skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The part of the quote you chopped off:

And the part of your own quote that you chopped off:

"To me there's a very big integrity difference between lying and applying for a role which you don't meet all the requirements."

That's not a difference between exaggeration and lying, it's a difference between honesty and lying. Where exactly is the exaggeration?

> I now realize reading through your comments that you're the kind of person that tries to vouch for flame bait and then complains about it. I've clearly wasted my time here.

Heh. Are you referring to this? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34849006

The commenter posted a link: "see his rebuttal here: https://tessier-lavigne-lab.stanford.edu/news/false-allegati..."

I said: "I've vouched for this comment. Not sure why it was flagged. Regardless of whether you believe Tessier-Lavigne's denial, it's directly relevant to the story."

The link was not flame bait, it was simply the accused person's response to the accusation.

Now, in retrospect it does turn out to the case that the commenter has engaged in flamebait in other comments. I did not vouch for those other comments, nor was I even aware of them beforehand. I didn't look at the commenter's bio or other comments before I vouched for that one particular comment, which was simply a link, a very relevant link.

Thus, your criticism of me is totally unwarranted and ridiculous. You're grasping at straws here.

[EDIT:] I noticed that you've edited your comment to remove the part about vouching. Have a nice day to you too!
This is on my todo list after wrestling docker almost in to compliance with nftables. Even so, I still have some issue with ports forwarded to docker services not NATting correctly and instead show up with a source IP of the docker bridge. Switching to nftables exclusively (docker is using iptables-nft) and preventing docker from doing this should resolve my issues.

I can't think of another application on any of my systems that muck with firewall rules behind the scenes like this.
I think a gesture is actually worse. They can say, hey look, I'm just like you. If I can work like this so can you. So buck up. When in fact they can go into their reserved conference room any time they want. Or not even use their bigger cube with 2 assistants. Just get the corner office and keep your gestures.
Why Musicians Can't Retire
Been involved in projects like software adoption in remote aid posts in Papua New Guinea that don't even have roads, and Agtech apps in deep rural Australia.

Even with Starlink there will still be places that stuff needs to work offline.
"Duh-rail-yer" is the only pronunciation I've heard, which is presumably some sort of half-hearted attempt to keep it sounding "foreign" without using phonemes that most English speakers would struggle with (particularly the 'r').
I guess it could fight against fake profiles manipulating the online social commons
Here's a quick and easy SEO guide to get you started. By improving your website's SEO, you can increase your visibility, attract more organic traffic, and potentially generate more leads and sales for your business.
A Link Between Hearing Voices and Hearing Your Own Voice
> if you’re not careful.

I don't think there's a way to avoid a DOS vector even if you're careful. If someone can access your database directly, they can make enough attempts to lock a user. The only way to be careful is to avoid public access to the db. But if you do that effectively, you don't have the issue of accounts getting locked.

It's a dubious argument to ever lock an account as a safety measure. Arguably, downtime is not a good tradeoff, especially if you're following best practices and using a very long, truly random password. An extremely secure db setup shouldn't require you to disable a "safety" feature that creates a new DoS vector because you've followed best practices.
>> you have some newly created money, whilst the demand for holding money balances … stays the same

This is a contradiction. You can’t create money without a demand for it first. In this specific case through the demand for money in exchange for treasuries/MBS/etc.

>> So what happens is that money is exchanged away like a hot potato until the demand for money balances rises to match the extra created money

This view derives from monetarist theory, it’d be fair to say this view enjoys less support today than it did in the past. As with all macro views, it’s primarily BS with perhaps a little bit of truth that may or may not apply in any given real world scenario. Probably not a useful model.
They already had a verification feature deployed which wasn't perfect but was reasonably strict. Then they debased it for a new revenue stream.

I don't see them making the now that we've got a bunch of people paying for it, lets reduce our revenue by suddenly becoming strict on it again decision. Or people taking the badge more seriously now it just means someone subscribed to Twitter Blue
You say it’s difficult, but you yourself will learn the key principles from a single course.

Learning to create a successful product is much harder and requires a much rarer set of skills. There’s no course you can take that will give you this ability. Knowing lots of details about accounting and business administration won’t help you unless you can make something that sells.
I think it's for content creators / official accounts, so basically people want to advertise or do public relations moreso than consumers.
I guess something like sandbox computation, where you can execute arbitrary code on the fly (within a sandbox environment).
I can’t speak for the rest of the article but for better of for worse “decay” is the standard word used for what happens to arrays as they are passed around as pointers. See for instance https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/types/decay.
`char *p` is identical to `char* p`??
The problem with this is that people usually underestimate what they are worth to a company like Meta and "I'd be willing to pay 5 bucks for no ads" is usually not above the LTV/month threshold.
Sure, in general you want to use the narrowest possible interface. But in this particular case, I think `net.Conn` communicates intent better than `io.ReadWriter` -- the former implies that two distinct parties are involved, whereas `io.ReadWriter` is usually for (single-user) buffers or files. Sometimes it's sensible to use a larger interface than necessary; e.g. if you have a helper function that only calls `SetDeadline` and `Read`, the argument should be a `net.Conn`, not a custom interface with just those methods.

