skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Well, time will tell.

If they get it right, people will use it.

If they don’t, it will wither on the vine.

Pretty darwinian, but This Is The Way.

XML Schema is a fiendishly complex, awkward, and verbose standard, but it is very much in use. Personally, I hate it, but I have used it fairly often.

I would like it to succeed, and will use it, if it does; even if it’s ugly. If it doesn’t work, I won’t use it.

My experience tells me that it can be next to impossible to predict what will and won’t work, and there’s probably no replacement for actually putting it out there and trying.

My experience also tells me that the most certain way to ensure failure, is to try predicting the future, and engineering for a very specific one.

Personally, I have had good luck, with an “heuristic” approach, where my designs act as a “lattice” for growth, and I evolve it, as I see the direction the project takes.

The main thing, in my experience, is to never have to go back and change stuff that has already been done. I may do new stuff, in the future, that breaks the API, but I should always honor The Old Ways.
Are you counting those with unrecognized paternities?

Because it's very easy to be against abortion and having somebody else raise the child you should have been responsible for.
Isn't that like lambdas, service weaver, temporal..?
Create a language learning game using two English sentences using ChatGPT
But software _does_ run on distributed systems...you might want to see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_computing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-process_communication
Hardware support is not the reason why Linux has 1% market share. Most users get a fully licensed copy of Windows bundled with their laptop, and it works, and it does everything they want, so why change it? I would argue that the software side is more important, with Linux still sucking at HiDPI setups (as seen in ~every non-ultra-cheap laptop) and with GNOME being GNOME.
MS had a rigorous certification and internal testing process, new D3D versions came out quickly to support new hardware features, and through the Xbox Microsoft had more real world experience for what games actually need than the GPU vendors themselves, which probably helped to rein in some of the more bizarre ideas of the GPU designers.

I don't know how the D3D design process worked in detail, but it is obvious that Microsoft had a 'guiding hand' (or maybe rather 'iron fist') to harmonize new hardware features across GPU vendors.

Over time there have been a handful of 'sanctioned' extensions that had to be activated with magic fourcc codes, but those were soon integrated into the core API (IIRC hardware instancing started like this).

Also, one at the time controversial decision which worked really well in hindsight was that D3D was an entirely new API in each new major version, which allowed to leave historical baggage behind quickly and keep the API clean (while still supporting those 'frozen' old D3D versions in new Windows versions).
My wife is a university professor in the states, she said it's incredibly obvious who has started to use a GPT for the work they turn in. There is a lot of wrestling going on within the staff in her department on what they should do, some people want to outright ban anything that "seems" it was written by a LLM. As my wife discussed with me, it's hard to know how much was written by GPT and how much was edited by the student, maybe they asked 50 questions to the LLM and then copy/pasted it together themselves, maybe they used it for the outline, and filled in the details themselves. The lines can get pretty blurry. One thing that it seems most of the profs find annoying is... they're aware that GPT can invent convincing sounding sources, so they're doing a lot more work verifying sources.
I guess a key point is to drink lemonade made from lemons, I’d imagine some lemonades use synthetic lemony chemicals.

Gives a new option for the old saying “If someone gives you Lemons, use them to treat kidney stones”
Yeah so imagine if tomorrow you forgot to wear pants. Now you'd know what would happen.
How do you tell the difference between true E2EE and Zoom E2EE where FB decrypts the message in the middle? Or otherwise backdoors the exchange, perhaps outside the Signal protocol? Ultimately you are trusting Facebook to tell the truth here.
Chinese banks cause alarm as capital flight measures intensify
This isn't really correct.

Loss is a training-time measurement based on performance on the training objective.

The training objective is rarely the same as an end user task that is being benchmark.

For example, classically language models are training on next token prediction. The closest benchmark for that is perplexity[1], often reported on the WikiText-103 dataset.

Until around 2019 this was often reported, but since then most large language model papers have moved onto reporting more useful benchmarks. Some examples of this are question answering performance or maybe embedding performance.

Unfortunately there aren't great benchmarks (yet?) for generative tasks. Quality is quite hard to measure here in a systematic way (see, eg the issues with BLEU benchmarks in summarization benchmarks).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perplexity
Try creating some of the more complex examples from "nature of code" in a node-based environment.

The networks you get are huge. And understanding them, after a month e.g., becomes tedious at best.

The creation may seem more artist friendly but understanding/modifying are very much less so when a certain complexity threshold is reached.

Code is simply easier to read when you reach that aforementioned threshold.

Writing code is also a different experience than using a node-based editor but that's more philosophical than pertaining to what is better when.

My experience is mostly with Houdini in VFX.

