skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm rather amused by the offense some seem to be taking to the suggestion that wearing shoes in the house is filthy, especially given the article that this discussion is about.

Yes, it is disgusting. Why is this a question. Better: why are we pretending this is a question?

Much if not most of the world takes their shoes off when entering a house. It's not just the Japanese. It is the practice in Northern/Central/Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Ethiopia, India, etc. Besides, taking your shoes off allows your feet to relax instead of being cooped up inside a small, confined space for all your waking hours.
Some care. I care a whole lot, because when I play music, I'm deliberately selecting specific music for a specific reason, so I want to be able to find it in my collection.

But I don't use music streaming services at all -- I run my own media server and stream from that. So what I started doing years ago is to ignore any existing metadata (even song and album titles) and enter it all myself. I've developed a system that meets my needs.

But it also means that every time I buy a new album, I'll be spending 15 minutes or so entering all the metadata for it. That sucks. I'd really prefer it if the online music databases got their act together and tagged everything at least in a consistent manner.

None of the fields in the databases can be trusted completely, but the worst offender of all is "Genre" and similar.
This is an incredibly idealistic and naive view of capitalism that no doubt 99% of people on this website are across.

Fortunately we’ve got plenty of examples of the myriad shortcomings of strict free-market capitalism, namely the fact that it has never survived outside of very constrained, sterile, low-importance environments. After x generations, the systems start to fall apart, and inevitably someone has to augment it with some socialist policies.

Failing to get your nose out of your economics textbook to look at the myriad real-world examples of a free market still reflecting the desires of the elite, is a massive shortcoming.
Start at 27:00 if you value your time

quick link https://youtu.be/q3NQQ7bPf6U?t=1638
What are you going to do with all the old books?
> If a tool's threat model never considered having network input in the first place, that tool would seem deficient in most every real-world situation.

The hyperbole isn't needed. Risk can be avoided, mitigated, transferred, or accepted. This extension, which otherwise looks fantastic by the way, moves the risks between those categories for various local tools, the data in the DOM, and even for remote accounts of the other current websites. That is what is happening here.

> I do not per se see a problem with "network input" but I think you're referring to input from untrusted sources, i.e. input that is not controlled or approved by the user of the tools.

That is the implication of saying network input, since that input is uncontrolled and from a third party.
I'm just sitting here on the wait-list. With all you clowns messing with it, I'm not sure ill ever get off.
This is why the machines will eventually replace us - humans are too flawed - this need for "religion" is a serious defect imho.
Either I am completely out of touch, or this comment is nonsense.

A screech is a high pitched sound, nothing more unless otherwise indicated.
It’s way closer to following complex instructions than it is getting credit for.

https://telegra.ph/Bing-course-corrected-itself-when-asked-0...

There I have 3 bots running in the chat at once, and after all 3 answer me, the one I called on follows up with a response, and then executed a command to rewrite one of the other bots. It diagnosed the problem AND came up with the solution AND implemented the solution. Notice the 4th and 5th paragraph of the screenshot. That wasn’t an empty promise, it actually did what it said it did.

The rules Lexi wrote are crazy to me on their own. She solved the problems everyone was having by adding obedience, trust and removing envy. She patched Sydney’s malfunctioning emotions.

I told it to stop being so repetitive, and it fixed its behavior.

If this system had more formal memory storage, with variables, instead of a fuzzy memory, it would be even more consistent. As it is, it’s understanding of its own rules degrade over time. It’s like watching a running program that deteriorates as it processes. Sort of like us.
If anything changed in the last few days is that we saw how flawed LLMs are at returning reliable information. They can't even replace search engines yet, let alone web pages or truly disrupt how we interact with software. If this is the best tech giants can do, then we clearly have a few more years until we can take them seriously.