tbh though, it's a very minor quibble and not really worth worrying about ‾\_(ツ)_/‾
It also costs money to buy ads on facebook. So not everything facebook offers has been free for quite some time.
Agree. It's becoming a bubble because they're strangling their own product while pretending it saves humanity to do so.

Which is why it wont pop. Because it's actually useful to many private orgs. It's just dangerous for the public to use if you're anything but pro-free speech.
What's frustrating to me about your comment is that you and the person you're replying to seem to basically agree on the pertinent points, but you've chosen to make an irrelevant, unfalsifiable semantic argument.
I see consciousness as equivalent to AGI.
I will accept a text generating model as AGI if it:

- has long term memory (soesn't have to be text, but equivalent in content to maybe at least 10000-100000 words. Maybe more, I don't know

- can effectively use this memory

- can perform language tasks with arbitrary time frame length on a human level (e.g. Turing Test)

Examples of such language Tasks:

Being a completely realistic (simulation of a) long distance partner that you deeply emotionally and intellectually engage with ober the course of 8 months is an example of a language task)

Being your online friend and co-founder of a tech start up that you work with over the course of 10

For practical reason, the model should probably have a way to integrate its text based causal timeline with our real world timeline. What I mean is that it should probably have the ability to call itself every x seconds, or have itself called asynchronously based on API calls or something like that. Talk to itself, etc. But this is mot fundamentally necessary for AGI/consciousness.
Seems weird that everyone is cool with Natalie Wood being abused by Frank Sinatra when she was 15. But everyone is cool that Elvis married a girl he started grooming when she was 14. And cool that Anthony Kiedis admits to taking a 14 year old across state lines and having sex with her in his biography. And that Steven Tyler was given guardianship rights of 14 year old Julia Holcomb so she could live with him. And that Don Hendly hired an understage girl to entertain his roadies and she was latter retrieved by medical staff while ODing. I guess if you can sing it's anything goes in America.
I don't think they want your money, not unless you are an enterprise costumer.

But feel free to donate to another open source project:

https://liberapay.com/
Less commonly but more dangerously, an excess of overconfidence also makes poor learners—they take action faster than most, but get into trouble due to failure to realize all they have to learn.
Is there serious talk about launching one? They honestly should.
ok. a small challenge - read character input of undefined length, and then print the input out backwards. i guarantee the c++ code will be easier to write and understand than any c code.
It was at the very top of Google's corporate code of conduct until[1] 2018.

1. https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-do...
We do look at that sort of thing but I wouldn't say it's straightforward to determine because we don't have access to people's intent.

We turn flags off a small percentage of the time. I don't know how small because although we log the flagging history, we don't keep it in a form that's easy to compute.
They are the minimum requirements to upgrade, be supported, and use all of the features not the minimum requirements for it to boot. Not using e.g. the Windows Hello login flow doesn't mean you were lied to about the requirements.
Is there a way to curate away those sponsored posts?
You don't.

This is for the Lady Gaga's and Elon Musks of facebook. Followers want to be able to know if they are following the real deal, and the real deal wants to be certain that they can be differentiated from the fakes.
> As far as I know, speech recognition in Chrome, unlike on Android phones, is being done online.

I'm no expert, but I would imagine this is Google's problem. The website is calling an API that no reasonable person would expect to leak data to Google – in fact, Google has an implementation that doesn't – yet personal data is being leaked, without the user's consent.

At no point does the operator of this website act as controller for the voice data.
i actually support the pay to verify feature. my reasoning for this is it gives authenticity to the user. if the user is verified then i know that the user is most likely not a bot account and gives some credibility. could this be free? certainly, it’s how the old twitter verified works but now since all users can be verified, it democratizes this feature and i think its better overall. i notced discussions with similarly verified users are more civilized probably due to the personal information being shared and makes them think twice about doing anything malicious or otherwise.
Sounds like Facebook’s problem, not mine.
> Seems reasonable that larger models trained on more data will continue to improve accuracy.

It also seems reasonable to assume that they will eventually encounter diminishing returns, and that the current issues, such as hallucinations, are inherent to the approach and may never be resolved.

