skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is pretty much my soapbox about DRY. Code is like clay, once it dries it’s not malleable anymore. Components that copy/paste but in doing so are self-contained can be fearlessly changed.

And above a certain size dry works against you because when making changes to component A that requires a slight modification of the behavior or component Q deep in the call stack is so painful because the blast radius is huge. Dry codebases end up slowly accumulating more and more effectively read-only code that makes implementing non-trivial changes require increasing amounts of cleverness until development slows.

I think the more general principle is more to do with code directionality and framework vs library but the motivation to franken-framework your code always seems to be dry.
If payroll is your primary concern, this seems like a roundabout way to go about it. Why not bridge them directly?
Which is all fair and well and good… but how would you feel if your employer calibrated your wages to what they think you need, rather than the value you bring?

So unless we’re going to a “…to each according to their needs” society, which I think most of us oppose, we have to decide whether we want jobs that don’t pay enough for an average person to live. Calibrating wages for everyone to the needs of teenagers doesn’t seem terribly sustainable.
Sure. But also, consider the availability of arable land relative to population.

I would argue countries like USA, Canada, Brazil, Australia are the outliers. Most of the world cannot afford to be as dismissive of land use optimisation as some US Midwestern farmers appear to be.
Is that a leak or is that data public?
* Because I care about function, not implementation

* Writing tests has a cost, so I want to right as few as possible while ensuring functionality.

* rewriting tests has a cost. When I start writing, I know what functionality I want, but I may iterate significantly on implementation. This makes unit tests both an impediment, and providing me no safety to perform the refactor/reimplementation.

* the module, or it's equivalent structure in your language, is the optimal tradeoff between standalone functionality. Ideally, a module encompasses a small enough behaviour to fit in one's head. IMHO, an ideal single function should be small enough that it's behavior is readably obvious.

* module inputs and dependencies are easier to instrument in tests. I/O and hardware API dependencies can be injected/overridden. On the other hand, private variables and internal instantiations can be complex and hard to mock appropriately when unit testing, unless you are able to structure absolutely everything as a pure function - IMHO a platonic ideal, particularly in the workplace.

* Functional tests are easier for other coders (and even non-coders, in regards to feature files) to understand. "I wrote 100 unit tests" provides less information regarding actual functionality and productivity than "this feature's scenarios are all passing now."

The originators of unit tests and extreme programming explicitly stated that unit tests are not to be checked into source control, and deleted instead. They felt that unit tests would overly constrain subsequent programmers, and that higher level suites were more useful at providing refactoring safety. The only time to submit a smaller sized test is as part of a bug fix, where one would write a failing test, fix the code and check it in.

Fwiw, while I agree with them on this, I'm don't want to come across as appealing to authority. A lot of Agile/eXtreme/Scrum ideas reflect a simpler and very different time in coding, when code was, by necessity simpler and easier to reason about, and the culture of computers gave engineers much more power to push back on management demands and prioritize code quality. And some of the ideas are just hokey - like eXtreme programmings dislike for branches - encouraging all developers on a team to land their code on 'main' at the end of every day.

Besides, the very first Agile project -that birthed the movement - went over time and over budget :)
You don’t have to use a bank. Cash is one option, and perhaps someday soon a self managed/federal CBDC.

You can also put your cash into money market funds that invest in T-Bills, which is what anybody with some common sense and a large amount of money should do.

But in this world entities that offer you a return on your money will still exist, e.g. banks. If I can register my cash and you pay me x% per year, that’s better than getting 0. So banks would form regardless.

Banks make loans and create credit which allows the broader economy to grow. Better to have properly regulated private sector entities with skin in the game making lending decisions than having the federal government do it.

If you take a big chunk of credit creation and issuance out of service, the economy is likely to regress fairly significantly.

