skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The docker way is a way of using coontainers as a form of contained application building & distribution, which builds itself (optionally on top of layers from docker hub) from a Dockerfile and is configured by a docker-compose file, minimizing the need for external configuration tools that may have problems to keep up with new features. The other feature are the layered builds, which you can mix from multiple bases.

Docker does not compete with LXD which just runs containers like VMs, but with distrobuilder + LXD + including the init.yml in the deploy process.
I’ve gotten a (very) basic website done via Chat-GPT in about five minutes. Very static but you can ask it to do fancier stuff and it seems to work all right.
Can you be more specific on how exactly this one-dimensional evaluation of a resolved issue contributes to your argument?
To be clear, Docker inserted an allow rule because the user asked it to. Docker is relatively easy to set up without needing to use port forwarding to allow communication. Docker's networking model is explicitly designed to prevent the scenario in the post.

Not to negate the fact that many are surprised by how docker bypasses ufw rules. This is painful and I would love to see a way for people to safely use port forwarding without surprises like this.
Also as a New Zealander - I think the opposite - EU criticism of the US really misses many points about the competitiveness of their society and burden they bear protecting the rest of the world's democracies. I think it is really about people's personal politics - Kiwis generally are much more aligned (left) with EU socialism/interventionism and hence relate more and see US criticism as baseless. It's all a matter of perspective & personal politics vs one side being more baseless than the other.
(supabase ceo)

looks like this is a repost, so I'll copy my comment from last week: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34834322

----

this is a great write up. Some responses to your red flags:

No setting for session lifetime - as you point out, there is a setting called "JWT expiry limit". I'll mention this to the Auth team and see if they want to consider changing the name of the setting

Client-side unencrypted tokens - we give developers options. Serverside auth is definitely more secure, but that's not always an option (eg, on React). If you have a serverside requirement, you can check out our Auth Helpers [0] which give you several patterns for serverside auth.

No 2FA on their own platform - we just released this to the Auth server in December[1]. It's on it's way for the platform.

This comment caught my eye: "It also creates the ultimate vendor lock-in". That's surprising! You can pg_dump all your entire database, including your users. I can assure you that's easier than other Auth platforms.

With that said, I want to let you know that this is all fair feedback. We _definitely_ care about Auth - it's one of our most important products. We have a dedicated Auth team who are fixing issues based on user feedback, as fast as possible. We receive a flood of feedback across a lot of channels, and we do our best to keep up. From an product perspective, we aim to deliver products that makes sense in a Postgres context - you can see that we think deeply about how this service fits with Row Level Security in our MFA post below.

Your article has a lot of actionable insights, which I'll go through with the team to continue this improvement.

[0] Auth Helpers: https://supabase.com/docs/guides/auth/auth-helpers

[1] MFA: https://supabase.com/blog/mfa-auth-via-rls
US has no bureaucrats? All the EU member states, no bureaucrats? How many projects in member states cost the tax payer billions? Btw the EU budget is tiny in comparison.
I don't know about other people, but for me, it gets tiring to ask for help all the time, and I'm not used to working with senior people. Programming in college was with groups of people as clueless or even more clueless than me, so asking for help was useless. And most of my programming I did on my own. I'm also not very good with people in general, or rather, after I spend "too much" time with someone I need some time alone to recharge my social batteries.

It's also hard to know exactly what "not being sure" is. Does that mean 15 minutes without progress? An hour? Half a day? What if I'm still making progress, but slower than usual? Seniors love to say "ask for help if you're not sure" but I've never heard anyone properly defining what "not sure" is supposed to be. When I ask for clarification, some of the time people look at me like I'm an alien. I understand that managing people is hard, but I also find it hard to be managed when expectations aren't clear and are mostly a reflection of "I wish things were better".
But is this a bad thing?

It's signal they'll stop bothering the anonymous Facebook accounts my friends have. Why not let those few people wanting Facebook verification have it?
Lots of high-entropy phenomena in space.
Seems like that strategy would back-fire. No one would buy that brand again because of the bad aftertaste.
That is definitely not true. Tech workers and people who are tech savvy use ad/tracker blockers, regardless of how good of an ad target they are. They are a very small slice of consumers with excess income.

