagine it isn't getting incrediable funding -- even by the city or Palo Alto for example.

What is the real problem? If I was a rich millionaire / billionaire from SV I would donate in a heart beat....
Writing custom shell scripts to avoid complexity usually achieves the opposite result. I can Google npm errors, but not why a custom shell script fails.

Second, anyone reading the repo is now expected to understand not 1 but 2 languages.

Finally, the shell script performs basic tasks that npm does out of the box.

Because of above reasons I think this solution is needlessly complex.
Qualcomm appears to have the relevant "AI" trademark: https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=97713612&caseType=SERIAL_...
> What he did wasn't immoral ... Since morality is subjective

I agree that morality is subjective -- what he did was immoral to some and moral to others. Similarly there are people who considered it immoral when CEOs were publicly voicing support for pro-choice policies.

For a leader it probably hinges on the perspectives of the people they lead. You won't have a healthy organization if a significantly large number of people believe you are behaving immorally, especially at a nonprofit paying below-market rates.
> I am skeptical of this "trick."

This one trick email providers don't want you to know!
Dude this just made my Friday!
Yes! During his lifetime, he was mainly seen as an artist. He probably earned well but still magnitudes lower than what he would have needed to get something done. Just imagine if there would have been something like venture capitalists.

I guess in terms of the big five, he was super-high in openness but no so high in conscientiousness. In today's world he would fit better because he could run an institute or a company.
Yeah... this entire conversation is getting weirdly racist.

Point here is... they seem to be acting based on... idk what data. But they are certainly experimenting, and I am not convinced it is in the right direction. Meanwhile we absolutely have functional educational models that could work to achieve every goal set out by this effort and more, but it involves elimination of private schools, making the rich go to the same schools as the poor (and no home-schooling). Because when you make everyone in society tied to the same educational system, everyone wins. But that's the one thing we are 100% unwilling to do under any circumstances.

For the wealthy, sending their kids to private school is easier and cheaper than improving the whole of the educational system. If Musk's kids had to go to the same school as kids with single parents who earn $30k a year and into the same classroom, you better believe Musk would invest enough money and pressure for the entirety of the school curriculum to be switched over to something meaningful and a classroom size of 7, and you better believe those teachers will be paid crazy money because Musk isn't gonna want his kids being taught by the worst teachers money could buy.

You might say "yeah well he can fly his kids to another country..." yeah convenience won't allow it.
This is considered the norm for high performing product teams in the modern day.

We keep customers happy because we push changes live incrementally, reduce our chances of major outages and improve our response time when they do occur.
An AI more impressive than ChatGPT is here
CEO communications are like the opposite of "bottom line up front." 1246 words, with "we should go back to being in the office together the majority of the time (at least three days per week)" appearing at word 888, and "We plan to implement this change effective May 1." at 995.

It's like the Wadsworth Constant[1], you just know when you start reading it that the right approach is to scroll to the bottom, then start working your way up the paragraphs reading the last couple of sentences in each to figure out what's actually being said, then go back and read all the lead-in and justification.

[1] https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/the-wadsworth-constant
Related:

Conway's Game of Life – Mathematics and Construction [pdf] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31000502 - April 2022 (22 comments)

(lots of other GoL threads of course)
Motorcycling is also significantly cheaper than is owning a car. The average used car price in the US buys a top-of-the-line, brand-new motorcycle. Used (and even new) motorcycles can be had for significantly cheaper. The insurance and fuel costs are significantly less as well. A motorcyclist will have half the cost or even much less than that of a car owner.

I know people always respond that motorcycling is more dangerous than driving a car. I think you have to look through the statistics. For example, over 70% of motorcycle accidents are single-vehicle crashes - typically the motorcyclist failing to properly negotiate a curve or turn. Many of the remaining accidents are caused by high-speed riding. In my own experience, I've had normal encounters that were I driving a car would have resulted in an accident, but by riding a motorcycle I have the ability to easily maneuver to avoid the accident. A motorcycle is the most maneuverable vehicle on the road in terms of swerving, braking and accelerating. Despite those facts I have friends who act like riding down the street is a death-defying experience and are amazed I'm still alive.

I have an ulterior motive for advocating for motorcycles - electric motorcycles are becoming a thing. The Ryvid Anthem is under $9K and has a removable battery that can be easily removed and taken inside to charge using normal household current. It's going to be interesting to watch this market over the next few years.
You’d expect an improvement in absolute quality security, sure, but no reason to assume the new equilibrium point is at the same or better level of relative security (“attack - defense” if you will).

