skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Seems like it would be difficult to leave your neighborhood if you're blocked behind these bollards. Especially on a one way street.

There are no one way streets blocked by these restrictions.

> The videos I've seen from the "conspiracy theorists" show residents sabotaging blockades in a residential area.

Those are anti-LTN protests.

LTNs are for eliminating through traffic from residential neighbourhoods by selectively blocking through roads. Effectively they turn a residential area into something more like a typical American or English suburb, which are usually built without through roads to prevent drivers using them as shortcuts to avoid congestion on the major arterial roads. No LTN prevents people from driving out of their own neighbourhood. The plans being described here aim to block arterial roads in Oxford to through traffic whilst allowing buses, taxis and some other traffic to pass, so have a wider impact than any individual LTN.

Oxford has extremely limited road space even on arterial roads - the city grew organically & the road network was established in the medieval period - this plan is an attempt to reduce through traffic on these roads in order to make enough “road space” to allow public transport (buses mostly) to make more efficient use of the available capacity.

Not sure why the conspiracy theorists have decided to make Oxford their place to protest all this stuff, but they seem to have decided that we need saving or something.

All the rest of the stuff you quote is stuff that particular people might like to do, but none of which is being planned or implemented here in Oxford. Nor is it likely to be, without the backing of the local population: This scheme is being implemented by democractically elected counsellors, all of whom the local population had the opportunity to eject in recent elections where they were opposed by anti-restriction candidates. A small minority may be making a great deal of fuss, but the voters don’t appear to agree with them.
I honestly don't think too deeply about this. I'm not at the age where I need to maximize an optimal retirement plan (of course the earlier the better). I just hope that in the end everything will work out. I'd rather focus on growing as a person now than much later in life. Compound personal growth is my focus instead of the monetary kind. A lot can change in 30 years. Maybe I'll find an alternate stream of passive income given all this free time. Maybe I'll die in 5 years. Maybe I'll find myself living a happily extremely frugal retirement in a rural area. Or maybe I'll just continue this way of living until 80.
Fantastic! Thank you for expanding on your use case.
They’re similar in size in large parts because it doesn’t make sense to go through all the pain of a layoff for a <= 3% layoff and it feels extremely risky to do a >= 10% layoff all at once (absent an existential threat). The end result is a lot of layoffs in the middle of that range.
Can someone ELI5 me why suddenly LLM and transformers became all the rage in AI scene?
I mean sure, in principle I'd agree with the 50-60% for the average team as a decent metric (and as a caveat, targeting the most business critical or complex parts of the software). As a single developer (and time and needs allowing, of course: a throwaway little project might not warrant any testing) I aim to get as high as possible just because I don't have that coverage that comes from having other people looking at my code.

I know there will still be bugs, particularly in harder-to-test things like the UI, browser issues etc, but it gives me more confidence to move a bit quicker when I don't have others to check me.
12:50:37 up 1224 days, 53 min, 6 users, load average: 0.00, 0.03, 0.00

Not desktop tho, my home router/server :)
AI simulates hypersonic air battle, offering tactic for winning Mach 11 dogfight
In my writing, I find world-building to be a very enjoyable activity and would not delegate it to a bot just because of that.
I would also like to say that employing ChatGPT or similar tools for this task would make all worlds feel the same, but the sad truth is that most amateur and hobbyist writers' world-building feel kind of the same anyway. :(
This joke’s also a reference to the fast turnover Australia had around that time of prime ministers, due to them getting replaced by their own party.
> The interesting part is why are they all in sync, and fairly similar in size.

As to the in sync part, the most plausible explanation is the economy. Inflation from the Russian-Ukranian war plus Covid stimulus drove the Fed to boost the interest rate.

The similar size bit is more difficult, but if a lot of that is support staff like recruiting, then that may make more sense, if those staffing levels were based on the number of engineering headcount in the first place.
Usually non-technical management are the ones that are against this kind of measures. This recent Passkeys initiative (that's what allows using secure enclave as a Webauthn key) is amazing though, I really hope it changes the game and maybe finally obsoletes passwords as a whole.

Also, as an aside. While correctly implemented Passkeys (without fallback auth methods) would make my life as a red teamer much harder, that would have only prevented this attack if the infected machine was engineer's private PC where they used corporate LastPass account and nothing else from their work. If the machine that's used for DevOps work gets infected, that's still and endgame because you're generating all sessions I need during your regular workday, so I don't really need the passwords / decrypted vault.
We will not ‘walk out’ of UK, nor comply with any request to bypass encryption
https://www.aot-technologies.com/
Much of this is very compiler dependent. For example, Java's compiler is generally able to perform more aggressive optimisations, and even virtual calls are often, and even usually, inlined (so if at a particular call-site only one shape is encountered, there won't even be a branch, just straight inline code, and if there are only two or three shapes, the call would compile to a branch; only if there are more, i.e. a "megamorphic" call site will a vtable indirection actually take place). There is no general way of concluding that a virtual call is more or less costly than a branch, but the best approximation is "about the same."