Clearly the existing bank regulations aren’t sufficient though.
Is there a place to get the prequant'ed model weights?
>Jacob Silverman

This is apparently the source:

>That's enough for me. Going to go write. Cointelegraph also posted this, though that wasn't where I first found it. It seems to be an SVB due diligence doc accidentally left online (I got it via an AWS link).

https://twitter.com/SilvermanJacob/status/163474879289640550...
> So what's the real lesson here for a startup?

Be careful of what hard dependencies you choose. The more dependent you are on a third party, or the more dependencies you have, the higher your black swan risk is. Of course, dependencies are a requirement to do business.
I don't think you understand how HN works.
> I really don't understand the moral hazard here.

It incentives ignoring risks from grey/black swan events. Weak analogue, a CTO comes in who removes redundancy/backups from the system, saves huge costs and gets huge bonuses. Once every 5 years system fails and data is lost, CTO loses bonus but on average he is making more.
That is an unfortunate dismissal. Perhaps it would be better to examine the arguments provided rather than preemptively dismissing them.

Fwiw, Mises.org is shadowbanned from new submissions on this site, but the authoritarian view from legacy media sources is celebrated. You can even post articles from socialist/marxist outlets like Jacobin.
Edit: I got confused and didn’t write this comment in the right place.

—-

I somewhat agree with how you described it as top-down vs bottom-up. I think it’s not exactly how I was framing it, but it’s close enough, and it’s a useful way to think of it.

Even in the rest of your comment you’re taking a bit more of a bottom-up approach relative to what I’m saying: you’d be surprised how much we know about how the brain’s gross organization leads to complex phenomena (pick up the latest edition of Blumenfeld’s clinical neuroanatomy if you want the very-high-level summary).

You can, in principle, achieve a “broadly correct” outcome by doing tissue-level modelling of NNs. It’s surprising how much of the brain is macro components, as opposed to micro, cell-level processing. (Of course I’m handwaving a lot here. I’m afraid anything short of a concrete demonstration is bound to be unsatisfying.)
Yeah I would be sure to learn how to use distcc first.
Or Airforms if you don't like coding: https://airforms.com/
Sorry but that's not correct. SVB is dead but solvent. People will eventually get their money back.
Ask HN: How will SEO break ChatGPT?
How will SEO break ChatGPT? Are there other risks that may have us ending up with an increasingly unusable product just like standard web search has turned out?
> No react, no reduce, no apollo or graphql. No typescript, etc.

All of these bring 10 benefit but add 12 problems back. It makes developing project slow at start, slow at medium term, and super garbage at long term. If developers get paid $100k+, I think they should be able to write good codes and have a good team instead of using these to save them from mediocrity.

If you have to really do SPA, pick something that's not bloat, not slow, not flaw .. instead of "hiring pool" BS.
I thought the majority of SVB's cash was tied up in 10-year MBSs, not treasury bonds?
Awesome, this is a pretty great and intuitive interface. I like it!
Ah, that's interesting too, I'll look into the possibility it's the touchpad.
Would you say Amazon.com has an interactive UI?
Is there a recommended userspace governor?
Obviously he is guilty of some stuff. You're probably guilty of some stuff too, and so am I.

But being guilt is not a binary outcome is it? For justice to be served one needs to take into account all the circumstances and evidence. There's a difference between harming and endangering other people, and damaging property, being coerced, being set up for crime and many other things (IANAL).

Saying "nah, he's guilty, I know it, no new evidence can make a difference here..." is ridiculous. It just show for who the goal is not justice, but politically motivated vengeance.
They're neither good nor bad. They're just assets. Investors who bought them should bear the consequences of their decision. Depositors knew that their deposits were not insured in excess of 250K. Why do we allow certain groups of people to just rewrite the rules whenever they fail? It's ridiculous. Not to mention totally antithetical to their supposed philosophy.
>That's enough for me. Going to go write. Cointelegraph also posted this, though that wasn't where I first found it. It seems to be an SVB due diligence doc accidentally left online (I got it via an AWS link).

https://twitter.com/SilvermanJacob/status/163474879289640550...
> Citation needed.