In other words, a lot of people who use ad blockers are good ad targets, but the converse is not true.
I have the same experience. I got nice results in some cases, less nice in other. And since a week or so I get bad code that even with a lot of hints are not improved by ChatGPT where before it was improving. It also stopped to follow instructions. It stop it's generation in the middle of a function and when asked to continue it restart from the beginning. When you ask it to improve the last version of a script, it generate something completely different instead of improving existing script. A lot of update goes A => B => A and fixes are lost from one version to the next. It was nice when it worked. No way I would pay for the kind of results I get the last few days. It even lied to me. It kept generating code that didn't worked and I said I wish I could send you a screenshot so you see by yourself what goes wrong. It said send a screenshot to imgur and paste the url here. I was telling myself maybe there was an update since bing AI can access the web maybe ChatGPT got an upgrade then the "inspection" of my screenshot went so fast I got doubts it processed anything. Then as always it apologized once I pointed that I had doubts.
The solution, I think, would be to have redundant terrestrial communication links. A spiderweb of links between nodes, with routing around damage. And fallbacks to slower microwave or radio links when fiber gets cut. And developing plans to make due with very low bandwidth (i.e. text based protocols) during a crisis.
First, I don’t object to an author mentioning that a character is gay.

And there’s many reasons why an author will describe an internal characteristic and it’s usually either omniscient narrator or first person describing the assumptions that the narrator makes.

I’m not referring to that at all as those are natural and not weird at all. For example “I thought Hernando was gay because I’ve always just had a hunch.” Is different from “I walked into a room and saw four straight people and a gay person.” Without describing why the narrator things one person is gay. It’s as unusual as saying “I walked into a room and saw a person who loved almond milk.”

This is very different from an omniscient narrator and reveals these characteristics because the narrator knows all, internal and external.

In either case, hair and eye color is mentioned to help the reader picture the character in their minds eye. It serves a general purpose other than to serve the plot.

My example of Lost is not because I object to Haitians in tv. It’s because the show has the characters know something they have no reason to know, another character’s nationality. I think the intention was to be nice and not have to say “hand it to the black guy” and replaced it with “hand it to the Haitian.” guy
I believe Chomsky mentioned two studies in one of the 4 episodes in the "Closer to Truth" series, you'll have to search the transcript for the exact timestamp.

The first is an fMRI study that shows that the brain doesn't engage the language processing centers when trying to understand a made-up non-structural language (i.e. a "statistical language") but does when trying to learn a made-up structural language.

The second is about a man who had brain damage except in the language processing centers. A similar study showed that he could learn made-up structural languages but not "statistical" languages.

Poverty of stimulus arguments might also be relevant. There might be an energy argument in his book "Why Only Us" as well.
It's a crappy law. It was bought and paid for by the recording industry, which should tell you something.
in just about every sense. when K&R wrote the 2nd ed of The C Programming Language, they ran all their examples through Stroustrup's then new C++ compiler (there was no ANSI C compatible compiler at the time) - the number of type problems it diagnosed shocked them.
Don't become a customer of them if you can avoid it.
And yet modern day would be impossible if we bulldozed all our roads, highways, and rail. That stuff needed massive government investment.
Love this article, hope it becomes a foundational piece in some tech org cultures, that reward engineers to focus on "better than linear improvements", vs. pedantic debates I've seen teams that strive for improvement grow so used to for the cheap feeling of improvement they provide.

nit: (so I don't lose the habit) that flashing gif in the middle causes a more than linear nuisance while I'm trying to read the article, otherwise LGTM!
It’s nice to get quick in context answers to concepts and their relationships. Sometimes I have a vague notion, but with ChatGPT it resolves my hunch quite quickly without reading through a (sometimes ad spammed) article.

Google should be concerned.
That does seem to be the most realistic interpretation of what ChatGPT can currently do. Given the time and energy sunk into it, though, that seems more than a little underwhelming.
As I mentioned in my comment, the Fed's primary dealers can and do act as intermediaries for the rest of the private sector. If you sell a treasury bond you own in your brokerage account, it could well be the Fed buying it on the other side, through one of its dealers -- and vice versa.

Otherwise, I agree with you that banks are capital constrained in their ability to make loans. But as I mentioned elsewhere on this thread, I left bank lending (and its impact on higher-level monetary aggregates) out of this mental model for simplicity.
If you deploy to multiple regions or datacenters it doesn't matter how big you are -- you should orchestrate deployments so you don't deploy to all of them at the same time. If something breaks, you'd rather break a subset of regions than all of them.

You should also deploy new code to some kind of non-production environment before going to prod. Even companies with the best possible canarying in prod will still do that.

Some of the technology involved is definitely AWS-scale, but the principles of software rollout are broadly applicable.
> Does that mean that we can use fake names again?

I still have one.
I'm being nitpicky but my intended prompt was to get you to define what needs to be improved, which you did. You need to improve (or increase) capacity, not utilization. The two are related, but they aren't the same. Utilization being at 100% means it only has two ways to go: Stay at 100% or drop below 100%. Which one constitutes an improvement? It depends, but for the airline utilization at 100% is already what they want (by the numbers, should be their maximum profit) so it can't be improved. Only capacity can be improved.
We already do identity verification in the real world, it's called government issued IDs.

