skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> but i'm fucking confused every time I start reading its docs and syntax.

You are not the only one. :)

I definitely walked up to Rust & then turned around & left again during my learning process. :D (And that was with the advantage of having dealt with manual memory management previously.)

But I think the Rust community generally acknowledges the learning challenge that Rust may present at the beginning & work to reduce it over time. And also provide the reassurance that it's definitely not just you.

At the beginning I think the resource I found most helpful was this:

* <https://fasterthanli.me/articles/a-half-hour-to-learn-rust>

Primarily because it's an extremely compact overview of Rust syntax which has the benefit of (a) improve your familiarity with the syntax & meaning to enable you to read Rust code; and, (b) it's all in one page so when one inevitably forgets something they can return to the page & search and/or review it. :)

As the introduction puts it:

> In order to increase fluency in a programming language, one has to read a lot of it. But how can you read a lot of it if you don't know what it means?

> In this article, instead of focusing on one or two concepts, I'll try to go through as many Rust snippets as I can, and explain what the keywords and symbols they contain mean.

It is also perhaps the shortest article by fasterthanlime on record. :D

> Is it worth using rust for anything that isn't currently written in C?

That's an interesting question. (FWIW C and C++ are also used for writing servers, command line & GUI applications.)

One question I'd ask would be: have you run into the limits of any language you currently use in terms of capability, performance, packaging/distribution or community?

If not, then perhaps Rust wouldn't currently be the best place to invest your learning time.

But if there's some element of Rust that intrigues you, and you're kind toward yourself during the learning journey it's likely that at a minimum you may learn something about lower level aspects of computing that might help you when you use other languages.

(One thing I've noticed with Rust is that--due to the power of the `cargo` build tooling & surrounding standardised library/crate ecosystem--once you get a relatively small way along your learning journey it can be relatively straight-forward to add a "cool"/"interesting" crate to your project & create something a bit more interesting than...a hard-coded currency exchange rate calculator or something. :)

So maybe browse <https://lib.rs/> (an alternative interface to crates.io which I find more "explorable") and see if there is a crate whose functionality makes you think "Ooo, that'd be cool to be able to use".)

Good luck!
Earth is a water planet!

We split atoms, to boil water, to make electricity, to run computers, to boil water.

Somewhere, someone is boiling water so you can boil water.

[I read about this somewhere on the internet. I don't remember where.]
Same with Go 1.20

https://twitter.com/caarlos0/status/1631635896393932801
> And schools do often have elective shop, cooking, electronics etc classes for those who want to do them.

Ha, those were cut from school before I was in high school decades ago.
Absolutely.

In general, cutesy UIs are fun only the very first time you use them. But they’re a liability in the long term because once the novelty of the cuteness wears off, you risk really annoying your users, and especially in high-stress scenarios.
It's not. But the branding works because Americans are socialized that "customization" must be good. And because changing things often temporarily makes things better.

(Liberty Mutual Insurance takes this to the limits of absurdity by advertising "insurance customized so you only pay for what you'll need to use".)
Yep, as another commenter said, you don’t really need to make guesses here. Just look at Australia. “The odds” are so intrenched in talking about the game itself, that kids are naturally taught the lingo and that watching / betting on sports go hand in hand. We are in the process of trying to wind this shit back, but unfortunately at this point we’ve had enough time to build a powerful sports betting lobby, including the sporting clubs and leagues themselves. A politician has no powerful friends when they decide to fight this issue, and it makes them a lot of powerful enemies.
What's the odds of being a human, instead of some other sentient animal?
LERF: Language Embedded Radiance Fields
For a single work, yes. If they turn it into a high-volume business, it might become more difficult to maintain the plausibility in the long run, and they could be asked to put their claimed artistry to test in a controlled environment.
Watermarking seems like a possible solution: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/02/17/business/ai-t...

I think that OpenAI et al are incentivized to pursue watermarking. If someone uses GPT to write a best-selling novel or a blockbuster movie script, OpenAI would want a piece of the action.

Similarly, publishers/distributors of creative works are incentivized to use any available detection tools because they don't want to be surprised when someone comes along and says, "Actually, you owe us a boatload of cash for that work."
That's the general idea. We're trying to limit the amount of abuse a single Google Account, device, or other first-party identity can cause. We have some more ideas and details we hope to share over time, but the goal is to keep writes to the API anonymous while preventing, the best we can, sybil attacks. We're willing to ignore/sacrifice some writes to achieve this (since any writes above ~k recent ones don't contribute directly to the utility of the system).

