skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Think about it this way -- up until recently lots of people were getting by doing menial jobs. Now more and more people are getting higher education and are doing jobs that require critical thinking.

So people with less than average intelligence who would be fine doing simple mechanical jobs in the past are now forced to do office jobs just to get by.

Not only that, but people no longer can rely on just learning your job and doing it all your life. More important is your ability to be flexible and able to do things you have not done before -- and this puts more pressure on your ability to think critically.

Yes, you need to know something about everything and it is valuable to know a lot about something. But nowadays this "a lot about something" is very specialised and you will learn it doing your job.

Schools are just lazy IMO. Teachers and students are forced into standardised process which makes administration easier and makes it easier to navigate racism and discrimination issues but is very poor at allowing any free thinking or understanding in the students.

As usual, the brightest people are going to be fine and the worst are going to fail anyway. The issue is with the masses in the middle who need this bit of help.
Startups Advancing Glucose Management with Wearables and CGMs
GNU/Linux-supported devices receive updates far-far-far longer, both laptops and phones.
Maybe fix the mobile site? I managed to generate a handful of random brown colours, but it was tricky to tap on the right things. The marketing site also don't render well on mobile.
If you have similar symptoms it might be chronic caffeine overdose. Stop drinking coffee (or switch to deacf) and tea for few weeks to rule it out.
That's funny, there was a thread in HN (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34868374) regarding how folks are stopping their inborn "prediction machines" for a while in various ways to rather reliably get an insight afterwards into problems they're solving.
So 'we' might be doing it also and might be not.

But I was curious whether it is just predicting the next bit, because I'd like a more or less knowledgeable opinion to quote elsewhere.
Thank you for asking.

Everyone should feel free to express themselves and I always encourage people to contribute. I'd just appreciate if people spent more time thinking about if they actually have something to say that has any sort of value for me as a reader on the topic in return for the time I'm giving them to read their submission / comments, as a basic form of respect.

In my opinion the steady decline of quality in comments and submissions, especially on scientific submissions posted here, is because a growing amount of people are not doing the minimal amount of research it takes to form an educated opinion about a topic.

But getting the science wrong has very real consequences. For example, when a community doesn’t vaccinate children because they’re afraid of “toxins” and think that prayer (or diet, exercise, and “clean living”) is enough to prevent infection, outbreaks happen.

To form a truly educated opinion on a scientific subject, you need to become familiar with current research in that field. And to do that, you have to read the primary research literature.

Reading and understanding research papers is a skill which every single doctor and scientist has had to learn during graduate school. Everyone can learn it, but like any skill it takes patience and practice.

Based on what I read in the comments for this submission, a lot of people do not want or can not spend that time on building an educated opinion on the topic and figuring out if the underlying paper has scientific authority.

That's why I encouraged them to ask the Authors directly, if something is unclear or they are making assumptions that are simply not supported by the paper.

I'd still appreciate if more people learned how to read and interpret scientific work but in a world where most people want instant rewards and have a rather short attention span, a short, polite E-Mail to the Authors is a shortcut to gain valuable insight on the scientific work and your own assumptions about it, so that you don't sound like a complete idiot to people who have actual knowledge about the topic when you say things like "Most people in this study were probably obese and would have died anyway" or "Probably junkies skipping meals".

I could take time to explain this paper in an even lengthier comment, but I'm just Jamesbeam on HN. You have no idea if I'm a nobel prize winner or maybe having an agenda to persuade you into a certain direction, but the authors of this paper are actually scientists published in a reputable journal and they were so kind to even give you the ability to contact them by publishing their E-Mails.

And yes, I think it's a good idea to challenge your assumptions by asking people with actual knowledge about the topic so you don't look like a complete fool on the Internet.
What does this have to do with Stack Overflow? Did you wander in from reddit? This isn't how we do things here.

Do better.
IDK, the last Thinkpad I had, I used for a decade, then passed it on to a relative who used it for a few more years before something finally broke. Have also owned a Lenovo Yoga series laptop, and it's absolutely not in the same category at all as a Thinkpad.
> Nearly everything requires active upkeep, especially if it interacts with a changing environment. Software is no exception there.

In some cases, but software engineers tend to decide to make that environment change more, so even if your environment isn't otherwise changing, you still have deal with a bunch of change (e.g. you don't get to have software unless you can pay someone to regularly track framework updates, because some software engineers would rather not do the work to maintain backwards compatibility or support old versions).
You've struck at a the heart of the matter - in the glory days there were so many people involved that a few "TLDR" questions (or answers) wasn't a problem, but as the quality of the questions goes down, the discouragement for the answerers goes up, until you have a wasteland populated by "how do I make the cupholder come back out of the computer" questions and rabid answer zombies searching for another good question to chew on (and being perpetually disappointed).
Anything with packets would still be based on normal IP so you wouldn't have those issues.