Whenever I have to touch a complex node graph, my own after a while, or someone else's -- the more nodes just containing plain VEX or Python code are in there, the easier it is usually to understand (vs someone making a sub network with another 30 nodes for what could be expressed with 10 lines of VEX).
We're only "without unemployment" because most of the population is spectacularly underpaid. This makes it cheaper - so far - to use human labour than machine labour.

And we don't use human labour very efficiently. A lot of activities are pointless make-work or zero productivity wealth transfer.

Which is almost the point of AI. It's not just about partial mechanisation or automation, which is what happened during the first Industrial Revolution. It's about making all human activity obsolete. Including all forms of mental and physical labour. All forms of culture. And all forms of economic and political organisation.

There will be nothing humans can do which a machine won't do better.

We're like the dinosaurs. A few of us are looking up at the new light in the sky and thinking "Well, that's interesting" without much of an idea of what's actually incoming.
> AI is going to come for the mathematicians and radiologists first.

As a mathematician I can see that
1) chatgpt is not able to make basic computations correctly.
2) there are not many gigabytes of information about how a great mathematician use his brain to develop a new theory or concept.
3) Common language, like that used to train chatgpt, is far from the pure concepts and intuitions used in math

From all of the above, I fail to understand on what basis are you suggesting that AI is going to replace mathematicians.

Perhaps new systems with new capabilities might emerge but what we have now are very simple systems that use some clues to perform the most simple computations.
Beeper
> The article seems to imply that the big social media companies should selectively comply with a valid warrant

They already selectively comply: "According to internal statistics provided by Meta, the company complies with government requests for user data more than 70% of the time".
That is an interesting read, although everyone seemed to be slightly hostile instead of openly discussing. I don't prefer J, even over APL; I find it not very well designed as a tool of thought. I do like some k's though; they more naturally feel like an ascii version of k. I think Arthur has a better feel for the ergonomics of verbose languages. I like BQN so far, but need to do something large-ish with it. I also like Klong, especially because Nils wrote a nice and easy to follow book about it. But it's not really a language with a community.

I think anyone interested in this kind of thing should just intern one of them ; you basically need so see every compute problem as an array problem and immediately see patterns for how to solve them. The 'gibberish' (as programmers not used to these kind of languages see it) is typically not written char for char, but the experienced programmer has idioms; when they encounter a problem seen before, an entire 'function' plops out, often shorter than a function performing the same task in another programming language would be name. Once there, the other ones are kind of more of the same. It's not very different from the first encounter with haskell or lisp or something; if you are not proficient, you won't see the advantage (or even think people using it are not totally sane).
As long as there is diversity of people and jurisdictions the law will vary from place to place.

What is legal and acceptable in one place is illegal and abhorrent elsewhere.

Until we have a homogenous global population and one world government there will be laws you disagree with and wont want enforced.

Edit: Genuinely confused by the downvotes here. Anyone care to take the time to explain?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honeypot_(computing)

A way to filter and block bots
> Nearly all electrical fires are caused by newly modified electricals

This seems like an extraordinary claim, that doesn't seem to be supported by this publication:

https://nfa.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/v8i2.pdf

Or this:

https://www.electricalsafetyfirst.org.uk/what-we-do/our-poli...
That's such a weird argument. Do people only leave their home country if their home country is bad? Do people who live abroad have no right to defend their home country from slander? The answer is generally "no" to both, but when it comes to China people can't comprehend anything other than "yes".

Just think about how weird that is. I increasingly believe that such hypocrisy simply indicates bad faith.
Because they are good laws and bas laws, so some requests shouldn't be given in too easily.
The only concerning thing to me is when tech companies volunteer information to LEO. They should at least demand a warrant.
I use Linux since ~25years, and he's totally right.

I cant stand the amateurish "it works here" or "wait your laptop is 8 years old? For sure the new kernel cannot load your nvidia driver" or "yeah that intel wireless card never worked good, buy a atheros card" or "you cant use XFS with that game because of inode64, just use wine or use another filesystem" and and and.

It's a real shitshow, i would never recommend any Linux-distro to anyone if i cant hold that users hand.
Perhaps they should be expressed as (analog) electrical circuits. Then you get differential equations in a format that is common and relatively easy to read.
> ...was getting flaky powering back on when turned off, which I assumed was the motherboard.

This is my PC right now. Sometimes it does a boot loop, where it can get to BIOS but not GRUB and I'm not sure why, as there are no error messages. Pulling the plug and plugging it back in helps.