I am not sure if you were aware, but there are a lot of houses in the world.

In comparison, there aren't nearly as many high end, elite educational institutions.

I think that you are more than capable of finding a citation yourself that proves that there are quite a lot more houses in the world, than there are top educational institutions.
You swapped your two links, btw.
The amount of work that went into those orcas is insane.

I appreciate all the work and dedication of those folks, but it feels like such a waste. Especially when the final film wasn't very good.

The craft is admirable, but it was never scalable or equitable. Very few projects could benefit from this kind of budget and vision.

The coming AI revolution will make this vastly cheaper than even CG, and it'll give more people a hand at storytelling. Without requiring fifty engineers a full year of their talents.
>Being an athlete isn’t particularly different than getting a minor or a dual major. Just because there’s sweating involved doesn’t make it not a scholarly pursuit, we should stop being such gatekeepers.

From a certain perspective there is little that separates sports from a lot of arts majors. Someone studying acting is very unlikely to turn that into a profession just like a football player. Why does running around on a field have less intellectual value than doing make believe on a stage? They are both glorified hobbies. If someone can study one as a major, why not the other?
There is only one, it allows you to set an explicit frequency from userspace. The cpufreq-set man will answer all your questions. Not all CPUs support userspace, cpufreq-info will list the available governors.
It'll take time for that many people to die off and free up housing, plus who will work the jobs? Who will buy the stuff?

We need more workers (record low unemployment in 2023), and more consumers (to generate more profits without more profit margins), and more tax payers (to cover fixed government costs).

We should basically open the borders, and enforce that those entering work fairly against Americans to keep them from driving down wages. This wouldn't be an issue if the business acted respectably.
A brief look at their comment history makes me quite sure they should be kept far away from... anyone, really. Except maybe a psychiatrist.

To the grand parent, if you're reading this: please get help. Your views on what activities are/aren't appropriate for children have no place in civil society.

9 year olds, dude.
The DOE runs the most advanced biolabs in the country, out of all the intelligence agencies they have the most scientific resources at their disposal. https://science.osti.gov/-/media/nvbl/pdf/DOE_Laboratory_Cap...
*intersection
Yes, details depend on exactly what version of EMH you'd subscribe to. I think we mostly agree.

One fairly sensible version of EMH is the notion that even an efficient market pays you to take certain risks. Eg an insurance company might be paid to take weather risk when they insure crops. If there's enough competition, that risk will be efficiently priced.

People can spend extra effort to learn more about crops or the weather, and thus get a better handle on the probabilities and variances. At some point you hit diminishing returns. Different people have different amounts of productivity, ie how much effort leads to how much improvement in understanding of risk. The market price will be driven by the most productive people and companies; because they hit diminishing returns last. (To give a silly illustration: I could spend a lot of effort trying to understand the weather better, but because I have no clue, that effort wouldn't do me much good. An expert will do much better. And so it's the experts who effectively set the price in competition with each other.)

The same applies for credit risks that a bank faces when it makes a mortgage loan.

In an efficient market, the risk for holding SVB stock would be priced efficiently. But you'd maybe want to investigate whether it's the kind of risk you want in your portfolio. Or, if your investigative abilities are at the productivity frontier, you might also want to just check out SVB in general, to see if the market price is slightly off compared to your expert judgement.
What do you actually work on? I'm a synthetic biologist and know a hell of a lot about manipulating pieces of DNA. I know a bit about other branches of lab and academic biology. And I can remember some of the chemistry classes I've taken, usually a bit after the fact.

Are you saying this because you've spent time reading and/or researching fruit fly behavior studies? Or for some other reason?
I think that since SEO and corporate blogging will use ChatGPT to generate content that they think will move sites up in the rankings, LLMs will end up being trained on rubbish. There will be a feedback loop, and later generations of LLMs will experience something analogous to "heterodyning".
Yes, please this.