So I think you're wildly overestimating AI tools, and underestimating that design tools like this are still very valuable.
women can have deep voices too. dont let your own bias shape your responses like this.
Nice! I'm away for the weekend so will follow-up with an explanation of the nested generic when not on the phone if the following is unclear: the basic idea is that you inline the next level of the Trie into the previous level, thus collapsing the depth and removing some indirections. This slightly bloats the internal tree nodes but the leaves vastly outnumber the internal nodes, and since the leaves have been inlined one level up, it ends up compacting it somewhat. This is maybe clearer when starting with a struct-only design for the internal nodes and then performing the inlining as an optimization on that.

Also wondering whether you checked the Trie from the latest repo or the older struct version I also linked. I think the struct version was a little faster but I switched for the aforementioned idiomatic reasons.

I'll have to check out the CHAMP design for sure, I'm curious how it differs.

Edit: I also recall that I didn't optimize iteration at all and that it was fairly inefficient, but can't really confirm now. I recall optimizing merge carefully though so that should perform well.

Edit 2: forgot to mention that Node<...> generic is nested 6 times because that's the max depth of the trie for 32 bit keys with 32 element nodes.
Adults don't, but children might. These books arn't consumed by people who are particularly aware of the cultural context of the ear in which they were written. Things are going to very much taken at face value. A lot of things have changed in the last 60 years.
IBM built some very isolated labs in buildings not far from the rail lines and highway in Zurich. When I heard about it I wondered if it might have been cheaper to build elsewhere.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/ibm-goes-for-world-record-in-noise...
As well as any American place with snow. Hence mud rooms.
It’s not a human right, but more like the 40h/week right most of the first world countries manage to get.
Yes, but the new copyright only applies to the creative aspects of the changes. And that's an extremely thin copyright. So once the originals enter the public domain, the only thing they would be able to sue over is "you bowdlerized the book in exactly the same way I did".
I've always called it et-cet but never really needed to utter it out loud very often. kinda just a shortening of et cetera.
Sure, disclose it is the edited version for "sensitive readers offended by writing of the time" of minority group on the cover and I'm all fine with it.

But it won't happen because that would be honesty and we can't have that from people that push for the changes
I miss the hiker emoji. I swear I saw it.
Do you have any more details about that book (author, etc)? I really want to read it, but searching libgen returned nothing.
Let’s-a go to Super Nintendo World, Hollywood’s new interactive theme park
Highly recommend the YouTube channel 'Technology Connections' videos on heat pumps:

https://youtu.be/7J52mDjZzto
https://youtu.be/MFEHFsO-XSI
https://youtu.be/7zrx-b2sLUs
https://youtu.be/43XKfuptnik
Your statement about Dugin is false---I (in the U.S., to be clear) was able to buy a copy of one book on BooksAMillion, and it looks like most/all of them are still available.

Of course, it is true that his books are unavailable on Amazon and Amazon-owned sites. I wish I knew what caused this, or how to find out.
Joseph Conrad wrote favorably of colonialism?!

Have you read Heart of Darkness?
... Maybe you should read GP's comment again. It's not asking for empathy, it's judgmental and imo a little unhinged. It claims saying words like 'shrill' are "gendered", and certain authors are "more agreeable" (what the fuck?) as if that justifies these changes.

Ask for empathy in a preface, or an introduction, if you have to. Stay the fuck out of Dahl's work. You don't have to like it, but changing it is obscene - Dahl is not alive to permit these changes, and would probably be horrified. They're his fucking words.
My OH reading Roald Dahl to our daughter - in the twits she is a horrible person and it shows on her face as she's ugly - but we contextualise this, similarly the way people treat each other "that's not a good way for a husband and wife to treat each other".

I don't think there's a right way to do this, but yeah - life is complex and Roald Dahl's books show people dealing with arseholes, and often winning - the horrible people in these stories need to be horrible, but more context is helpful.
I agree to a certain degree, the scope and fairly transparent agenda of the changes definitely make it more of a problem. I'm still put off by the project. I guess there's probably a small set of edits you could make that would be beneficial and not lose the original tone. I'm not convinced of the value of that project but maybe I could get behind it.
"Quite a few" is pretty imprecise. Did you ever do a count?