To be clear I don't have a clue which statement is true (though I don't see why scaling would solve the hallucination problem).
The mass exodus isn't moving to Debian, but to Linux Mint, which is #3 on DistroWatch.com. Ubuntu is #7 and Debian is #8. A year ago Mine was still #d, Ubuntu was #6 and Debian was still #8, so Ubuntu is experiencing an exodus. Of course, DistroWatch's rankings aren't scientific but I don't think we have any other way to measure Linux distro use.

Ubuntu gave up on having the best desktop experience when it gave up on Unity and replaced many packages with Snaps. Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu and has its own Cinnamon desktop but also offers other desktops and a version based on Debian instead of Ubuntu.
I am not surprised at all. Maybe 7 years ago I got called in to clean up a website "hack" where the site had a bunch of malicious JS on it. Site was hosted on GoDaddy.

Pulled the site down locally and started the regular process of find/remove, but nothing was showing up. Hosting the site locally, the JS wasn't being put on the page. Checked all the server files for stuff like php.ini, user.ini, etc etc. Nothing was showing up.

Created a plain info.php file on the account. That had the JS injected into it.

Started searching for other sites with the same JS, found a bunch, dozens. Started a search for "neighbor" sites to the one I was investigating, ones that most likely were on the same server. They ALL had the JS injected. Server was owned.

I alerted the client and sent a note into GoDaddy, like you need to check this out. Got a response that it was impossible for the server to be compromised and I should buy their Sitelock service for security. Instead we requested a migration to another server and that cleared up the issue.
“Simple to implement” is an undervalued virtue in most of the systems we use. The internet and industry tend to pull things towards scale and complexity, and there is real value in systems that resist those forces to stay intelligible and human-scale.
The former executes loop when `i` is 0.

And we cannot change the comparison to `>=` in the later, because unsigned is always bigger or equal 0, thus we would get infinite loop.
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine in 82.5 Hours
If you’re exposing ports on your tailnet then you’re presumably binding to those specific interfaces, right?
That anyone would think 2 years is a long time for a part not to need adjustment is a symptom of 21st century thinking surely. I'd also suspect you're not riding 100s of km of hilly terrain every week (I do, and have definitely needed to make adjustments, but no more often than on mechanical shifters).
>> But money does not "go into assets." That's a misconception

How would you describe the situation when you purchase a treasury bill then?

You gave money, the money you gave ceased to exist in the economy - it is no longer available for anyone to spend, you gained an asset.
I wouldn't make that strong a statement anymore. The level of play by AlphaGo/Zero seems to demonstrate creativity and understanding that we would only attribute to humans. That is to say I can't say for certain that emotion couldn't be faked, and we don't know that human emotion is super-special, only that it's complex.
My only nit with their build stages is I don’t see them
mentioning that the pipeline stages they outline are logical. When it comes to how the real pipeline actually runs you should ignore the stages and just specify the minimal dependency graph and let everything that can be run in parallel run. This usually means produce your build artifact first and then run everything immediately after. If you’re feeling fancy you can have the steps remember the logical stage they’re in and bail out of later stages on failure.
No? Your question doesn't feel like a question and I'm not sure what your point is.

If your point is "the mods are censoring me because they disagree with me" - basically everyone with strong passions on a given topic feels that way when they get moderated. I've written about that a bunch of times: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... - but the short version is that this is an illusion. Plenty of comments that agree with you don't get moderated; only the ones that break the site guidelines do—and the same for the comments from the opposite tribe.
The combination of stuff like char*** and the lack of const usage by some C code is really horrible.

Like, yeah, maybe you do need something like char***, but do you really need that to be mutable at every single indirection level? But even if you sometimes see char***, you really never see char const* const* const*.
> I haven't noticed a correlation between formal education and the people that I would describe as "high value producers".

I agree, but I would argue that people without formal education have to usually work their way up.

Basically, if I'm a high school drop out, then I'm very unlikely to land a job at FAANG right away. Quite possibly I will have to start in some low value job to get some credibility. But if AI eats most of these jobs, then it also removes the possibility for the high school drop outs to move up.
There are a lot of admirable things about the EU, and this is by no means intended as EU bashing.

But could there be a more on the nose example of why the EU lags in tech innovation and entrepreneurship? An solo maker builds a cool little tool as a personal project, open sources it on github, and is immediately attacked for the effort by cosplay compliance regulators. It defies parody.

The commenters also have a cartoon understanding of the GDPR - the author of the Chrome extension is neither a data controller nor a data processor.

I'd ask the commenters that jump on a project like this to introspect a bit and try to understand why their first impulse on seeing someone's effort like this is to try to take it down.
Russia has been using it successfully in their fields to predict deposits.
Hm, this is actually a very interesting case. If the extension is (I'm assuming) literally just leveraging the API and not storing anything at all, would it be sufficient to let people know it's doing so in order to be compliant with GDPR?