Beyond Private State Tokens we also have new cryptography we're researching that should let us improve unlinkability between issuance and redemption further.

https://github.com/WICG/turtledove/blob/main/FLEDGE_k_anonym...

https://eprint.iacr.org/2023/320
Front page of Drudge Report yesterday, "ChatGPT Predicts Crash" https://web.archive.org/web/20230315224053/https://drudgerep...
Some of the most impactful code I've written has been absolutely trash. Like, really, really bad. By almost all objective measures, terrible. Except for the results it helped bring about. By that one measure, it was excellent, damn near perfect code
Scientists hoodwinked by touch-me-not plants for decades
Show HN: Multipurpose Cloud Migration Strategy for Node.js Projects
Our almost 80-year-old leaders in the house & in the Senate & in the presidency are not well equipped to make good choices in this area. I'm not convinced professional computer scientists are really well equipped but at least we have potential to understand the scenario. But instead it's going to be people that think global warming doesn't exist because they brought a snowball into the Senate that make choices.
More civilian lives would be lost or destabilized if there were no interventions.
There's plenty of copies of public domain works available for purchase on Amazon. It does mean that AI digital art will fetch commodity prices, but not that it won't be sold.

Sort of like hotel art.
This announcement has immediate, significant practical impact for creatives.

The most important document a creative had, up until today, was their portfolio -- typically, a look-book of finished pieces.

Now, that portfolio needs to include, for every piece, proof-of-work -- snapshots of the whatever-it-is in various states along the road to completion, in sufficient quantity to dissuade any legal claim that the work was AI-produced.

At the limit, those aim to sell organic-certified free range content will want to surveil themselves during the entire creative process, and associate that recording indelibly with the created work.

That's a whole lot of extra work and a whole lot of extra privacy violation, but the alternative will be to devalue one's own work: for to the extent to which it may have been produced by AI, it will be a liability to downstream consumers.

For example, a film director might commission a score from a composer, but unless that score comes with timestamped, SHAsummed video of enough of the composition process to preclude invalidating the broader claim to a copyright (and thus salable work), that composition becomes a financial risk for the director.

The consequences of not doing so are severe: At minimum, if the score cannot be copyrighted, then it can be borrowed, free-of-charge, by another film director, and at maximum, the spectre of AI contribution might virally taint the entire film (IANAL; am I getting this right?)

"Creative" just became the most surveilled job on the planet.

We also may have just found the first agreeable use for blockchain -- an indelible public record of organic artistic creation, bearing SHAsums associated recorded twitch and youtube streams (along with logs of workstation network traffic) permanently with the finished work.

Wouldn't it be hilarious if AI copyright law saved crypto?
If there is substantive work in the development of the prompt, then the applicant can submit the prompt for copyright.

The finding seems pretty reasonable, if the machine is doing the work then the machine can claim authorship. Otherwise, we would say that the Pope was the author of the Sistine Chapel as they prompted Michelangelo to paint "a large curve display of heaven including with clouds and pictures of angels triumphant".
You might be able to copy-write the method by which you generated something, but not the thing generated itself. Although even the former act might be too far, it's like saying that you fooled around with the parameters on a computer for 8 hours before it started working, and now you want to copy-write the operation of the computer: the computer is doing what it was intended to do, you just needed time to figure out how to use it. You could copy-write a training manual for how to ride a bike, but not bike riding itself.
Nowhere did I say Bandcamp engineers can't have a union, or even whether it makes good business sense for them. It might, it might not. Maybe this will end up being better for Soundcloud engineers in the long run if you know what I mean. I was reacting to the idea that it somehow furthers the cause of organized labor, it doesn't.
> And anyway how would you know whether or not and how much I was assisted by the AI.

Because in a lawsuit you would have to reveal that info.

You can't just sue someone and not answer questions pertinent to your claim.
Being a long time supporter of the ACLU doesn't really make sense at this particular moment in time. If you liked what they were a long time ago, you shouldn't like what they are now, and vice versa.
And they historically do not work and only impact the citizens within a given country and not the decision makers and lever pullers.
How is setting up a motion camera on a log not similar to setting up a prompt for ChatGPT?
*for future bank failures

missed that bit in the headline there. This makes sense because SVB had a liquidity issue, which is easy enough to clean up without getting your hands too dirty. Other banks may fail differently.
Not quite; having it exist is something that may be worth paying for, even if it's equivalent to public domain.
A lot of these things are already addressed on USPTO’s FAQs and these answers are the same but “with AI” tacked on.

eg: “only human works are subject to copyright”, “the work must be an original work of authorship”, etc.

It’s just disappointing that they haven’t produced anything helpful yet. I suspect that the result will end up being permissive because there will be a big industry built up around people just kicking the can down the road by the time anyone authority issues a more specific opinion.
It's stupid to create a rule that's both unenforceable and limits protecting unique creations generated by AI but initiated by humans. Results are all that matter, not process.
> "I'm concerned you're ... encouraging anyone who has a large deposit at a community bank to say, 'we're not going to make you whole, but if you go to one of our preferred banks, we will make you whole.'"