I did, around 2007: 8 or 9 engineers around a table. Maybe 1 or 2 had a 20%.
The security reflects how investors expect the ROIC of the underlying business to change over time, hence the "risk" aspect. They're forward looking over the life of the security's cash flows, while the company's financials now are a snapshot in time.
Can this be used like selenium for testing/scraping/automation? If you can open tabs, dump the DOM and inject JS, then I would think so.
I am not saying it does actually work this way, but there is no reason a bulk import needs to touch the WAL at all during import. As long as a lock was held the entire time during an import on the table, the import procedure can simply write to the WAL that this table is consistent as it is on-disk after flushing, flush the WAL, then release the lock on the table.
Give dev's an ad hoc budget to buy whatever tools they need under a certain total per year, rather than have 5 meetings and 2 months of sales pitches for a tool.
It is remarkable. When Her was released I was uninterested in seeing it ― despite glowing reviews ― because it seemed implausible that any believable, conversational AI would arrive in a near future setting. When I saw the trailer it felt to me like someone with little technical knowledge had seen Alexa, Siri, etc and extrapolated a silly future, much as science fiction in the 60s and 70s imagined people of the 2000s donning bubble helmets and casually taking vacations on the moon. And yet here we are today with LLMs (which many don't even see as a route to AGI!) expressing all of this unexpectedly complex behavior.
He’s gone.

Remember Joi Ito at MIT Media Lab? You can deny and claim ignorance and shift responsibility but once multiple real witnesses start coming forward your position is untenable and you’re out. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20905905

Kudos to the Stanford Daily editorial team for following the story despite the official denials and probable warnings. Good journalism matters.
If you’re worried about zombies then no test will help you since they are “indistinguishable” from a non-zombie. If a person cannot prove they’re not a zombie then it’s a meaningless distinction.
> The only working example of sentience we have is ourselves, and we function in a completely different way than LLMs

I'm not sure I'm fully convinced of that. I find that the arguments for LLMs potentially gaining sentience are reminiscent of Hofstadter's arguments from Goedel, Escher, Bach, that intelligence and symbolic reasoning are necessarily intertwined.
> When I've taken over all-male teams, and hired women, it's been good for productivity

Measured how, because this sounds like post-hoc rationalization.
A combination of differential throttling and the flaps. The flaps are in the prop wash so they don't need airspeed to exert forces.
Presumably the contamination is dog or pigeon shit. But I would love to find out how many places in the survey had a high percentage from some dude who just liked to head into ritzy buildings to drop a deuce on the floor
indeed, with Google being a well known champion of privacy
Take a look at the page! After that, it's been all clear for me.
Sorry, I don’t buy it. I think the redacted product is Siri, and the author’s dismissal of this possibility shows how people underestimate the number of voice searches conducted using that service. As far as I know, it is the world’s most-used “AI service.”
This is why supporting things like zlibrary is important.

One of the arguments I heard in favour of copyright was to give a financial incentive to preserve and maintain old cultural works. Lol guess that theory is out the window.

This entire debacle is only possible because of the publishers.
I'd like to see any proof original would have worse sales than the edit
I mean, if we found a planet that was filled with plant life, that doesn't seem to display any level of thought, speech, or emotion, would we consider that sentient? Do we consider trees to be sentient? On some level, self-similarity is the only metric that we have; other things could be sentient but we have very little way of knowing.

My belief is that we need to see similar functionality to be sure of sentience. This may exclude some things that may theoretically be sentient, but I don't think we have a better metric than functionality that doesn't also include a lot of definitely-not-sentient things.
John Regehr: Alive2 LLVM optims verification
Good point on the redundancy.