In the worst case, you just build on top of UDP and don't care that you're wasting four bytes.
Why defense? If someone seriously attacked the USA, Ohio would be one of the last places they would go for. It would be the Democrat states like CA and NY that would be hit first. You would think they would be in favor of having less defense so those liberals in CA can be taken out.
To be fair, I've met plenty of idea guys in real life. I can't imagine the internet somehow being worse.

It's always ' I want Multi billion dollar company X combined with multi billion dollar company Z. Build this for me in exchange for 2.5% equity vested over 5 years.'

Then if you do waste a weekend on a POC you'll hear it doesn't match their vision. You don't even get a thank you from these jerks.

TBH I've given up on starting a tech company completely, I work a 9-5 and then make small games afterwards.
Generally speaking rights are extended to all inside the border of the US because it is impossible to immediately tell who is and is not a citizen. There is no federal citizenship ID or database. So the government finds it easier to simply assume anyone inside the US is a citizen to avoid constitutional/legal issues. Outside of the US the chances of running into problems with a dragnet is much lower so they just do it.
We're actually at historic lows for # of derailments in the US over the past 30 years
No, Twitter was clearly super bloated.
Yeah it's sad but the butterfly keyboard generation of MBPs had such issues. Keyboard aside, USB-C ports burned out / stopped working all the time. Battery life was just OK on Intel.

The latest gen is better thanks to MagSafe and Mx chips help yield much better battery life.
Doesn't HTTP3 solve this with QUIC?
You should probably check those notes again. I'm saying that one of the easiest and probably most effective responses to this by publishers is to only use known sources e.g. existing authors and people they can vouch for.

This would put up a massive barrier for AI-generated books, yes - as intended. But also puts up a massive, massive barrier for finding new _real_ authors, who don't have the connections and might have previously actually had a chance of being published.
Hugging Face internally has a lot of very strong believers (including the exec team) in open source + decentralized approach towards AI as the only safe and productive way forward. HF is ostensibly the only place to find deep+broad resources for open source DL and transformers/diffusers are the libraries du jour of open DL.

Compute is really important for AI, and having a cloud provider align themselves with an organization which is genuinely trying to be "Open" AI is I think a positive step forward.
Oh man, Mahmoud's not gonna like this! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_among_South_Asian...

Paraphrasing:
Muslims who invaded/robbed the subcontinent were ALREADY divided into vocation based social "classes" , including priests, nobles and others. Further, a racial segregation demarcated the local Muslim converts from foreign origin Muslims . The foreigner Muslims claimed a superior status as they were associated with the conquerors and categorized themselves as Ashraf ("noble").

Remember two things before you post next time:

1. Wikipedia is well-cited, and social strata issues are rampant amongst all people, including Muslims.

2. Messenger of Allah said “Even if he observes Saum (fasts), performs Salat (prayer) and claims to be a Muslim, the hypocrite does three things: When he speaks, he lies; when he makes a promise, he breaks it; and when he is trusted, he betrays his trust.”

Awaiting your well-cited rebuttal, ComputerGuru.
> The fact this isn't covered in NYT or headlines on cable TV is insane

Seriously, where is this idea coming from? Search the NYT, there's been coverage of the incident almost every day since it happened - not just the incident and its causes, but also on potential environmental fallout and meta-coverage of journalism and conspiracies around the whole thing. Many times it's been the top-line headline, at least when I am logged in.

I've seen continuous coverage on NPR, in fact the subject of this post is the current top headline on npr.org.

Every time I've been at a relative's who watches MSNBC I hear it brought up at least once during news hour.

My local paper a couple hundred miles away, despite thin coverage these days, has even had articles about what/any impact the fire has in our region.

The only event I've seen the has had anywhere close to the amount of coverage is the Turkey - Syria earthquake, which is a global level natural disaster that's killed 46,000 people and counting. I think that rightfully deserves coverage as well.

What national outlets are you following that you haven't seen coverage of this?
Yeah at a high-level, that's how it works. However, the incremental caching part does require remote caching of artifacts, so that they can be shared across CI jobs/runs.
There's no "rise" or "growing quite well". The article author's statement was inaccurate, a gross overgeneralization. Most people do not do that. The article author mistakenly projected their own idiosyncratic behavior and preferences onto an entire platform.
In other words, "You can't derive 1st-person qualia from 3rd-person physics alone."

I've studied this for decades and it's a recurring theme not only with Jackson's "Mary" thought experiment, but with Nagel's "Bat", Searle's "Chinese Room", Leibniz's "Mill", etc.