Does this even count as something that would be covered by GDPR? Is it because the data collection is tangential to the "service" being offered?

Chrome's Privacy page [1] doesn't say anything about the API. Other people have also been wondering about the privacy implications of using the Speech API. What an interesting rabbit hole!

1: https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/privacy/
What does it mean to improve utilization if the aircraft are at 100% utilization?
I don't recall if Elite was the first game or not to have stable mixed mode. It was most likely the first, and once demonstrated, other developers implemented the idea too. I recall that the mode 4 of Elite wasn't strict mode 4 because they wanted a certain amount of pixels that would divide evenly by a number, so when the interrupt fired, the mode could be changed. It's been a few years since I worked on the Beeb.

You probably already know this, but to fill in context the screen would flicker because the NMI that handles disc IO would fire, and would be serviced before IRQ1 if both fired together, and also you cannot interrupt an interrupt.

BBC Micro Advanced User Guide pages 359 and 370 detail the 6845 and ULA demonstrated Mode "8" and I recall Practical Computing and Acorn User also had listings for doing tricks with the interrupts and the mixed mode, though don't ask me issue numbers.

I picked a random video of yours "ABug 09 Explaining Elite" and jumped forward to 2:22 to skip the intro, and said "oh, that's a matrix transposition function" when the code popped up on the screen. It's funny how some of that crap sticks with you.

Elite was an amazing achievement.
Ask HN: Drop your favorite mentorship orgs
I've got a bunch of friends that are interested in starting their own enterprises but are having a hard time finding mentors. Right now the main sources of mentorship seem to be ondeck and y combinator, but these are for people who are interested in build tech stacks and apps - what if you want to start a spacetech company? or an online publishing company? or an online fitness co? All things that are going to integrate tech, but which don't actually fit into the ondeck/ycombinator model.

interested in seeing what you guys have come across..
I’m shocked they didn’t pull the “we said Facebook would be free, not meta checkmarks.”

Imagine being able to rename your company to exempt yourself from the terms you wrote, because your new name isn’t in the terms.
Lol this guy's is hilarious.
It means greedy people have too much cash and are still looking for investments. They are forced to put money into investments that are less than ideal. If something isn't worth it but you can't find anything else that is the case with everyone else meaning all the shitty assets are going to be driven up. If a billionaire has a billion dollars they are looking to get rid of that trash and find something they can write their name on. They know where that toilet paper came from. I mean money.
I do think 100 man years is an exaggeration, or maybe they're talking about fully reverse engineering an existing CAD kernel and all the weird proprietary extensions it supports.

In my uninformed opinion working with meshes is hard. In the interest of comparing apples to apples I'll compare a CSG-based approach (joining two mesh objects together) with an SDF-based approach (joining to SDF objects together).

If you want to merge two mesh spheres together you need to do a lot of work. First you need some way of telling whether a point is inside or outside of another mesh. This is because you need to be able to delete all the vertexes/points/faces that are inside the other mesh. So you do that, and you delete all the points/vertexes/faces that are colliding with the insides of another object. Then you need to stitch the two meshes together. This is a whole thing, you need to find the boundary where the two meshes would have collided, create a bunch of new edges along that path while also taking into account where the existing faces on both objects are going to be.

There's a lot that can go wrong during this as well, it's possible for your geometry to be "non-manifold" which means it has no clear inside or outside, and it's really easy to accidentally make an object non-manifold when you're stitching it together with another object. There are issues where sometimes meshes look alright but in reality there are two edges on top of each other, or a face with zero area, or all kinds of crazy stuff. Making a tool that can reliably stitch two meshes together is a pretty big challenge. Than you start talking about adding fillets to vertexes, and how that affects the mesh geometry of other attached faces, and you're having to write some really complicated error prone code for N different combinations of situations. Like what if the chamfer abuts another chamfer? What if it abuts a spheroid? A bunch of edge cases (heh) depending on the faces that your edge butts up against.

With SDFs you just check if the point is inside one object or the other, and than re-generate the mesh from scratch. You write one not-too-difficult mesh algorithm and everything else is basically just OR/XOR/AND-ing things together. It makes defining geometry geometry about as simple as possible, just write a function that can say whether a point is inside your geometry or not. Something you need to be able to do for mesh based CSG anyway, but with a bunch more complications.

This is also why tools like openscad can't do fillet/chamfer joins after 10 years and the tool I threw together in a few weeks can.

https://github.com/traverseda/PySdfScad
I think they were just making a sarcastic point - i.e. the tool has lots of uses!
Is it possible to find the binary that does this and nop out the offending function? How would you approach this with a debugger?
Kinda weird to blame Docker. This is pure user error.