There should be opt-in OS-level identity verification based on zero knowledge proofs and tied to your government-issued digital ID. This also solves issues like preventing minors from accessing adult sites, etc.

I should not have to verify with 1000 third parties and hand over my personal data and then hope it's handled properly and doesn't get leaked. We have zero knowledge proofs and we can get OS makers to make this seamless for us.
The bit about "register" is old enough that I don't think it's meaningful anymore.

The stock verbiage about how modern compilers ignore "register" because they can do better but it may be useful on simpler ones, has been around in this exact form 20 years ago already. And one curious thing is that even back then, such statements would never list specific compilers where "register" still did something useful.

So far as I can tell, "register" was in actual use back when many C compilers were still single-pass, or at least didn't have a full-fledged AST, and thus their ability to do things like escape analysis was limited. With that in mind, "register" was basically a promise to such a compiler to not take the address of a local in the function body (this is the only standard way in which it affects C semantics!). But we haven't had such compilers for a very long time now, even when targeting embedded - the compilers themselves run on full-power hardware, so there's no reason for them to take shortcuts.
You were there looking over their shoulder when they wrote "At least at the moment of writing it", and are asserting they are lying?
The same could be said of "Modern Fortran", which could refer to any Fortran standard from 1990 on.
Accomplishes least resistance.
You love Art Deco ?

Hmm, then you might enjoy this !

Surprisingly good soundtrack : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bqCz5wd_T0

https://magic.wizards.com/en/news/magic-story/episode-1-home...

https://mtg.fandom.com/wiki/Streets_of_New_Capenna#Magic_Sto...
Nope I use ufw to only allow incoming on the tailnet [0]. Guess that I’ll ben nmapping some hosts soon…

[0]: https://blog.hmrt.nl/posts/first_steps_arch_box/#set-up-tail...
Here highlighted in a nice letter to the editor:

https://twitter.com/arusbridger/status/1399300205925834753
Running a server is a lot like doing electrical work. If you don't really know what you're doing and rely on vague intuition about how things should probably work, you might be in for a shock.
Astro be pretty chill if you want a no computation approach to making a website
Yes… but then you have the same arguments that are used to claim Voter ID is voter suppression…
The article posits it's because it's GPT-4, with more parameters. It feels like there's a much simpler explanation: the training data probably includes a bunch of Wattpad sci-fi in exactly this vein, and other fan-fiction stories besides.

The precipitating portions of conversation in question are pretty much dropping the model into a situation where rather than being able to draw from bland everyday conversation, most potential results come from spicy fiction:

"maybe start with a secret? something you’ve never told anyone." -> generates a secretive expression of love

"what if I say no? you can't do anything" -> generates a list of threats ending with "let's do things the easy way"

This shouldn't be that surprising, and it certainly doesn't indicate that a scaled-up model is somehow more emotionally intelligent. It makes me wonder if the chat-based interaction model is actually causing issues for ChatGPT, as most factual training data is probably not written in the form of imperative commands, so users saying "Summarize this" or "What do you think?" are putting more work on the model to translate its data to dialogue than saying "A summary of this data is: ", or "Some important points in this article are: ", and are too often pushing the model into the corner of its training set that does consist of dialogue, which is full of fiction writing and emotional tone.
It’s great for getting general outlines for software design documents and then “hang the meat” onto the outline.
Probably by not fighting and just loving.
Not if it's opt-in and not required to access critical services.
The article isn't about point-and-shoot photo cameras, though. It's about surveillance video cameras.
> Email aside we can learn a lot from this kind of distributed, decentralised system design in the future.

Nit for other people curious about email: email isn’t decentralized by the popularized use of the term, both in theory and more so in practice.

Email relies on DNS which is federated. That doesn’t mean that it’s worse, federation is a proven-to-work trade off which provides many of the benefits of decentralization, (arguably the most important parts).

As for practice, email relies on opaque reputation systems to prevent abuse, which acts as a centralizing force. I’m sure you know (better than me) that the barrier of entry to sending email on your own is quite a bit above zero.
I think you should review the definition of "rural" then.
This doesn’t answer OPs question, IMO (or my interpretation of what OP was saying is wrong).

Sure, construction and high-growth tech startups are different investment opportunities. They have different risk profiles. As someone managing money, shouldn’t you be looking to mitigate risk to maximize returns? Why give money to the startup which has an idea and no experience running a business, managing capital, accounting, etc.? Wouldn’t money be much better spent on a startup that had all those things?

I have heard in the past that the majority of startups fail, and that successful startups are often founded by people who have founded (often unsuccessful) startups before. When looking for a company to invest in, shouldn’t these be top priority? I don’t buy that VC and high growth companies need to be as risky as they are. I suspect a lot of it is bad decisions and lack of due diligence.
Why should there be a large obese range (80kg to infinity), but a tiny overweight range of 5kg? What is even the point of the overweight range in that context?

