skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I guess the “wrong side” is the side anywhere under the 70th percentile in the skill in question?

This is being far too generous to parent’s claim, IMO. Note how much “people of all competency levels see themselves slightly closer to the 70th percentile than they actually are” sounds like regression to the mean. And it has been compellingly argued that that’s all DK actually measured. [1] DK’s primary metric for self-assessment was to guess your own percentile of skill against a group containing others of unknown skill. This fully explains why their correlation between self-rank and actual rank is less than 1, and why the data is regressing to the mean, and yet they ignored that and went on to call their test subjects incompetent, despite having no absolute metrics for skill at all and testing only a handful of Ivy League students (who are primed to believe their skill is high).

Furthermore, it’s very important to know that replication attempts have shown a complete reversal of the so-called DK effect for tasks that actually require expertise. DK only measured very basic tasks, and one of the four tasks was subjective(!). When people have tried to measure the DK effect on things like medicine or law or engineering, they’ve shown that it doesn’t exist. Knowledge of NN research is closer to an expert task than a high school grammar quiz, and so not only does DK not apply to this thread, we have evidence that it’s not there.

The singular reason that DK even exists in the public consciousness may be because people love the idea they can somehow see & measure incompetence in a debate based on how strongly an argument is worded. Unfortunately that isn’t true, and of the few things the DK paper did actually show is that people’s estimates of their relative skill correlate with their actual relative skill, for the few specific skills they measured. Personally I think this paper’s methodology has a confounding factor hole the size of the Grand Canyon, that the authors and public both have dramatically and erroneously over-estimated it’s applicability to all humans and all skills, and that it’s one of the most shining examples of sketchy social science research going viral and giving the public completely wrong misconceptions, and being used incorrectly more often than not.

[1] https://www.talyarkoni.org/blog/2010/07/07/what-the-dunning-...
Feel like this number will only grow with the consumer AI advances.

Text is one thing, but also thinking of deep faking video/audio. Elderly seem especially susceptible. I have a close friend's grandma that was scammed out of 5k from a fake voice call.
But this is mostly (?) a historically contingent result of Google heavily advertising for Chrome while Microsoft dragged its feet to have an easy to use package manager, sandboxing, maybe flawed (?) rights management for Windows (a Windows Store comes with it's own issues if controlled by Microsoft of course).
> It even pronounced ⅯⅭⅯⅩⅭⅥ as "nineteen ninety six".

No, it pronounced it “one thousand, nine hundred and ninety-six”—a number rather than a year. I’m mildly curious which it would have pronounced “1996” as.

I think this shows pretty neatly that even numerals are ambiguous as to pronunciation: depending on the situation, I might pronounce the number as “one thousand, nine hundred and ninety-six” or “nineteen hundred and ninety-six” (when it’s a number; which will depend on factors like what other numbers are around, and my mood) or “nineteen ninety-six” (a year; or very occasionally but riskily a number—as that text could suggest “$19.96”!).

One possible solution in all these cases is to annotate the desired pronunciation so that that is what a screen reader will encounter. Unfortunately, I don’t think you can do this without negative side-effects that are typically worse than the problem. Ideally it’d be a simple attribute like <img>’s alt or interactive elements’ aria-label, but you can’t use either of these on a simple span, and this won’t work:

<span aria-label="nineteen ninety-six">1996</span>

So instead you’d have to mess around with CSS to visually hide things and end up with markup like this:

<span class="sr-only">nineteen ninety-six</span><span aria-hidden="true">1996</span>

… and that damages copy and paste and anything that doesn’t use the CSS. Also screen readers aren’t the only accessibility tech out there, and you may want some to see “1996” rather than “nineteen ninety-six”. Braille printers will very probably fall into one of these two damaged categories, though I’m not actually sure which. (I would quite like to know, actually.)

I’ve been dealing with CSS Counter Styles recently (in my own lightweight markup language, powered by that plus parsing), now I have the crazy idea of adapting its @counter-style rule’s speak-as property (… which I will also admit doesn’t actually permit anonymous counter style values, but hey ho):

<span style="speak-as:symbols('nineteen ninety-six')">1996</span>

Hmm. Could actually be mildly fun in a “nooooooooooo!” kind of a way.

For years specifically, I’m curious if wrapping them in <time> changes any screen reader’s understanding:

<time>1996</time>

(Yes, this is valid. <https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/text-level-semantics....>, ninth case.)