I'm not sure whether it's the motherboard, or maybe a disk not wanting to read data or something. Guess I'll have to wait and see, eventually swapping out parts one by one once it fails entirely.
Okay. Now I feel old.
I ran some hosting using these and the raq3’s over here in Ireland.
Such a bang for your buck. Comparable gear from compaq with the right kind of management tools to do the same hosting ran in six figures. And the raq rolled over them for feature sets and stability and most especially security. Loved those 1u’s. They were awesome. Even ran a radio station’s streaming via Real that was installed on one of them. Cobalt able to compile their own RPMs for the win.
Two thoughts:

1. I think it's worth considering how much the Baumol effect is responsible for the price changes described. Specifically: we'd expect those industries that don't benefit from improved productivity (for instance, because AI doesn't actually meaningfully help with most parts of the work) to experience price rises, since they're competing in the labour market with other sectors that have have benefited from improved productivity, and can therefore pay workers more.

Or, to put it another way, you'd expect this effect to some degree in a market operating entirely without restriction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol_effect

2. If I remember correctly, in the past, when technological innovation eliminated jobs, the new ones that sprang up generally meant a rise in wages across the board. In other words, the overall effect was low-paid jobs being replaced with higher-paid jobs.

No more. In recent years, the graph of wages of replacement jobs looks more like a U-shape: they tend to either be low-paid or high-paid. For instance, take translating a textbook. A company might decide to fire their moderately well-paid translators with a steady job, and replace them with AI (built by another company, using a smaller number (per book) of high-paid tech workers), plus some low-paid, proof readers to fix up the mistakes. And the latter group is probably precariously employed: the better the AI gets, the less they're needed. And they're probably seen as lower skilled and therefore easier to replace by the company, so perhaps their jobs look more like precarious gig economy jobs.

That's a simplification, but I think the evidence suggests that that U-shape is a pattern that, very broadly, holds true. So, we might not be unemployed, but we might have a lot of people with falling incomes and much lower job security.

(Apologies, writing this in a hurry, so can't find a source right now!)
So I signed up in Thailand and Singapore without a phone number. After I disconnected from the vpn and then signed out to sign back in with my account I got asked for a phone number. I think I dug myself into a hole.
I’m not comfortable living in a world where FB and Google get to decide what laws are worth following.
>It took me a while to wrap my head around it,

I'm chinese. I understand what you're talking about it, More than you. But you are taking it too far. The concept is exactly the same as the the universal thing about not admitting fault. It is exactly the same.

The main difference is the concept has been crystallized into the language and is more prevalent. It is not anything more than that.

It's likely someone who was natively born in China is trying to explain the concept to you without fully understanding western culture. He likely thinks western culture is some sort of pristine culture with no concept at all of "not wanting to admit fault" and was trying to explain it to you thinking that the concept was completely absent from your background. No, this is wrong.

I'm a creature of both worlds. Deep insight into western culture by virtue of being born in the states and deep insight into east asian culture by virtue of being born of the chinese race, having family who is chinese and also having friends who are all chinese.

The duality of my origins make my insight more calibrated in this regard.
> As long as there is diversity of people and jurisdictions the law will vary from place to place.

You forgot from time to time. Abortion was legal in all of these places 1 year ago.
So if the Iranian government wants data, they should comply?
> how can a user (without deep technical knowledge and skills) prove the claim of end to end encryption?

Checking to see if investigations include evidence from messages on these platforms excepting:

Messages sent by the user to someone who distributes them further

Or investigators getting control of the phone.

---

WhatsApp stands up to that test.
I'm surprised that this feels more verbose than libcinder, which already pushes beyond a lot of creative coder skill sets. I wonder if it does need another pass getting a DSL together or some abstraction toolkit to get it marrying up closer to the processing experience.
For non-brits: Triggers broom is a joke revolving around the ideas of the ship of theseus.

In the show, trigger is a street sweep who has "kept the same broom" for 10 years, only periodically replacing the brush and occasionally replacing the handle.

The joke is of course, that it's no longer the same broom.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56yN2zHtofM
The framing is inflammatory. What most people can agree upon is that the surveillance state is out of control.

I'm sure I'll be flamed into oblivion here, but it is worth considering the headline from the perspective of the anti-abortionists. If we cannot empathize or attempt to understand those who disagree, what is the point of having a discussion?

"FB and Google hand over user data, help to prosecute baby killers"

Reasonable people can disagree on the topic of abortion or at what stage of pregnancy it is acceptable. HN is not the place where I want to have that discussion. It has already been explored at depth elsewhere.
> I agree, if the police finds other illegal acts during a legal investigation, they should be allowed to act on that.