Over time I've come to sort of despise the karma system. Some low karma accounts are amazing, some high karma accounts are tools (imho), and I wish there was a way to remain logged in yet ignore karma, except for maybe one update per day max. It is often an unhelpful distraction to me, personally.
Counterpoint: be a little scared. Mild curiosity is not a good reason to try cannabis. (1) Some people are more sensitive than others to THC, and, worst case, you can end up hospitalized. (2) Smoking anything is bad for your lungs.

If you really want to do it, try low grade edibles; do it in the presence of a friend so they can get you medical help if you need it. Only a small number of people will have a problem, but don’t take stupid chances with your body and mind, people.
I think our industry should accept that React sucks in every engineering metric. And then we move on and no one is going to complain about it.
I think it only impacts new accounts, because you can find older files on GitHub with that content. Not sure though.
"Eventually"

You are just plain wrong that withdrawing was the wrong choice. What about those needing to make payroll or pay other expenses in the mean time? When will they get their money back? You have no idea lol

The bank failed. It has been closed. It was a bank failure. Here's the official source that calls it a "failed bank" [0]

[0] https://www.fdic.gov/resources/resolutions/bank-failures/fai...
You completely misunderstand the situation. The bank failed because of the bank run. It’s unlikely any depositors are going to lose their money because the bank was not insolvent. They’re going to get 50-60% of their deposits by Monday or Tuesday.
The usual problem is that people often pick an SPA tool for a job that a CGI script can handle. The fashion made "web UI" and "react" associated too strongly.

Much simpler tools can work if you allow for less fluid interfaces, and this may be a non-issues for a tool running on a LAN.
Sniff around companies and universities that have IT departments that old - often they have shelves of NIB stuff that never got used somewhere.
Currently, GPT3 is trained on a lot of data, but all this data is pre-2021. Essentially, no matter how much "new content" comes out on the web, ChatGPT won't know about it.

Nothing can influence ChatGPT's dataset or training data for now. However, GPT4 will have more data points than GPT3, and by the time they train more LLMs on GPT4, the data on the web will seep into ChatGPT.

The same way SEO realizes on measures, the same way ChatGPT answers rely on transformer layers which choose the most succinct answers, given enough feeding of the wrong data and no fine-tuning, large LLMs could break.
a) when you raise millions of dollars, don't set it in one account, figure out how to get deposit insurance. Many banks offer programs to spread deposits across many institutions, so it's not like you necessarily need to administer a lot of accounts directly.

b) don't bank where Peter Thiel and his friends bank. Cause they're panicy. Probably try to avoid anything he and his friends use heavily without commitments, where them pulling out will cause major immediate issues.
Theoretically yes. But in the real world, no.

Simple thought experiment: you want to know how many tons of copper are mined in the US each year. Lowest possible latency is calculating this in your head, most likely using data you don’t have. Looking it up online is a lot, lot faster.

In some far future world maybe every transistor will include the sum total of human knowledge up to the nanosecond, but that’s a pretty far future. There are many things where running locally means a higher latency floor.
Check out the YouTube channel Corridor Crew, I also liked movie magic and I think you'll like their content
*OBVIOUSLY* the bank failed because of the bank run. What the hell does that have to do with the pertinent question of: was it rational to withdraw? Those that panicked first won. Those that didn't lost.
Floppy disks were just that - they couldn't be keyboards and dataloggers with transmitters, masquerading as disks.
How to Get into Software
I made this guide to save myself time when I’m helping new people get into software. Feel free to submit a pull request and discuss using the github system if you find something highly objectionable. I do understand that the first one is very divisive, but I’m not sure how else to get people into problem-solving and not being afraid of the terminal.
They don't have the connections.
Well if you look at the other blog post titles, this person may have a bright future in the extremely creative field of self-help.
Laid off in October. Was making $130k as a mid-career embedded/C++/Python guy in LCOL USA. Supposed to start new job this Monday for $80k as an IT backend Java software developer at a University.