Having said that, even Java now encourages programmers to use algebraic data types when "programming in the small", and OOP/encapsulation at module boundaries: https://www.infoq.com/articles/data-oriented-programming-jav... though not for performance reasons. My point being is that the "best practice" recommendations for mainstream language does change.
I looked and DO doesn't offer this extension. Then, I tried their "ideas" app, where users can vote for new ideas/suggestions and this is the "pgvector extension" idea URL [1], full of SPAM. Looks like they don't care anymore.

[1]: https://ideas.digitalocean.com/app-framework-services/p/pgve...
Most of those Clean code rules are BS.

1. Prefer polymorphism to “if/else” and “switch” - if anything, that makes code less readable, as it hides the dispatch targets. Switch/if is much more direct and explicit. And traditional OOP polymorphism like in C++ or Java makes the code extensible in one particular dimension (types) at the expense of making it non-extensible in another dimension (operations), so there is no net win or loss in that area as well. It is just a different tool, but not better/worse.

2. Code should not know about the internals of objects it’s working with – again, that depends. Hiding the internals behind an interface is good if the complexity of the interface is way lower than the complexity of the internals. In that case the abstraction reduces the cognitive load, because you don't have to learn the internal implementation. However, the total complexity of the system modelled like that is larger, and if you introduce too many indirection levels in too many places, or if the complexity of the interfaces/abstractions is not much smaller than the complexity they hide, then the project soon becomes an overengineered mess like FizzBuzz Enterprise.

3. Functions should be small – that's quite subjective, and also depends on the complexity of the functions. A flat (not nested) function can be large without causing issues. Also going another extreme is not good either – thousands of one-liners can be also extremely hard to read.

4. Functions should do one thing – "one thing" is not well defined; and functions have fractal nature - they appear do more things the more closely you inspect them. This rule can be used to justify splitting any function.

5. “DRY” - Don’t Repeat Yourself – this one is pretty good, as long as one doesn't do DRY by just matching accidentally similar code (e.g. in tests).
Anyone with this level of access should know not to run random github projects or npm install in the most sensitive context. The choice is between easy or secure. You can't have both and that's a reality one has to accept. It's not that difficult to spin up a VM when you want to fuck around and isolate it from sensitive data.

Especially as a "DevOps engineer", gatekeeping and providing least privilege access is in the job description. I understand getting lazy and relaxing the rules in some contexts but not when running a password manager on this scale, unacceptable.
Relevant XKCD: https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/
I don't even get why people wouldn't use normal GPT API (OpenAI completions) instead. Isn't it exactly the same except that ChatGPT is primed to be more conversational (which in many cases as the one in the OP is just noise anyway)?
> I'm about to leave a project where it gets the review process badly wrong - anyone can and will comment on a review, but only a select few can merge.

Ugh, I definitely recognize this. There is often a lack of management behind those things. My heuristic is: If I can’t do my job, I tell my manager and ask for help. If they can’t fix it, there’s no point in going on.
The trade off has changed over time as memory access has become a bigger and bigger bottleneck. But caring about this is still "premature optimisation".

The claim of 20x program performance difference is overblown. Compilers can often remove virtual function calls, JITs can also do it at runtime. Virtual function calls in a tight loop are slow but most of your program isn't in a tight loop and few programs have compute as a bottleneck.

Measure your program, find the tight loops in your program and optimise that small part of your program.
It's on the roadmap since 8 years. But the problem I have with this free kind of software is that they claim on their website " The world's fastest framework for websites". That generates some expectations. They don't claim "the world's slowest hobby project, written by people in their spare time for no money." So it shouldn't be a surprise that people get disappointed, if important features are missing from "the world's fastest framework".
All this might be true in the US where realtime transfers don’t really exist.

But here in true UK where we‘be had realtime, high volume transfers for at least a decade, it’s very possible to steal digital money and move it on before the bank notices.

Faster Payments in the UK are expected to be credited and spendable within 20min, normally it’s spendable within milliseconds. The actual settlements happen every few hours, and all of it is pretty much automated. Additionally because the money can be credited so fast, there is no recourse for a bank to recover a payment they’ve authorised, they have to settle it. The sending to the transfer message is as good as sending the money, once it’s sent, they have to pay, if they refuse, the money is taken from their collateral at the payment network to pay their debt, and they’re disconnected from the payment network.
It could handle 300 moves or so with that many tokens, seems like plenty.

I propose that if you gathered enough chess transcripts like this:

e4 e5 Nc3 Nc6 f4 exf4 d4 d5 Bxf4 Bb4 exd5 Qxd5 Kf2 Qh4+ ....