I’ve picked on numbers here, but it applies to a variety of other things too. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35168439 elsewhere in this thread shows half a dozen different pronunciations of “X”.

I really hope there’s something I’ve missed, but I don’t think there is. Perhaps we should make one. I think I’ve also demonstrated that it needs to be speech-specific, not just something like aria-label.
Beliefs need to be recalibrated over time
I disagree. I worry that this structure may effectively tie Powell's hands and prevent him from raising rates further.

As you describe it, banks can post collateral with a market value of $75 in return for $100 of loans from the Fed. This is not a panacea. There is a reason why this is not normally done.

The problem arises when this loan has to be repaid. At that point, the bank will have to repay $100 to recover $75 worth of collateral. There is a gap between what the bank must repay and the value of the collateral it gets back. This means that, at that point, banks may find that they are insolvent and unable to repay the loans. This is the banking version of "jingle mail", sending the bank's keys to the Fed instead of repaying the loan.

The higher the rates, the lower the value of the collateral, the greater the gap, and the more likely the banks are to default on their loans when they come due ...

... silly me, of course not ... at that point the banks will expect the Fed to bail them out again and cover the gap through some "repurchase" voodoo where the banks can "repurchase" their collateral at market value and have their loans forgiven.
The best option I found was to explain - multiple times - to my grandparents that these scams exist and how each of them work. Hopefully if they are ever approached by a scammer, they'll remember my warning and that hesitation will break them out of the fear used in the scams.
I think it depends on the use case. My experience with my RPi used as a 3D printing tool has been plug and play with OctoPi and haven’t needed to tweak it much at all
I'm excited as well to see if you can get it to work!
I frequently remind my parents that nearly every email and phone call they get is a scammer. Might be good to "pen test" your parents, through a friend or something.
> The losses banks have taken on their assets are real. They already happened. They are survivable if banks remain liquid.

But… they aren’t real yet? They haven’t been realized. If held to maturity they will be paid back in full.

Which I know the author is fully aware of. So I don’t understand this point.

> I would suggest one has at least one backup financial institution. If one hypothetically does not, I would observe that opening bank accounts rounds to free. Thousands of perfectly good financial institutions exist.

Some people have investment accounts with brokerages like Fidelity or Schwab. Many brokerages (including the two mentioned) offer cash management accounts. They offer deposit insurance similar to FDIC and will give you tools similar to checking accounts. Debit cards, checks, bill pay, etc.

They can be excellent backup accounts that don’t add the additional overhead (however small) of yet another company to deal with.
> I'm not sure what "deactivating RAID" means.

mdadm --manage <array> --remove <failed disk>

so your machine doesn't have a fit when the disk is detached. Or equivalent.
> We went multiple years without a bank failure, of any size, in the United States.

This is objectively false, unless by "multiple years" he means 2 years. The data is out in the public[1] so why not do some basic research before putting out claims like that? Basic mistakes like this makes me question rest of the article and the author's grip on the subject.

https://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/bank/
Is it possible to digital detox anymore?
Well, perhaps not 100x in rps, but 10x sure:

Overall top performing frameworks (JS, Java, and Rust) at 650K rps. That's 7x over the top Python based framework at: 86K rps.

And another very popular Python framework (flask) gets just to 2K rps. That's 325 times worse to the best.

And that's the "single DB query" benchmark: https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r21&tes...

https://github.com/TechEmpower/FrameworkBenchmarks/wiki/Proj...
the person that decided to wipe the URL upon scrolling through the bottom of the article, without putting it on the history stack, should have a wooden stake put through their eyeball
Worse than Italy? (I'm Italian, it's hard for me to believe UK fared worse).
I'm not familiar with how Docker works, so forgive the ignorance. I thought the point of docker images was portability? Is it not just taking the references and pointing to a new instance under your control?
The only people who complain about whataboutism are the ones who want to get away with being hypocrites. Your displeasure won't help you in evading the fact of your double-standard application of the notion of agency. Agency is agency, regardless of the abstraction that defines a group of individuals. Individual agency is a prerequisite property for agency of every other abstraction over the given group, including the state that wants to claim its sovereignty, as otherwise you'd be describing a slave state controlled by illegitimate rulers of the land according to their preffered modus operandi.