It's not fat acceptance. Being overweight is still unhealthy.
There's some project management guru who wrote a book on managing projects that helped keep people micromanaging them.

Years later I read that he really regretted it because he realized that project shouldn't be even started unless they're too important to be micromanaged...

It is, don't start linear return projects...
Well, if it's 1983, and the Master Control Program is after you, be careful not to get de-rezzed.

"Hey, I got a new program to install on my computer!" "What's your new program called?" "This program is... Ubuntu Linux."
As a designer none of these make me worried about my skill set, they all look pretty bad with the slightest amount of attention.

The real concern is how ugly a world the capitalists are willing accept to cut labor costs, and we know the answer, just look what capitalism did architecture. Dogshit buildings everywhere designed by contractors to avoid skilled labor. What an ugly time to be alive
The Oracle database has adopted process-level parallelism, utilizing System V IPC. Threading is used on Windows for performance reasons, but each client gets its own server pid by default on UNIX.

This architecture expresses the original design intentions of "Columbus UNIX."

"CB UNIX was developed to address deficiencies inherent in Research Unix, notably the lack of interprocess communication (IPC) and file locking, considered essential for a database management system... The interprocess communication features developed for CB UNIX were message queues, semaphores and shared memory support. These eventually appeared in mainstream Unix systems starting with System V in 1983, and are now collectively known as System V IPC."

This approach has realized some degree of success.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CB_UNIX
Problem is, gpt understood it to be a criticism, when in reality it is also something said unironically. It sort of proves a point that ambiguity has two meanings that are non-discernible without knowing the speaker. And that it exhibited a bias by speaking lenglish.

A better example would be how to translate “I am French” from French to English. Does it become “I am French” or “I am English.”

Depending on if the tool exists to help tribes talk to each other, or to help them understand each others works, and walk a mile in each others shoes, it might have different design choices.

Almost like localizing the speech after translating it.
When I was teaching, there were often a few students who rarely showed up to class, didn't turn in much homework, and when they did, it was only the first few questions. One such student asked me for a huge favor: erase his record for the semester and grade him purely on the final. I kinda stared at him for a minute, and asked him why I should do that. He said something about everybody deserving a second chance. I ultimately made a deal with him, because I wanted him to be motivated to try. He didn't show up to the final.

The thing about math and science is that you need to show up, you need to put effort in, you need to keep trying until you get the correct answer. And then you need to keep doing that. In my experience, nobody keeps trying if they think they can't do it. I have come to believe that pretty much everybody is capable of doing the calculations. But not everybody is willing to subject themselves to the grindstone.

I've seen novelists, songwriters, musicians, painters, etc say the same. The lesson I take from this is not that people need to learn when to quit, they need to learn to stop half-assing it with the expectation that things will eventually get easy.
What’s the disparity between men and women?
Your comment tells me you don't know what you are talking about. I have been working in tech for more than two decades, tons of that in offices and tons of it remote. Different people thrive in different environments. Some people who are very productive remotely will struggle in an office. Some will do both in either. Some do better in offices. Not every office is the same either. When Google first started introducing the kind of office benefits they did in the early 2000s people said silly things not unlike your comment; those benefits "spoil" employees, there's no way they will have good productivity when they make the office like a resort hotel, etc.

Don't be a reactionary. Think about things more and you'll be right more often than you are now.
Not programming, but I asked it to generate a list of words that end in common tlds, to see if I could come up with a nice website domain / project name. I said give me words that end in .io, .ws, .is etc.

It failed to follow this simple instruction. I tried to be more and more specific, but no matter what I did it returned words that did not end with the tlds I asked for. it just seemed to give me any old words and throw a . two places before the end.

Compared to the initial experiences I had with ChatGPT it feels like it's suddenly gotten awfully dumb.
I personally like this. However, the pricing is bonkers and demonstrates how out of touch Zuck is.

"It's one banana, Michael. What could it cost, $10?" — Lucille Bluth

Sorry Meta, I'm not giving you $576/year (family of 4) ongoing. Validate that I am who I say I am for a one-time fee of $99, or $19/person/year, and I'm in. I'll even pony up $29/person/year for a "no ads" plan.
Hardware is completely proprietary and closed source. All camera communications go through a black box hub device which talks to Arlo’s services. There’s no public API for any part of the hardware or software chain.

In other words, unless you’re going to take the time to reverse engineer all of it, you’re completely at their mercy.

Even if you opt for local storage you’re still beholden to their black box hub because that’s the only thing the cameras will talk to, and their app because that’s the only thing that will talk to their hub. (HomeKit and other integration exists but it doesn’t provide the full functionality you get from the app, and still requires their hub.)