The reason these arguments are often difficult to appreciate is because we struggle to put ourselves in the minds of other people, wondering how/if they perceive the world, but all the while we are using terms whose meanings and experiences we already understand intimately (e.g. red, rose, tomato... in the case of the Mary argument.)

The argument would have a bit more force if you imagined yourself landing on a strange new planet inhabited by Zorlichs. Zorlichs often drink Byzerp, which is a beverage made from Slayrne, Mucche, and Karlne. You're an expert molecular chemist. You've studied these ingredients for months and you now know all there is to know about Slayrne, Mucche, and Karlne. You know how they interact not only with each other but also with human biology (e.g. you'll know at least whether this beverage would harm you or not). Oh, you also happen to be a very picky person. Your entire life, you've never consumed any food or beverage that wasn't entirely bland. That means, you yourself have never had anything sweet, salty, bitter, or fizzy. So the question is: Would you know/learn something new to YOU upon first tasting Byzerp?

If we take "learn" to mean "acquire new experiences", then Mary certainly learns something new upon seeing red for the first time. Keep in mind that people can (and often do) learn something that is fleeting in time: you might have "taught" me how to bake brownies last year and, in that moment, I truly understood... that is too say, I was following along and comprehended every step along the way. But now it's 2023 and I've done nothing with that experience since. Indeed, I kinda forgot most of it. Is it now fair to say of me that I "know" how to make brownies?

"I learned" doesn't necessarily mean "I know".

And that flows both ways. Mary "knows" all there is to know about colour vision because she studied 3rd person objective facts about the world: light waves, retinas, brains, etc. But, if we stick with my definition of "learn" (i.e. "acquire new experiences") then Mary obviously hasn't learned what it is like to have a 1st-person red rose experience until she has that very experience.

That's not to say all learning must be a direct 1st person experience of the matter. I can learn all about the objective facts of skydiving without having experienced it firsthand. But I'll never know the subjective qualia of falling out of a plane towards the earth below until I actually do it.

Mary would have thought: "I don't know what it's like to see red." in the same way I currently think "I don't know what it's like to skydive". Yet both or worlds would be rocked (that is too say "learn something new") upon actually having the experience.
Congrats on the launch! Can you share more information about the intended business model?
Reading your pitch here, i'd love to have a vague idea what questdb is and why I should care.
the federal government can step in and nationalize the railroad at any point as it has done in the past (woodrow wilson era iirc)
Because despite what their religions told them, people still surely fell in love, experienced passion! Im not talking about biological urges, I am talking about the need to feel whole, Desire itself. The idea that some moments can make you feel like life is beautiful, moments where you feel you can die right then and it would all be worth it.

In general you are suddenly being prescriptive rather than descriptive, which implicitly seems to show you agree with what I am saying about belief, but you simply think that humans should change fundamentally. Which is fine, but it is itself a belief you have that you contextualize your life with!
I wonder if expanding our definition of defense would help...EPA defends the air and water and other public sources from things that will harm the environment and us. Literally has "protection" in the name. Maybe we think it's only protecting the "environment" and that we are separate from the environment.
Can someone here explain how a solo developer can use bing API. It seems the cost is not cheap, even for basic plan.
"1,000 transactions free per month for all markets"

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/bing/apis/pricing

Thats like 30-searches per day (including any tweaking). How can a solo developer make an MVP based on this?
Thanks for your detailed answer.

> release workflows

Looking forward for this, especially if that also means auto-publishing of NPM packages, Rust crates, etc.
It rather obviously isn't or you wouldn't have competing factions within religions (and I think you'll accept you often do).
Your proposed solution isn't a very good one. Actual password systems use server-side things like salts and other mechanisms like hashing. Having "trivial" client-side extension to generate a certificate would make brute-force a lot easier. So, if passkeys are the only way of logging in, then no, a browser-based certificate generator would not work to emulate passwords.
AMC Apes Hate AMC’s Apes
Depending on which country you are in, I think that's a distinct possibility. In the USA they will probably just use legal means to SLAPP anyone they don't like. But in other countries...

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/jul/11/uber-hired-olig...
Maybe Steam will give us a line of gaming laptops with the same build quality...
Exposing 185M+ Indians’ Personal Information and much more
> I cannot do this

You could if you wanted to. You're smart, inventive, and creative. There's nothing stopping you from learning.

> Why would a tool need to be formally verified to be considered impressive and/or useful?

Part of it depends on your perspective.

If we assume that an LLM (or some future ML tool based on it) is capable of producing code with the same rate of errors as a trained, expert human could then it would seem the productivity gain is not having to write all of that code ourselves.

We already tolerate a certain amount of errors in our software and the world has not collapsed. The JVM had an error in its binary search implementation that lasted for nearly a decade before anyone noticed. They noticed because the size of the arrays being used started getting big enough that their programs started failing in mysterious ways. OpenSSL had a vulnerability that sat unnoticed for more than a decade. The cost of errors is not zero but it is tolerated.