I'm not sure this principle is a good one. Almost everyone had probably broken a law or two (yes, this meane there are too many bad laws, let me know if youve an idea of how to solve that), so by investigating someone for some random thing they haven't done you've got a good chance of finding something. This de facto gives imprisonment powers to the police and prosecutors office, giving plenty of opportunity for corruption.
Note that you can turn on E2E encryption in FB Messenger (as well as WhatsApp). It does lose a few features, but people should probably be aware it is possible.
Yup, looks like it's broken
I also found that part interesting. Last time I read about the rampage was about a decade ago, I even saw a video showing the prototype, but just the card itself because "nobody has any drivers for it". Apparently they must have been found somewhere by now. Some fun stuff to research for a Sunday I guess. :-)
This is not the story.

The story is Roe v. Wade overturned due to heinous corruption of the US political process in favour of the religious right and free market libertarians.
Are we not? I’m doing it right now and no-one has come to arrest me yet.

If the best you can do is tell me that I have to accede to the ineffable and indefinite reasons for your neighbor taking offense, then I suppose the discussion is over. (Of course I do accede in practice - I’m not going to refer to her as ‘they’ just to be a dick.)

If you really believe that people are entitled to be arbitrarily offended by pronouns, then you can have no objection to trans or non-binary people being arbitrarily fussy about their use. I mean, I’m “woke” by HN standards and am all in favor of respecting people’s pronoun preferences. But even I don’t believe that the subject is entirely in the realm of subjective feelings of offense and beyond rational discourse.
Using A.I. To Detect Breast Cancer That Doctors Miss
For those who have not heard of the "MiSTer FPGA gaming system" before:

"MiSTer is an open project that aims to recreate various classic computers, game consoles and arcade machines, using modern hardware. It allows software and game images to run as they would on original hardware, using peripherals such as mice, keyboards, joysticks and other game controllers.

MiSTer utilizes an FPGA board called the 'DE10-Nano', which connects to your TV or monitor via HDMI video out. It can additionally be expanded with various add-ons (such as a USB hub, SDRAM, audio and VGA out)."

(from: https://github.com/MiSTer-devel/Wiki_MiSTer/wiki)
Who decides which laws are bad?
I don’t think you’d see the change immediately as many of these companies just shifted strategies to be digital in the last few years and continued to increase prices.

I’d expect that to slowly reverse over the next decade or two. If not, then there was plenty of successful lobbying.
>In my opinion, Direct X was what killed it most.

False, 3dfx killed themselves. Their graphics chips and their architecture became quickly outdated compared to the competition. Their latest efforts towards the end of their life resorted to simply putting more of the same outdated and inefficient chip designs on the same board leading to monstrosities GPUs with 4 chips that came with their own power supply. Nvidia and ATI were already eating their lunch.

Also, their decision to build and sell graphics cars themselves directly to consumers, instead of focusing on the chips and letting board partners build and sell the cards was another reason for their fall.

Their Glide API alone would not be enough to save them from so many terrible business and engineering decisions.

>OpenGL was well supported on the Voodoo cards and Microsoft was determined to kill anyone using OpenGL

Again, false. OpenGL kinda kiled itself on the Windows gaming scene. Microsoft didn't do anything to kill OpenGL on Windows. Windows 95 supported OpenGL just fine, as a first class citizen just like Direct3D, but Direct3D was easier to use and had more features for windows game dev, meaning quicker time to market and less dev effort, while OpenGL drivers from the big GPU makers still had big quality issues back then and OpenGL progress was stagnating.

DirectX won because it was objectively better than OpenGL for Windows game dev, not because Microsoft somehow gimped OpenGL on Windows, which they didn't.
You're just playing them wrong. The optimal way to appreciate rougelikes is to spend days reading the source code and constructing a set of spreadsheet models, simulators and research collection of obscure forum posts. Then grind patiently along the extremely boring, very rigid optimal way to go.

No checkboxes ticked.

It is exhilarating.
How does LLaMA handle fast fine-tuning? Are they using transformer adapters for it?
This is a really cool project, named after a beautiful Aphex Twin song[1] (mentioned in their about: https://www.guide.nannou.cc/why_nannou.html)

[1] https://youtube.com/watch?v=A-Pkx37kYf4
> It's much the same as an XML schema,

That's wishful thinking. I can find a lot of differences, but want to point out this one to underscore the difference in approach and level of sophistication.

So, in XSL (which is one of the XML schema languages), there's a sequence element. This element describes how tags are supposed to appear in certain order. The analogous structure in JSON would be the dictionary keys, which are also allowed to repeat... but the schema doesn't even cover that option! To make this more concrete, below, is a valid JSON:

{ "x": 1, "x": "2" }

But there's no way of describing in the schema what happens here. Not only this, XSL can restrict the number of times a certain element may repeat... but JSON schema cannot still figure out what to do about this.

There are plenty of things that can be implemented in various XML schema languages, but have nothing analogous to them in JSON schema. Another example would be ensuring uniqueness of some particular type of values across the entire document.