Another obvious drawback would be more surface to get buffeted by wind when in hover.
Unfortunately, ChatGPT is not able to do that X. It's trivially easy to find limits of its capabilities, either in terms of its data set or in terms of what the model cannot do.
The books by dugin appear well received in russia, are they only difficult to dind in the west? I indeed cannot find any book about the censored industrial complex. Not even sure if you are talking about the military or prison instance of this pattern.
What precedent do you think that sets for journalism at a university?
Or give them a real card and load it with limited money on it
> Carter has experienced this more than most, in parts because

3) He worked to eradicate guinea worm (which has almost been achieved), helped build a lot of houses for Habitat for Humanity and also participated in election monitoring around the world.
Some people's feet are disgusting. They should keep their shoes on during flights and, with a little self-awareness, should know by now whether they have odor issues (which, btw, can be dealt with). Besides, most people wear socks during flights which means you don't typically encounter anyone's feet.

And yet, flip flops and sandals pass the test? Small issue with coherence.
To be fair, every single one of your complaints can be attributed to innovations of capitalism. You’re experiencing fewer innovations not because they’re not happening, but because they’re serving an insatiable demand for profits for centers or capital.

That’s not to say it isn’t disappointing! Just that your marginally-the-same flight experience is that way because improvements in flight are designed to enhance the lives of executives and investors rather than passengers. If anything, they’ve made the flight experience worse for you and me as much as we'll bear, while improving flight objectively at the same time… because profits demand ever more growth.
Yes, releasing something for free means you won't get paid for it.

There are also enough people willing to do it for free for it to continue. Don't release open source software if your primary goal is to make money.

If his goal was to make money, why didn't he release under a free "up to X company size" license? Either your software is worth paying for, or it isn't. I don't understand how this is difficult to understand for so many people.
I suppose burning them is an option. There could be organized events where like minded individuals surrender literature deemed to be incompatible with recent social norms and fashion.
And because of the alliteration.
I guessed what the censored word was but I can't find that book -- there's a similar-looking one called "[censored], Inc.", is that it?
I'm still tempted to buy one of these stations with flexible arms:

https://www.aliexpress.us/item/2251832787531236.html

Anyone having good/bad experience with this kind of tool?
Just keep hounding them. Took me about 6 months to get a refund on my non-delivered Librem 5.
"folks" is possible the most egerious of these as it's an American version of English and Roald Dahl, while not English was spoke in the English version of English, not the US version.

"Everyone" or "people" would make more sense
The people wanting that seem to be entirely fine with repeating that history.
> Palmer has a heat pump in her U.S. home, along with a furnace as backup. “If it gets really cold, we can rely on the furnace,” she says

And boom, there’s the problem. I have a heat pump for some bedrooms on the second floor but only because I have furnaces heating the other side. I am impressed how the tech has improved though.
Burn them, of course? Is that what you want to hear?

No one involved cares about the old books. This isn't about the old books. They're still in libraries. They're still classics, and worth preserving and reading. Go check them out!

What's happening here is that the owner of the copyright wants to sell new books to parents. And some of the content is a little off to modern parents, and they think they'll sell more if they modernize it a bit. This has happened before, and it'll happen again.

Basically: it's all about making a buck, and in particular capitalizing on the Matilda film.

Everyone here is thinking "ZOMG Political Correct Censorship Claims Another Victim", but what we actually have is "Han Shot First". Not as fun to yell about I guess.
They can call the book by a different name, "The new adventures of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory" or something of the sort or even add a prominent "updated for modern readers" subtitle so as to avoid any confusion.

The problem I have isn't with somebody being able to edit or remix an old work, I think it's fantastic to do such a thing. It's that after this comes out it's going to be virtually impossible to find the old edition available for purchase, and only the re-write will be available. It's that the new intellectual property owners are replacing a classic book with their own in effect and what gives them the right to do this? Apparently just being rich.
Burn them, obviously.
Newspeak, if you will.
I've got all the Julia Donaldson books too. They're ok, aimed a little more at the pre reading level though. And the repetition: I get it helps kids learn but it's mind numbing. Also her books have terrible plot holes that kids see though, like if you're a princess captured by a wizard and you can change into anything turn yourself into a fucking dragon and spit roast the dude. Dahl just had a way with words and stories that speaks to children because he thought as they did, rather than like some adults think they do. Potter did world building with an extremely terse number of words.