However the problem of programming is that we think it's our ability to write code which is the problem that is slowing us down.

My perspective is that we're not focusing on the problem: that it is hard to be precise and write programs that work, whole cloth, from their specifications without any errors.

Using an LLM to generate more code has another problem: while humans are decent enough at writing code to solve our problems, even if our solutions are imperfect, we're far worse at reading code and understanding what it does and whether it is correct with regards to some specification (if there is one).

Empirical studies of large-scale code review are very humbling. We can read maybe 200 SLOC every couple of errors and have a negligible impact on error rates in the software being produced. More than that and the effect disappears.

So now we have LLM's producing code that we know will have errors in it. And we have no idea where the error is. It could be a trivial error we could tolerate. Or it could be another Bar Mitzvah CVE. Hard to say.

Even Betrand Meyer missed an error in a single-line expression generated by ChatGPT. He's way smarter than me. I don't see how we'll be able to keep up.

But if we tackled the problem of getting better at being more precise with our specifications, I could definitely see how having an AI-like system automate code generation being really useful. There are plenty of times when working on a formal proof where you want to say, "this is obvious!," that have a machine verify that for you using the same proof rules and tactics you would use. Bonus points if it can explain the proof back to you.

I just think we're a long way off from being able to do that.
My favorite feature of SO is their ephemeral chat system that returns 404 pages instead of useful information. It's a good alternative to forums that have been deleted and turned into SEO link farms.
I haven't used SO for anything other than a read-only reference for probably over a decade at this point. It's always seemed incredibly hostile to me. But it's also about the only place you can find the answers to esoteric programming questions, especially specific error messages, so I keep clicking the links if they come up in a google search. But if I could do my job without using it, I would.
Deutsch is not certain that his conclusions are true. But he does know that he has reached them in the best way: by making explanations that are hard to vary, that solve problems and that have withstood severe criticism. If any of his conjectured explanations were refuted, he would change his conclusions. If he didn’t he would be authoritarian, which he would abhor.

His books are dense and benefit from multiple readings. I came back to them recently after reading Karl Popper’s works, which helped me understand his position better.
Yeah you can definitely make a language that is not Turing complete but your goal of "up-to" is not possible.

For any complexity class C that is not Turing complete, there is a complexity class C' that is a strict super-set of C and is also not Turing complete.
This is available in the London's datastore under open government license according to the FAQ.

And no the data is not imported to OSM at this date. But the doc for natural=tree tag in OSM does have quite a lot of possible extra types, leaf_type and cycle are the most common.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=tree
I'm pretty confident there's good evidence supporting a connection between "early childhood adversity" and the development of schizophrenia, but I'm inclined to agree: once the system has gone off the rails, it's probably too late for environmental intervention to rein things back in. And that's assuming there's any reliable way to initiate and maintain those environmental changes.

Realigning the internal systems involved in schizophrenia seems at least as important as improving external systems that might provoke it.
Exactly. ChatGPT is just a compiler for the low-precision programming language known as English.

In programming we can always make a tradeoff between precision and effort, e.g. by importing libraries or using no-code or code-generation tools. ChatGPT is just one more point on the same tradeoff curve. It hasn't meaningfully moved the curve itself.

Moving the curve would mean making it less effortful to write code at the same level of precision.
They mentioned not having any projects to speak of to link to
You’re both saying the same thing from my pov. But thanks for the translations!
This is a great idea. And I like the idea of fines being X% shares outstanding, not X dollars as that proportionally penalizes shareholders for not being good corporate owners. It's a win in so many ways.
I think we need sort of an etiquette code to disclose when a piece of text is AI-generated. Like when we say "Full Disclosure" or "IANAL"
Make the POC your business, call yourself a market-fit engineer and "yes, right away" all the way to early retirement.
> lending a vibe

If the vibe would get me $$$ I wouldn't mind to share it with "vibe-lender"
Is this not bisection rather than bifurcation?
Unlikely. Reddit has subreddit built right into the ecosystem, so if r/developersneedanswerstotoughcodingquestions gets taken over by an SO style mod mob, you can just go start r/fucktheolddeveloperreddit and the cycle will start new.

Reddit has a lot of flaws, but stagnation isn't exactly one of them
Correct. I agree. Well said.
I have a T14g2, and while the keyboard is indeed reasonable, it is a far cry from keyboards TPS used to have, and the front chassis wedge is so sharp it gave me long lasting and very painful CTS-like symptoms after a single long day of coding on a train (I’ve since fixed that issue by padding the corners with Sugru). The camera is also extremely poor, both in terms of image resolution and light sensitivity.