skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>If you believe this is going to happen, how should you prepare for it? Start learning prompting now? Get involved with building these AIs? Etc.

If you still want to work as someone who produces code - except your personal code factory has changed from brain and fingers to AI - then yeah, you should probably do both of those things.

Even if you spend 1-2 years and this AI hype doesn't work out, you still have those skills to go back to.

Frankly, this mainstream adoption by Google and Microsoft is, uh, not going great. So you can afford to observe for now, but AI advancements have been made very rapidly, so it's not wise to completely ignore it either.
I didn’t even think it’s possible for a site to take down a browser completely. Nice work!
If an AI were conscious would its outputs reflect that characteristically?
> To put bluntly, anybody who buys hardware that is inexorably linked to some cloud-crap should be ashamed of themselves and deserve the loss of money as a learning experience.

This isn't "blunt", this is just cruel. Nobody "deserves" to be the victim of false advertising or broken guarantees, particularly when they can reasonably lack the necessary contextual knowledge to analyze them beyond face value. Most people do not have the time or the aptitude (which is developed through more time) to become a system administrator of nontrivial local computing resources, but still derive significant value from being able to things like remotely viewable cameras.

The lady mentioned in the article, the one who owns a pet-boarding kennel a few minutes down the road from her house, has her life materially bettered by being able to access cameras remotely, and her life is not materially bettered by becoming a sysadmin to get that except for the fact that she is downstream of bad actors.

The solution to this is not "well, everyone should be a sysadmin". The solution is "make the consequences of being a bad actor so petrifying that companies avoid doing so."

Candidly, I echoed a lot of the sentiments of your post when I was younger, more self-absorbed, and more confident of my ability to attain sufficient expertise in all walks of life to never need help. My attitudes changed as I grew older and it became clearer that I was just as fallible as the next person, just on different axes. I hope you get the chance to attain perspective, too.

We are, as it happens, all in it together, and the attitude your post expresses is counterproductive.
> AGPL doesn't cover internal software if you don't expose it outside of the company.

What about "internal" users of the company modified AGPL software (eg. employees)? I would be surprised if they are not entitled to having access to the source code under the very same AGPL terms (which gives them the right to distribute the software as well).

GPL and related licenses do allow personal use of modified software without publishing or distributing it, but company internal is not "personal" use: you are exposing some users to modified AGPL software.

I haven't read AGPL in detail so I could very well be wrong: can you point to the exact clauses which allow this exception? (Or rather, exact language that does not forbid it)

Note that users (in case of AGPL) or recipients (in case of GPL) of the software might decide not to exercise their rights, which could be pretty common for employees.

To quote AGPLv3 from https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.html:

> 13. Remote Network Interaction; Use with the GNU General Public License.

> Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, if you modify the Program, your modified version must prominently offer all users interacting with it remotely through a computer network (if your version supports such interaction) an opportunity to receive the Corresponding Source of your version by providing access to the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge, through some standard or customary means of facilitating copying of software. This Corresponding Source shall include the Corresponding Source for any work covered by version 3 of the GNU General Public License that is incorporated pursuant to the following paragraph.

I don't see how this "protects" company from offering the software to all the "internal" users under AGPLv3, allowing them to distribute it along freely under the same license.
If your ability to manage employees is dependent on their subconscious, guttural audio cues, your management is fucked beyond belief.

Regular checkins, pair coding sessions, onboarding roadmaps, careful selection of initial projects, and fostering an open-door culture should all be a part of managing any new employee, whether in person or remote. And when done properly, there is no difference in the ability for employees to transfer knowledge or get onboarded between in office or remote.
That sounds like an excellent Wikipedian.
The value in artist is their skill in realizing their creativity. I can be creative too but but sure as hell I can't paint it.
To make matters more complicated, some products start as standalone and get "upgraded" to cloudcrap along the way.
Albert Camus dancing? That's absurd.
Any advice on where to start for someone who'd like to learn to dance better at nightclubs?
A somewhat unpopular but strictly pragmatic view on human non-specialness and what that means for consciousness is eliminative materialism, where the qualities we attribute to consciousness are actually illusory, like other sensory illusions. This puts it strictly within the bounds of known physics, no magic.

This paper is a good, accessible overview of how this would work in neuroscience:

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2116933119
Heartbroken gamers mourn World of Warcraft’s shutdown in China
I would contest they are generally necessary.
Applications of parametric CAD are many. Can a jeweller designing a parametric ring do without them? Probably.

That said, you can e.g. calculate derivatives of the SDF and, simply speaking, when they 'flip' you know you found an edge or corner.
You can project onto the SDF along a plane or line and 'record' the intersection, use it as input in your model etc.