Been a very, very rough few months. The new pay will be difficult to service my debt properly.
> After all, someone deposited $100, and SVB turned around and bought a bond for $100. If they were able to hold that bond to maturity, they would get $100 dollars back to make the depositor whole.

No. In your example, someone deposited $80 and SVB turned around and bought a bond for $80. In 10 years, that bond will be almost certainly be worth about $100. Because it’s reliable, theu can use that value for some of their long-view bookkeeping and projections, but it’s still an $80 asset purchased for $80 and worth $80.

Some months later, the market for those bonds starts to shift. That bond will still be worth $100 eventually, but now trades for only $70.

This puts SVB into a different risk position than they were previously. While their books still reflect a $100 asset in 10 years, they actually hold less value in assets now than they started with and are more vulnerable to a run than they were previously.

Where they could have immediately sold that $80 bond to meet an $80 obligation, they can now only sell it for $70. That’s a problem. It’s a bearable problem as long as nobody asks for too much money at the wrong time, but the fact that they’re so much more vulnerable invites people to do exactly that, in order to make sure they’re not caught as the last one out the door.
> I know for a fact that around 95% of my applications don't result in my portfolio being looked at

At some stage, it will be. And if it comes down to you and this other guy, the portfolio page is going to be a deciding factor.
I want to see a database of banks that are the least solvent (when considering mark-to-market losses) and have the largest portions of their deposits uninsured by the FDIC.

Have to know which ones are going to have bank runs next so one can pull out money before everyone else does.
> depending on how you value the equity

Zero.

Value the equity at zero.

Or at most value it like a lottery ticket - something that lets you amuse yourself dreaming about what you’ll do when you “win”.

But make all your ongoing plans assuming they equity will be worth zero. Either because the startup fails, or because you get screwed out of any payout by the founders or board, or by future investors insisting on deals where early employee equity gets diluted and preferenced down to zero. Or even occasionally because they intentionally never have a liquidity event and stay private with no available way to monetise your shares. Those, or exits where employees make at most “new car” money not “fuck you” money, are by far the most common.

Do a startup if you want, they can be amazing ways to gain an incredible amount of experience to add to your resume in a short time, they can be a great fun work style at least for a while, they can be great at finding out who amongst your co workers are genuinely super talented and productive people and building networks with them.

But don’t fall for the “yeah, we’re paying well below market, but look at how generous our option grants are!” snake oil recruitment pitches…
> Until you get told to implement more reactive features, then it's over.

Turbolinks/hotwire? Not as easy with Go as with Ruby but can be done
They did already have 77% of the collateral in short-term T-bills, and the 23% in cash was spread out across multiple banks. They held $3.3bn at SVB, but that's out of $42bn total.
nuclear fission. note all the folks complaining on this site about how there ought to have been much more of it but muh regulations.
I haven’t. I drink socially, but never used anything else. But that said, I knew what “baked” meant in that context.
> Do not get this story twisted. SVB wildly mismanaged their risk, and went permabull in 2021/22. This lead to buying shit MBS’ and subsequently being forced to liquidate those securities to stop the bleeding.

Do you have any objective points on what they actually mismanaged and what they should have done instead for each point? Most of the people I see saying this don't actually understand what happened.

As someone said up thread. What SVB did was the "least bad option". The people to blame are the VCs and the fed for creating this situation by extreme devaluing of treasuries.
They are actually worth that amount if they hold them though.

They are worth one 2033 dollar or 0.7 2023 dollar. 2033 dollar and 2023 dollar should be considered two different currencies. The bonds are pegged to 2033 dollars but customers want 2023 dollars, and when dominated in 2023 dollars the bonds are devaluing like shit.
Think it’ll change at some point?