And fed them into a blank GPT then it would learn chess like a language and be able to make legal moves most of the time. It would do this by inferring and modelling the board and the rules. It wouldn't be a great player but it would be able to make moves.

This is bascially what the Othello paper I linked above is all about. They used GPT-2 I think. Chess is harder but I reckon could be done with a bigger model and more training data.
It might be me but "expressive syntax" does not automatically translate to any metric of productivity or "fun". Especially not in a job, where we put most of our work time into reading, researching, searching, conception and discussions.
Only a fraction of my work time consists of "actually typing in some form of syntax".

I for one appreciate simplicity and would prefer Clojure anytime over Scala.
The further comes with barely any syntax, has a couple of quick-to-grep concepts and once you trained your brain to read it and your editor to juggle the parens it is a lot of fun.
The latter looks very nice and casual in the beginning but to me feels like a rabbit hole of complex concepts that were always heavier than the domain I was using it for. YMMV.

Tho civet code examples look nice I'm afraid it adds much more complexity than needed, both the concepts you have to keep in your brain's working memory and the whole TS toolchain which is already kind of horrible these days.
Can I ask how old are you? I like your way of thinking
This is how I have worked most of my career. It takes checking everyones ego, but turns out great software. Also, the same person doesn't have to be the surgeon on every project. If the project is small enough that 1 person can lead with the vision and everyone else helps, it produces a great outcome.
BT has been a massive disappointment for me. My Android phone to car connection is fine and the BT (Logitech) mouse works most of the time with the Apple MacBook.

Other than that, I have tried numerous headsets and none have been reliable. Even BT keyboard (other than Apple's) have been spotty with the MBP as well as phones and tablets. USB tethering works far better than BT tethering. None of the SmartHome devices have worked with BT-low-power, etc.

I think that BT using the 2.4GHz ISM band along with WiFi, microwave ovens and some ad-hoc RF devices is just too much congestion where the strongest signals swamp battery powered attempts by BT devices to compete.
Bucharest/Iași, Romania.

https://ro.linkedin.com/in/raduweiss

They have quite massive R&D offices in Romania, several thousand folks there.
Very interesting read. The author’s point about traditional academic conferences not accepting papers for GPT3 seems plausible given that Meta AI Chief Scientist Yann LeCun tweeted about why ChatGPT wasn’t impressive
> three or more alternative words

Wait until you start studying Sanskrit ;)
Who rules Earth? Wild mammals far outweighed by humans and domestic animals
Might things change when she starts walking?
2.5th-tier.
And another one here as well! Was wondering how many of us are browsing HN...
If you can't remember all of those 500 tabs, did you really need them ?
I've seen "Composition over inheritance" more times than I've seen "Polymorphism is good"
The AI Disaster Scenario
Pretty sure the author is talking about himself
> and even virtual calls are often, and even usually, inlined.

Last time I checked it could not inline megamorphic call sites, evn if implementations were trivial (returning constants).
At the same time I saw C++ compilers able to replace an analogue switch that dispatched to constants with a simple array lookup, with no branching at all.
The vast, vast majority of people in their 40s (wearing appropriate glasses if necessary) can tell the difference between an average monitor and a 4K display, which is the context of their comment.
The pine boards in my house weigh more per volume than pine boards that I can buy today. I read or heard once that old-growth wood is denser (therefore, heavier) than new-growth wood. I don't know if this is true or a myth, but if anyone reads the paper, let me know if this is discussed as a possible limitation or explanation for the discrepancy.
a plot-line almost bad enough to be a Seagal movie...
On second reading (and some context in the thread about the author), I definitely missed something.
Code has a strong dependency on context. It is not understandable without a context. Hence reading code is much harder than writing it.

More often than not, that context is something you need to guess - by reading the code - and then establish the context. Often it's a best guess because the author did not explicitly document the mental and required technical context by which the software was written.

In terms of coding standards and diverging designs, as other people has mentioned, this comes down to both tooling and leadership. It's an integrity question really; Do you wish to write software that other people understand ?

It's a pretty established fact that the brain only have so much cognitive ability, so by writing software that the brain can absorb is of course key. One way of doing this is writing small and well documented context-based code.

I highly recommend that if you are in a team, set up ruleset for how things should be and have your tool to enforce it. Class lenghts, spaces, variable names, null reference checks etc.

It's easy to be a lone developer. Everyone can write code. If you can get someone else to understand it while reading it, you're one step closer being a really good developer!
This is a good point but it gets complicated as you often don't know the software's entire lifecycle so you have to optimize for something slightly different.
The submission title includes "LastPass edits robots.txt" but https://support.lastpass.com/robots.txt doesn't seem to exclude those URLs and the article doesn't mention robots.txt
I don't think these things are mutually exclusive.