Similarly, you can treat an area bounded by such edges as a face etc.

Just because there is nothing out there yet doesn't mean it can't be done.

I also predict a great future for SDF based CAD for the simple reason that manufacturing methods mostly used for prototyping now (3D printing) will become more common for final pieces.

And there is no need for an explicit representation (higher order surfaces or polygon meshes) of the shape to get tool paths (often derived from 2D bitmap slices) for these methods.
Dave Davies asks Elon Musk to stop flagging Kinks-related tweets
> The debate is mostly about: Are opaque probabilistic models scientific?

No the debate is about whether probabilistic models are scientific when applied to the human language faculty (they aren't).

Probabilistic models are scientific when they tell you something about the natural world. In some cases they do and in others they don't.
$2.5 million is not bad given how few two-letter .com there are
So, political crap?
thanks for the feedback! it's always a tradeoff between writing the full details (my preference too!) and keeping the article short enough so that my people with minimal patience and technical background can get through it.
End to end it took maybe 2 hours to go from formulation of the problem a working solution
I guess so. But there's nothing I can do about that right now sans going to the future, as I'm still acquiring the pieces. Haha. I was trying to just make it clear that this was a choice was due to research and not use, as of yet.
Show HN: Can You Hold Your Breath for 40 Seconds?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_secret
Anything with the word "smart" falls under this -- that's a good heuristic that covers a large fraction of cases.
Banksy’s Valentine’s Day Artwork to Move to Margate’s Dreamland
I mean... DeepMind has its fair share of AI exposure
In Denis’s article he saw he was accused of ransom and his response was “ok let’s do this.” It’s not a mischaracterization, he plainly admits it’s close to his last option left.
Another thing that Austral gets right is capability-based permissions for packages, in recognition of the growing danger of supply chain attacks. See for example https://blog.phylum.io/pypi-malware-replaces-crypto-addresse... - a bunch of typo-squatting Python packages that use setup.py to write a JavaScript file into the developer’s filesystem (specifically the Windows Start Menu) and register it as a background process inspecting and altering the clipboard to replace crypto wallet addresses with the attacker’s own wallet address. Why can a setup.py in /home/user/.local/lib/python3.6/site-packages or wherever access the Windows Start Menu folder and write files there? Well, because code is almost universally permission-less. Austral’s solution is to give granular permissions: “capabilities can be arbitrarily granular. Beneath the capability to access the entire filesystem, we can have a capability to access a specific directory and its contents, or just a specific file, further divided into read, write, and read-write permissions. For network access, we can have capabilities to access a specific host, or capabilities to read, write, and read-write to a socket.”
I've come to think that a more malleable history is seen as a feature, not a problem, by rather a lot of people.
It's almost like we need a hybrid model. Some things centrally planned and some things left more free.
404, doesn't work.
Good point. Although the Iran revolution was slightly more in the news with the drama about the shah of Iran. He was ill with cancer. Carter would not allow him into US for treatment, so he had to go to Mexico. I think he eventually got into US though, because Mexico could not care for him. The shah of Iran had quite a following among many. He sort of the royal family of the middle east.
I guess you could have software error correction and still be faster than swap to flash?
>>these the the central core that understands BREP and implements the geometric operations.

> I've seen people quote a good modern CAD kernal as a 100 man year project. It's probably not going to happen, maybe there's some avenue for government funding?

Perhaps the leverage of AI coding assistants will bring it down to a few man years over the next 5.
Have you read the original question by Pinker and the response by Chomsky (http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/myl/PinkerChomskyMIT.html)? It doesn't look like a strawman, though it's a bit hard to get what he was gesturing at as the answer was impromptu.
TBH it’s rather easy now if everyone is using Windows and or have OneDrive installed right click on any file and click share with onedrive.

Other than that you need to teach people how to share via the local network which isn’t terrible but requires some basic knowledge to set it up initially.

But overall yes the experience of sharing files between one computer and another can be terrible especially if you don’t want to drastically decrease their security posture.
In my work with it, chatgpt has never produced very good code. I have not noticed a drop in its already mediocre to poor performance. I have to wonder about your weird perception that it was "superb."
How does the average person go about a non cloud connected router? They barely know what it is, let alone what it means to administrate it over the cloud software. How is this their fault for not being a IT professional capable of understanding a $75 purchase?
Any tips for how to get into it as an adult?
The rationale that seems most reasonable to me is decades of low interest rates.

Interest rates are essentially an indication of how expensive money is. When interest rates are low, money is "cheap".

Outside of the FED purchasing bonds, Banks giving loans is another way to "print money". So when interest rates are low, more people and businesses take out loans, and as a consequence there is more money circulating, "sloshing around", in the economy.