My base assumption would be defense is harder, and so the easier it is to attack, the worse security gets.
> The original poster claimed that car usage is the norm in the Netherlands, which implies that anything else is outside the norm, or unusual

This isn't a reasonable interpretation. "the norm" only implies that it's the majority mode of transportation (in contrast with the anti-car rhetoric). This implies that other modes are not the majority, but it does not imply that those other modes are particularly rare.

> In a country that famously has more bikes then people, the idea that if half the bike journeys converted to cars there would only be a ten percent increase in traffic is quite clearly ridiculous.

I mean, I showed my math--feel free to point out where I erred, but just stating "it's quite clearly ridiculous" is like putting your fingers in your ears and shouting, "I can't hear you".
If one company doesn't, then the customers will take the cheapest they believe to get.

To me it just shows that sometimes strict regulation is the right thing to avoid the tragedy of commons.
so i see a lot of posts about the nomenclature of democracy and its machinations of change in favour of elites but i think theres something people are missing here.

the amended text is blind and harmful not to the end user in the near term, but to the corporate entity itself in the longterm. as technologies like 3d printing and machining advance, and as the end users equipment becomes evermore cumbersome to engage and repair, it is a foregone conclusion that hackers can and will circumvent, override, and make obsolete the arbitrary controls and restrictions that forbid reasonable owners from performing repair and maintenance outside the confines of a rent-seeker. The sheer volume of people and groups this inconveniences makes this inevitable.

manufacturers had their chance to meet on common ground, to re-evaluate their profit strategies and predatory practices, and in the end they fell back on the simplest laurels and chose to poison the legislative assuming this was an absolute control. You cannot stop hackers by doubling down on the very policies they seek to amend, you can only slow them for a time and in the process discourage and infuriate your paying customers. Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo could give a doctoral lecture on this, if agricultural farm equipment manufacturers cared to listen.
The original founders didn’t design the current iteration of senate and house rules. You didn’t need 60 votes in the senate to pass anything in 1795.

But in a way you’re right. “The founders” created a government that protected aristocratic interests explicitly. Most states had property requirements to vote when the constitution was ratified, and even higher property requirements to hold office. So you can definitely say that they would have been fine with a system that allowed moneyed interests to block legislation they didn’t like.
Strong +1 on the motorcycle. I grew up around motorcycles (different country, and not urban neighborhood). But where I currently live I wouldn't trust other drivers enough to actually drive one.. :(
As it stands, its 3000 drops in a 3 gallon bucket.
$11 million is not a confirmed number.

The company who brokered a prior trade of ai.com in 2021 said the asking price was $11m, but that they are not going to share the final price of that prior transaction.

But, I have not been able to find any information about the price of this most recent sale of the name.
Phosphor decay is not terribly difficult to simulate to an acceptable degree. Doing it at the pixel level is pretty easy, doing it at the phosphor level is computationally harder but not much more complicated.

The larger issue w.r.t. this specific quirk of CRTs is that we're running out of human beings that are familiar with what this is "supposed" to look like, and actually care.

I care a lot, but I'm old.
THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren't only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way.

(Kurt Vonnegut, "Harrison Bergeron")
Why is error reporting telemetry bad?
Im really lost at why this is such a big deal. They're not collecting personal info. They are just looking to make the product better.
They bought ai.com and have it redirecting to chat.openai.com, but as far as I can tell they don't own chatgpt.com? There must be a lot of people hearing about chatgpt and trying that address
> What he did wasn't immoral

... to you. Like you say in this very comment, morality / ethics is personal / specific to each person.

If you did something legal I despise (I might even think what you did was moral, but still strongly disagree), I understand that you did something legal but still might reject the idea to have you near me or representing something I like and might employ legal means to try to get rid of you, too. By protesting for instance. I have the right to do so as long as I respect the law.

The fact that what he did is legal is settled but he still decided to step out, as a consequence of people protesting against him being the CEO because of his past actions. Since legality is settled and everyone agrees about this, it's not a discussion worth having, actually. Only the rest remains. This is absolutely non-legal concerns that people don't agree on.

Law does not settle everything. Legality is not sufficient for something to be moral. It might not even be necessary.

Now, the rest has also been discussed at length, so it's not clear it's worth keeping discussing this neither.
Had to downvote this, it's just too superficial to be the top comment on this article. What is "left-leaning content?" Why is there so much more of it than (presumably) right-leaning content? And "don't rely entirely on what you read online" is overly simplistic advice.
> It's supposed to be a tool for protecting everyone's basic rights and limiting government to certain particular functions, not to allow it to do whatever a 51% majority wants. That was the original idea of the founders of the US system.

The US Senate process to force an end to (previously unlimited) debate on an issue and hold a vote on the matter is not a feature put in place by the Constitution.

It's a rule put in place by the Senate in the 1900's.