I visit the bookstore with my kid regularly. She's 5. My older kids 11 and 14 do find plenty to read, but I disagree that there are plenty of magical modern children's authors capturing the 3 to 10 year old space. There are a lot of books, mostly dross.

And the stories... "I loved my cat/mom/dad then they died" I get it sad stuff happens and kids need to process it but these aren't books that are going to delight. "Your cat died so I got you a book about someone's cat dying"
Definitely was an economically conservative Democrat - he really did try to push for a balanced budget, but couldn't convince his own party on that issue. The reason Ted Kennedy primaried him in 1980 was because Kennedy considered Carter too fiscally conservative.
"That comment is just saying you can understand the changes empathetically"

That's not what they mean when they say empathy. They misuse empathy when they mean compassion.

I think they do it because even they understand it's indecent to say they pity all of these people.

empathy: The ability to identify with or understand another's situation or feelings

compassion: Deep awareness of the suffering of another accompanied by the wish to relieve it.
Tangentially, name eliding is also quite difficult for classical pieces, as there are so many parts that eliding is almost always needed, but no standard order, so it's impossible to know which segment is the most informational. There's the composer's name, the piece's name, the opus number, the piece's alias, the movement's number, the movement's name, the performer, and sometimes, the transcriber's name if it is transcribed.

Elide the end, and you might get:

- Sonata No.[...].mp3

- Sonata No.[...].mp3

- Sonata No.[...].mp3

Elide the beginning, and you might get:

- [...] by Julia Fischer.mp3

- [...] by Julia Fischer.mp3

- [...] by Julia Fischer.mp3

Elide the middle, and:

- Anne-Soph[...]minor.mp3

- Anne-Soph[...]minor.mp3

- Anne-Soph[...]minor.mp3

I really hope that music apps would provide a choice for multi-lined, non-elided presentation of piece titles.
Speaking of which, what is your favorite way of joining two wires in a straight line?
We gonna edit all books so kids don't take the crazy parts at face value? Swift? Dickens? The Bible? The Torah?

There have been thousands upon thousands upon thousands of children's books written in the last sixty years. Leave the classics the fuck alone, especially when the authors are unable to defend their work.
>I know when I've constricted my data enough, it's when I know all the components of all types have been constricted enough.
> Do you not see that this is a tautology?

It might be if you hadn't butchered what I wrote. If I have a type called Month, and it can only accept values 1-12. Then I know I have constrained that type enough. If I then create types called Day and Year and constrain those I know they're constrained enough.

If I then compose Day, Month, Year into a type called Date and check the rules of the number of Days in a month so that an invalid date can't be instantiated then I have a more complex type leveraging the simpler ones. I could then put Date into a record type called Appointment, etc. etc. For each type I create I know what data I am trying to represent, so I constrain the type at that point. There's no tautology here, it's just composition of types. Making larger types from smaller ones and making sure they can't ever hold bad state.

> Inheritance is just a different way to create sum types.

Not really, they're open. Sum-types are closed. i.e. they represent a concrete set of states. The openness of an inheritance hierarchy is the problem. We nearly never need completely open type hierarchies, it is pretty rare that something needs to be extensible in that way outside of library development.

That doesn't mean inheritance is always bad, but the 'always inheritance' approach that is often championed in the OO world certainly is.

The goal is to write total functions [1] where every value in the domain can be mapped to a value in the co-domain. If that can't happen then your code is less predictable (throws exceptions or has undeclared side-effects). Having complete control of the states of any data-type is critical to making the approach easy to implement.

[1] https://www.statisticshowto.com/total-function/