There are other factors at work though, outside of interest rates, that can cause wealth to pool.

Various forces since the mid-1990s in the United States, mostly related to the tax and regulatory environment of corporate compensation packages (i.e. paying senior employees in stock, etc), have caused net wealth transfers to the upper classes. The wealth gains those classes have achieved also causes them to have excess wealth that wants to go somewhere.
FWIW the only tweet of mine Twitter ever flagged (about a month ago) contained the phrase "paywall penetration"
From a quick couple "Ctrl-F"'s - very little of the article is about oligarchs, and even less about Russia.

Also - my understanding is that Putin decided quite a while ago that the oligarchs had more power than he liked, and undertook measures to "fix" that problem. For example - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Russian_businessmen_myste...
Okay, you know what - let's pretend that skill and talent does matter in terms of revenue.

We now need to explain why those sports that require just as much skill and talent (sometimes more) as the major money-making sports do, have less revenue.

You really want to go down the path of saying that a sport that relies more on brute-force strength (football) than other sports requires more "skill" and "talent" than (for example) sports that require insanely fast reflexes (ping pong) or sports that require a very high degree of precision (golf).

Right, so lets pretend that brute-force strength is a skill and talent - now how are we going to explain sports that require more brute-force strength being less popular than football.

Athletic skill and talent have almost nothing to do with the revenue of the money-making machine.

Like I said above, athletes are entertainers. They get paid for entertainment.
Don't OFFICIAL ballons have to have transponders?
Hi all
don't know ANYTHING about this so... But I would have thought OFFICIAL ( authorized) balloons have to have transponders/radar reflectors etc and if so WHY did we, seemingly, shoot down hobby and academic balloons? Also why did we use a $400,000 missile to shoot down a balloon? wouldn't a missile's fragments destroy most of the intel platforn?
It really sparks optimism when the economic system you live in considers people and businesses having lots of wealth as a bad thing.
> It is perhaps the only thing that is true about that universe, that I somehow exists. Everything else is simply derived from that and might as well be an illusion (perhaps a very consistent and steady illusion).

Actually, there is every indication that you are an illusion.
Most of us learned to manage that 3 years ago when this all started
I’m just waiting for this to happen to newfangled connected cars. Hopefully then people will start to vote about the issue
I just want something small with ECC RAM
Yeah seems like they want to stick with one approach rather than supporting both EventPages and service workers at once.
So if ford stops making spare parts 30 years after a car was discontinued is the car rented?
Secure shell and ipfs are legacy systems now? This article is nonsense.
"There are only two ways to make money in business: bundling and unbundling"
The everyday movement of the technologically extended body (2017)
"Because we are smart"

Then why is having fewer types correlated with generally high IQ? I am not buying this, sorry. It's an interesting theory but typos tend to be indicative of lower intelligence, all else being equal. The smartest writers I know of have very few typos (talking about bloggers, so no editors).
More government regulations?
Practical Understanding of FLP Impossibility for Distributed Consensus (2021)
>You can't change anybody, you can only influence them to change.

Everyone and everything influences who we're regardless of their intentions. What is strange is, although you may already be happy and fulfilled, people feel it's their duty to "influence" you to change because their worldview cannot accept you. In their mind they think "you cannot possibly not like this thing that I love." Well dears, it's possible and you should accept that not everyone is like you.

>You can't learn anything from a book that you didn't already know.

Let's start that this very much depends on the kind of book. Putting that aside, literature isn't meant to convey knowledge in first place. Rather literature is meant to convey emotions and imagination.

>but I've seen enough people change

People may change. But that doesn't make right other people to try and force this change.

>You don't have to be open to the possibility of you don't want to be

Sorry but I've hard time understanding this. Do you mean "at least try"? What if they tried and didn't liked it? Do they've to try indefinitely because some people cannot accept the fact that they may not like it?

>I'm not a math person.

Huh! See this is usually said when someone has hard time with math. Which is entirely distinct thing from enjoying math. Have known many people that were good in math but that didn't mean they'll solve math problems in their free time. Similarly people can be good at dance but that doesn't mean they enjoy dancing.
A site can't take down a browser. A browser can take itself down if it doesn't like a site.
If your queue is always full (100% utilization) your jobs will on average never be processed.

Love the downvotes! People should read this: https://blog.danslimmon.com/2016/08/26/the-most-important-th...

I understand this is a little counterintuitive but it is true. You should not have a queue that always has a job ready to be processed.
I agree with the premise - not all situations benefit from usage-based pricing. However, this discussion misses many dimensions of what makes usage-based pricing valuable.