"That's certainty not something that we're encouraging," Yellen replied.

They’re not encouraging people to act in their own self-interest while knowing full well that’s the reality they just created. I have to wonder where she tells her family and friends to bank?
Typescript is a good try, but ultimately our favourite JS runtime errors still happen, even with all the strictest ts settings. Syntactically it is quite clumsy, you can see the uninspired mix of C++ and Java in there. The typings now although people are doing lots of cute things with them, don't do some really fundamental things. For example there is currently no sensible way to type a non empty array in Typescript. Also the discriminated union with the identifying string literal in there is not terribly elegant.

Personally I wish either Rescript or Purescript gained adoption instead.
> Has anyone formulated any kind of argument that shows that AIs created by training on data will have any politics

I fully expect that it won't be long before the same pattern we see in other areas of tech plays out. That is, the right starts alleging left wing bias in all of these networks and even starts campaigning for laws to constrain them to represent right wing points of view.

Of course, this is betraying my own bias which is roughly in line with Colbert's "It is a well known fact that reality has liberal bias". That is, right wing views are intrinsically rooted in principle and preconceived beliefs rather than observable facts and so there is always going to be a problem to get LLMs which are heavily constrained to train on what is observable to give even representation to things that aren't supported by observable facts.
今天is Chinese word not Japanese. 今日and今天have the same meaning in Chinese.
> the same will not be true this time

This prediction has occurred with every technology revolution. It hasn't been borne out yet.

> the sort of undergrad maneuver

It's a variation of the broken window fallacy.
The Misalignment Museum
I'm not a react expert, obviously, but what would be wrong with this?

class MyComponent {
constructor() {
watchViewPort((x, y) => {
this.something += x + y;
});
}

render() { /* ... */ }
}

watchViewPort(callback) {
addEventListener("resize", (event) => {
// get x and y
callback(x, y);
});
}

This is obviously not production code, and I haven't tried it, so maybe something doesn't work? What is this missing that hooks provide?
membership of such organisation is not made by referendum, it is done by government on the basis of political reality - western countries / companies command most of the world's wealth, and we need investment, withoit IP they wont invest.

it's a hard-nosed bargain, not an earnest belief.
Sounds like the prompt itself is quite copyrightable, the same as any code is copyrightable.

Indeed in the contents is this:

> While some prompts may be sufficiently creative to be protected by copyright, that does not mean that material generated from a copyrightable prompt is itself copyrightable.
Apple testing new Siri natural language generating features starting with tvOS
What I’m curious about is how much Neuralink will it take to make a person legally less-than-human in this context. If I’m hooked up to the Metabrain am I still entitled to ownership of my works?
In usa (but not uk), effort isn't relevent, just how "creative" the work is.

For example, digitizing famous paintings is labour intensive but not considered copyrihtable.
The Fed is appointed by the President. That's a heluva influence.
Does anyone know of a way to check the amount of lending done through Bank Term Funding Programme so far?
Fair, though sadly sarky, argument.

Those languages came about during the boom of websites and apps, however.

And more code was being written, rewritten and maintained by coders--now, instead, it's looking like it'll be generated, tested, analysed and regenerated.
unless they were gearing towards a roving platform your could put on the back of your bike, or a balloon

Or a car, like the Flatburn device in the linked article?
Nitpick: Everyone does this, but it's "copyright" as in "the right to copy", rather than "copywrite"/"copy-write".
> to realize that tech isn't any better than any other industry like I previously thought

Ding, ding, ding! Why would it be?
> So you’re saying this picture cant be copyrighted?

No, if I was saying that, I’d say “It’s not a sufficiently creative work and cannot be said to have an artist”. What I’m saying is that “you created an image with midjourney” (and the same goes for SD, whether base models or something more custom) does not appear to me (though, to be fair, I'm familiar with the broad concept of the test but not the details of any closely on-point case law – or even loosely analogous specific cases – when it comes to this threshold issue) to be a clearly sufficient basis for asserting either that it must or must not have an artist.

> Indeed, the artists are the ones who made the picture used in the training set.