> this is an example of too much majoritarian thinking; whoever has the majority in either house of Congress takes that as permission to gerrymander the rules however they like to favor their preferences.

This is literally how the Constitution specifies that the legislature will operate. The Senate sets it's own rules, by majority vote. This is how the "nuclear option" to change the Filibuster rule was recently implemented.

>Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) used the nuclear option Thursday morning, meaning he called for a vote to change the Senate rules by a simple majority vote. It passed, 52 to 48.

https://www.politico.com/story/2013/11/harry-reid-nuclear-op...
The mysterious textInput RSS field
The distinctions are far too broad to be meaningful.

Every single reason put forth for why autism is different than the other minority groups mentioned is invariably parroting the majority view in the 1950s about minorities.

It hindsight, it's easy to see the problem. But how would you go about determining if it was a problem without the benefit of hindsight? Put differently, what makes you so certain you wouldn't be parroting the same thing about Black, Asian, or LGBT people if you lived in a different time? It's easy to say that now, it's not so easy to conceptualize that in the 1950s. The idea of gay marriage in the 1950s was scoffed at in a similar fashion and seen as bending over backwards too.

Just because something is acceptable now doesn't mean it will be in the future. And your inability to come up with a solution doesn't mean it should be ignored or left alone, either.
How about the large portion of the US that should be evacuated immediately?

Rivers are badly contaminated.
And those same rivers run through large portions of the country.

https://youtu.be/8NTRrKI28T0

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64671893
This stuff's just another form of layoffs, really. That's why it's all hitting when it is. After waves of regular layoffs so people know they're serious and don't try to put up organized resistance (they'll either stay and put up with it, or "voluntarily" leave, instead). Several companies are doing this, it's clear they're counting on some attrition.
One of the worst things about the internet is the way it brings the top 0.01% of performers to your attention at all times. You will never be that good at everything you want to be good at, you might not ever get that good at even one thing you want to be good at.
Rebranding soon? Would be quite apt since they aren't "open" anymore.
When you make $213 million a year, you need to add some extra words to show the value you add.
Not sure about image recognition but for the language models and audio space, semi/self-supervised methods are currently doing quite well.
That's not quite the conclusion I reached from the comment.
I was wondering why you were down voted right up until the last sentence. Pretty much everything we associate with being sick is our own bodies, not the virus. Inflammation, fever, cough, runny nose, swollen lymph nodes, etc, it's all our own bodies natural defenses, not the virus. By the time we start seeing effects from the virus our bodies defenses have been overwhelmed. The conclusion from that is not the "the virus itself does not hurt you".
Another possibility is that TikTok's short-form content feed allows for a greater volume of feed to fit into the same timeframe. Twitter was popular because it condensed blogging into microblogging; TikTok's success is pretty easy to delineate from that logic. Even if you don't have an algorithm promoting enjoyable/affirming content, you're just more likely to encounter that content when you watch more videos.

Whether that behavior is healthy or not... I'll leave that up to people more educated than I. My guess is that trading the user's attention span for short-term engagement isn't worth it, though.
This just sounds like Continuous Delivery. We never achieved it in my last job, so I can't speak from experience, but my understanding is that typically "deploy" is separated from "release" using feature flags of some kind.
I'm from the same BBS/Usenet era and I used to be heavily into cars, now I can't imagine spending >$30k on a massively depreciating asset. I also hate how cars have become massive steel tanks on wheels.
I think there's a little more to this. I'm in my thirties and grew up in a lower-middle class suburb. Once I was in middle school, I didn't leave the house unless I was forcibly pushed out. All of the land around me had been sold and built on. Most of the owners didn't want other people's kids in their yard. The nearest park was several miles away and I wasn't allowed to go alone. My nearest friend was six miles away in the opposite direction.

Going outside the house was boring because all of the fun things I wanted to were too far away or off limits.

I knew a lot of people through my parent's church. This seemed to be a pretty common experience.
Web components do not imply a lack of reactivity. JavaScript accessors, observed attributes, and a declarative template library give you as much reactivity as React. Photoshop and Chrome are built with reactive web components.
Owning a given .com seems to instill a sense of authority on the matter for branding purposes. I don't think it has the same effect like back in the 90's where people may have just guessed at domain names to find something in lieu of a search engine, or like AOL Keywords, but they still do have a bit of prestige and seem to signal some kind of trust on the matter to most.

That being said, nowadays it just doesn't end at a generic TLD, and just by way of owning ai.com they are not going (or expecting) to suddenly see huge influxes of users and traffic... but used in conjunction with ad spots that call out ai.com it's a lot easier to start positioning that authority.
already had em. 18,000
The term for that is kayfabe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kayfabe