Companies have been bloated for...ever, and even more than usual in recent years. That they're all choosing now-ish to cut some costs is copycatting.
Probably ChatGPT can produce more human documents than Mr Zuckerberg.
Charging requires running a standard 240VAC connection to a pole or wall near the car. It is not a complex or luxurious technology. Yes, that wiring doesn’t exist today and will have to be built out, but wiring conduits already exist in most cities for street lighting and residential distribution.

What’s actually somewhat complex and luxurious is the parking space itself: as you point out, cities and towns don’t build/maintain enough public parking spaces for the entire population because setting aside land and maintaining public areas for the sole purpose of car storage is expensive. Once you’ve committed to that investment, running wires to your expensive parking spaces is a relatively small comparative investment, and it’s one that actually pays for itself if cities add a modest surcharge to the electricity cost.
I suspect this has a lot to do with sample selection. Because while there are statistical differences between cleanness of genders or bullying behavior, you don't really get angelic perfect girls vs evil mischieving boys unless you intentionally selects for it. And yes I am in contact with kids.

The shows like this put a lot of effort into selecting performers so that the end result is funny and entertaining. The kids knew they are performing for TV and the families that allow their kids to be on show like that are also very biased sample.
While synthetic worlds are still tedious to create, “nanite” tech in Unreal Engine 5 makes it dead easy to recreate real-world environments within a virtual world. Heck, you can buy almost real forests and cities - enough to create a full-fledged game - for under $200
My friend and I once asked a bartender for the absolute worst drink he could make. He came back with straight green chartreuse. It did not disappoint.
Use CLIP could let you search by text sentences. And this could be used to accelerate the embedding similarity sorting part. Like https://mazzzystar.github.io/2022/12/29/Run-CLIP-on-iPhone-t...
Well, I never want the site's keybindings anyways. They are without a fault, always worse than the general-purpose navigation offered by the extension (I use Surfingkeys, but it's the same idea).

Unfortunately, the extension cannot always overpower site's key-bindings, and that's where it sucks.

However, there's one exception to that rule: every now and then I need to work with a VNC in the browser, and in that specific case Surfingkeys takes over and makes it unusable. Well... it's annoying, but, really all it takes is clicking the extension's icon next to the address bar, and then clicking it again once I'm done with the VNC.

And yes, not having access to browser's chrome (that the address bar and new tab etc.) is a disadvantage that's due to how browsers currently work is impossible to work around.

Extensions do offer a kind of substitute, but it can never be 100% (i.e. Surfingkeys have a way to input new URL or edit current URL w/o interacting with the address bar, or a way to select a tab w/o interacting with browser's chrome, but if you happen on a page like settings or something similar, the extension cannot work there).
VoWiFi for LTE is what carriers (in the UK at least) try to encourage if you have poor signal at home. It still relies on your SIM being in the phone and actually makes a L2TP or SIP connection through to the carrier's server. I know because I disabled all these NAT passthroughs on my router and VoWiFi didn't work at all for me on EE with an Android phone (but did for my wife with her iPhone on Virgin). So you can still be tracked since the connection to the carrier's server requires an identity - it won't carry calls for just anybody!
Unfortunately losses from insecure banks are considerably easier to quantify than losses from insecure secrets storage.
> It's backed by very little legally or culturally.

Isn't it? I thought this was exactly what people fought for 100 years ago: to limit the standard work week to 40 hours. The US played a leading role in that fight, and it's incredibly sad to see how Americans have forgotten their history.

> Lawyers, doctors, finance professionals, and other high paying, salaried professions include the expectation of more working hours, many times unexpectedly, to get the work done.

If you've got a job that depends on unexpected events, then of course there's going to be some irregularity. For most software engineers, that's not really an issue because their work can be planned and won't kill someone if it's not done by tomorrow. System administrators may be an exception in that they have to fix a server right now when there's an issue. But that's a different issue than making overtime standard, and I would expect those admins to be well compensated for their work during off-hours.
I'd translate "Zeug" as "device": a tool or other contraption made to facilitate some activity. Flugzeug definitely helps flying, like Werkzeug helps working.
If you are not using the hotel safe, where are you putting your valuables?

I always viewed the safe as a way to protect your valuables from the cleaning staff. A hardened criminal would have no issue opening the safe.

Plus I’m more likely to forget them if they are in some hidden spot.

My recommendation is don’t travel with really valuable stuff, lock your passport and computer in the safe and you will be fine.
That would require the AI to perform at a superhuman level.
> No One Knows If Decades-Old Nukes Would Actually Work

There is only one way to find out.
I believe it's because they became more capable
ok most languages do that, take another language word in, but I think English has the habit of turning things into metaphorical phrases, adjectives, adverbs and the like for the things it imports.

Admit I can't come up with an example at the moment though.