If there is exactly one picture in the training set and all the model can do is reproduce it then, yes, the artist of that picture is trivially the artist of any of the (identical) pictures generated. But that’s not how actual midjourney works. IF there are many pictures in the training set, and all the model can do is reproduce one of them, but different prompts reproduce different images, then, again, the artist of that image is the artist of the identical result, but, again, Midjourney isn’t Google Images with an “I’m feeling lucky” button, so that’s not the right analysis, either.
Seconded! If there’s anywhere we can cut the superfluous social fakery it’s with an AI that obviously doesn’t give two hoots about us or how our day’s been going so far. I found its replies stylistically tedious.
Relying? I was assuming a 404 for "latest" might cause people to look into what happened with the image and find it's new home. Without locking them out of specific versions if they needed them for some reason.
Neither does a virus
>The FDIC insures the entirety of the deposits either way.

This is new with SVB. I get the whole "250K minimum" argumemt, but this is the first where we are seeing major 10M++ depositors getting 100% guarantees.

I don't see issue with spreading money across smaller banks - other than perhaps they may not be able to assess risk as well as larger banks. But again, SVB.

I think one thing to keep in mind is that most bank depositors hold far, far less than the 250K guaranteed by FDIC. By a large margin. Id be surprised if the average was above 10K. There are $17T in deposits across the country [1]. The FDIC at the beginning of the year had $128B in balance as insurance to depositors [2].

[1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DPSACBW027SBOG

[2] https://www.fdic.gov/analysis/quarterly-banking-profile/inde...
Yeah, it’s infuriating; when I pushed back a bit on him claiming it was “competitive” he then said “we really want you focusing exclusively on Apple”.

Confused, I said “but I would be doing this on my own time, not during work hours”.

His response was to say that Apple pays its employees pretty well so there really isn’t a dichotomy between “my time” and “Apple time”.
You can do world locked 3D renderings in an lit inside room and have more a few hours of battery life. Yes here are limitations, but all technology has limitations. As time passes we will make them better and better. There is a bar we will have to pass before they become attractive to regular people and I'm not claiming we are there yet.
Ok,so looks like pixel 7 and 7 pro are patched:

> On Pixel phones, the main CVE-2023-24033 vulnerability was fixed with the March 2023 security patch that rolled out on Monday but should have come a week earlier.

> However, the Pixel 6, 6 Pro, and 6a have yet to see that March update and are currently vulnerable.
You cannot copyright the method of doing anything.

You might be able to patent it, but that is a different thing.

Copyright applies to the end result. Patents apply to methods and mechanisms.
the expertise and technology for this kind of development reside in law-abiding universities and businesses. if you say it’s illegal to develop, then they will follow that law

you don’t need some kind of Big Brother UN nonsense the same way you don’t need Big Brother UN nonsense to stop nuclear bombs getting into the wrong hands. it’s too specialised, too expensive, and the people involved are mostly scientists and academics

also—and this has begun to annoy me—people have this idea that politics is inaccessible and not representative and there’s no solution: they’re right. politics is inaccessible and unrepresentative. however there is a solution

unionise

band together and create the change you want to see. politicians have never followed the will of the people. they’re too easily bought, or jaded, or blackmailed. real, meaningful change for the common man comes from organising to create a counterweight to the power of corporations and the rich
Can you please expand further? If I annotated my js, how would the browser check and enforce my types? Would the checks include js-to-js code? What is the js script that I should include at the top of my <head>?
It's more complex than a straightforward totem pole. (For example, you could look into Chevron deference)
Why is this important to HN?

And it's not U, it's not HEU.. it's unrefined uranium ore.

Nothingburger "story".
There will be a case-by-case weighing of which artistic aspects were contributed by the human and which by the AI. What they are indeed saying here is that a prompt being copyrightable does not by itself imply that the generated output is copyrightable. I believe this also means that if someone takes your copyrighted prompt and uses it to produce some output, then that output doesn’t a priori infringe on your copyright.
option 3: Pareidolia
This is how three letter agencies get the materials needed for plausible deniability in future operations.
In Minnesota, the taxpayers are paying for corporate welfare to the tune of billions of dollars via multiple Pro sports stadiums, the main one being the Vikings stadium. Back when Jesse Ventura was governor, he had a plan to run statewide legal sports betting to pay for those stadiums (since the multi-billion dollar NFL corp wasn't going to).

Of course it was squashed immediately without any research or investigation into how it would be implemented, but it is one example of a positive outcome from sports betting. People are going to bet regardless of the system, but I'd rather people that actually care about sports pay into a massive stadium than that average person wondering why the taxes have gone up.

Side note: If you get a drink downtown Mpls, you're not only paying tax for the Vikings stadium, you're also paying a penny or so tax for the Metrodome which was torn down nearly 10 years ago.
Forming a union isn’t a platitude, it’s direct action. In a culture as union-hostile as the modern day US, every new union is a win for the labor movement.

I can speak from experience that leftist groups who otherwise hate the tech industry do celebrate tech unions.
> This is all very sane and consistent with previous opinions on the matter.

Is that sarcasm?