It’s akin to a poorly developed benchmark that doesn’t consider all the real world factors but tries to win on one vector.

Here are some other intangibles:

(1) Subscription pricing is difficult to scale upwards. The concepts of upsells and new products are difficult to execute and increasingly result in lower and lower adoption. Each new capability needs to be “sold in” with a new sales motion creating endless amounts of feature creep and unused features.

(2) If your costs are variable and your revenue is fixed, you better hope your customers don’t like you or your product is really simple. Otherwise, you risk more margin compression as customers use you more and more beyond what you modeled. The difference between your ARR and the cost to serve gets smaller. Like a perverse Innovators Dilemma.

(3) Innovation tends to be simpler with usage based pricing, when done right. In a subscription model, product teams tend to be much more conservative. Each new sellable feature needs to be fully supported with training and enablement for sales teams. When the product fails to grow like the first product, then the sales team becomes increasingly more conservative. It’s a viscous cycle.

Usage- based pricing makes a lot of the above moot. If any existing or new benefits of the product are offered to all customers, then it actually aligns the incentive of your company and your customer. Use more to drive revenue (you) or use more to get more value.

Of course, marginal value isn’t always the same, so that’s when usage tiers develop.

Now how you quantify all this I’m not sure. But there are far more simplification benefits to usage based pricing.
They should be empty to reach absolute minimal latency (e.g. the only latency is the time it takes to process the task, which you could call 0 latency). Different services have different latency targets.

The right statement is not "they should be empty" but "they should be under the target latency", which might be 0 (then "the queues should be empty"), or might be some other target (then empty means overprovisioned resources).

Everyone in this thread seem to be talking over each other because they imagine vastly different services (e.g. shipping company vs hospital emergency rooms).
KPIs are like a GPS for product managers, except they won't reroute you when you take a wrong turn, they'll just tell you how far away from your destination you are.
Most people are quite stupid otherwise this would work for other situations and in the past
None of them have a dedicated GPU, just a low-powered one built into the CPU. Using a CPU without an integrated GPU would only shave a few dollars off the cost, so I don't that is a common choice.
What breaks my heart is that it's not shut down everywhere else.

>“It [felt] like a precious piece of antique was stolen overnight,” Xingxian, an avid Chinese World of Warcraft player for more than 13 years

This is what addiction sounds like.

You can tell because the statement is absurd.

More accurately, it's like if your antique was broken and glued back together over and over and twisted into some increasingly grotesque version of its former self by the bloated zombie of a corporation who died inside sometime near 2010 and who's intent on squeezing every last dime from parading the desecrated corpse of your antique as long as it can until... well, its options are pretty limited since all of its big-hit franchises are in solidly dead genres and its rapidly hemorrhaging all goodwill or expectation that it can produce anything of quality anymore, but... maybe it'll make a mobile game or something; those reap in tons of $$$!

...And then THAT thing was taken away.
> I only buy hardware that can be controlled and/or managed locally. Sure, it means some 'cool' gadgets aren't available in my world. But it does mean that what I buy will be supported and will just work.

You are part of a vocal minority.

The vast majority of people aren't tech savvy. That's why smartphones are the way they are nowadays.
Why would you add a dedicated graphics card to computers that run in text mode or a very minimal graphics mode? Seems expensive.
> As we see with LLM consciousness is not needed to fake humans

You are just assuming that LLMs aren't conscious. We don't have a way to evaluate that at this time.
The Soviet Union hasn't existed for nearly 32 years. That's practically a third of a century. It's not a good example country for today.
It is definitely closest to what I want. I need to give it an honest try.
The Little’s law[1] offers considerable guidance here. In the shortish term it’s safe to model the system as being stationary and then you need to provision for seasonality[2]. Upward or downward trending demand after correcting for seasonality indicates that the system isn’t stationary and your choices are either to scale up or reject requests. Nevertheless the optimal queue size is not necessarily zero except in cases where extremely low latency is necessary. The optimal queue capacity for most web service type applications is one that trends toward almost but not quite full when seasonal requests are higher.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little%27s_law

[2] broadly construed. For example a service that gets a mass of requests at the top of every hour displays seasonality.
For the new generation, the Internet is the Web. HTTP is part of the standard stack like IP, even if you don't need or use hypertext.
1and1 and Godaddy are absolute trash. But what's your issue with Namecheap ? They have solid support and yes domains are a bit pricey may be compared to another registrar but when I look at domain registrar, I care mostly about Support and reliability.
Saying that offline, local-first apps aren't relevant because "almost everyone is always online" rings similar to saying accessibility isn't relevant because almost everyone can use their eyes.

As for sharing, that's very much application dependent: personal data could benefit from being shared across a user's device, but not with third parties.