As to whether the current Ukraine government's decision to close the borders for its entire adult male population is a token of people's democratic decision, I rest my case: you've just openly admitted that physical coercion of individuals is justifiable and lawful as long as the end goals serve the purpose of the side who holds a preferential stance in power imbalance between an individual human being and the state in the given situation. The might's making it right in its purest textbook form, coming straight out of your typing fingertips. So let the same moral principle of yours guide the current foreign relations between Ukraine and Russia. After all, they are just another higher-level abstractions over the coerced groups of individuals with deprived agencies.
This is an excellent use of p2p incentives. Share to pay.

Tricky bit is, for some users, you’ll either abandon them with no way to share or you will still be paying their ingress/egress fees when their client falls back to your TURN server if NAT hole punching fails.

You’ll also have to solve image expiration gracefully. Hosting a “publish as much as you want” append-only ledger isn’t going to scale infinitely. There needs to be garbage collection, rate limiting, fair-use policies, moderation, etc. Otherwise you’re still going to outstrip your storage pool.
Peter Thiel supports libertarian causes. Larry Page suggested there should be an upper bound on laws. Presumably that would be somewhere below restricting everyone from doing anything. Yet, the article doesn't quantify what a libertarian is in any meaningful context and how it applies to the topic.

Libertarian has become an amorphous category partisan writers can hurl at their opponents. Meanwhile, canonical libertarian content is highly restricted on this site. When it is posted it is often dismissed out of hand based upon the source.

Perhaps it is worth looking at what prominent libertarians are actually saying here?

https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=mises.org

Intellectual curiosity indeed.
I don't think we need to worry about cuneiform yet when we have the current lack of even basic support described in the article. Reading the unicode character name out would be a good fallback for less important cases - certainly be better than skipping over characters. Let's not make perfect the enemy of good.
Yes it works for highly numerical code. Most code is not like that.
Given the bank's yield is some sort of formula with regards to how much and succesful they are in investing/loaning-out the capital of their depositors. Then how is it not a moral hazard, when the bank gets a signal that the FDIC will cover all this capital, regardless what the bank does with it? Even if the bank asset can go to 0, in the end the vehicle used to prop up this asset will come from the depositors. If I (depositor) give you (bank) 100$ and someone else (FDIC) tells you "do whatever you want with that money, if you lose it I'll give it back to the depositor" - you could basically go to the casino and put it all on red. Even if you would also lose your own 100$ in the process (you risked 200$), you would probably take on more risk simply because my capital isn't at risk but the returns will be yours.

Hyperbole yes, but the moral hazard seems to be with the bank (and the investors therein), not the depositors or their actions. Or I misunderstood you.
750 if I remember right! It’s in what I can only describe as a holiday resort looking apartment block, with a dog park, swimming pool, and fire pit area.
Big and little L libertarianism are a constant target for some people on the left despite having near zero voting power or representation outside of individual ideology. I get exhausted with this kind of rhetoric but it's not atypical of the left or the right for that matter. It's also typical of just angry people with next to zero explanations for why their lives aren't as easy as their parents, so they opt for "let's smack libertarianism around a bit"
I can see why the government would do this - doesn't capitalism require a steady supply of capital?
I wonder if Ryan will still be in the commercials?
> escrowing

Are you sure this is what you mean? Escrow is a type of contactual arrangement, one type of which is agreeing with a commercial partner that you get a copy of their source-code if they go broke.

I feel like you mean vendoring.
Is there any way with US banks to only allow transfers via in-person, at-the-bank requests? Some accounts just don't need the convenience of online access, and tired of the "identity theft" spiel from banks to absolve themselves of responsibility.
Service Mark
Accessible version: https://archive.ph/w8z6l
These headlines usually work by the dept asking a researcher for a 10 sentence summary of their work. Someone in the dept summarizes that to 3 sentences, and sends that to the university pr dept. The university turns that 3 sentences into 1 and that's what's published. My take is this says more about the weird game of telephone being played than it does about the research product itself.
I've seen it argued that we ought to replace antiquated terms in shakespeare with modern ones as well. I was at pains to disagree. Replacing the numbering system would be easy by comparison.
I'm HN's resident Republican curmudgeon, but this is all squarely the fault of the Tories. They've over-optimized the economy to _only_ do what they're the best in the world at, the rest of the country be damned. They're out of touch with people in Manchester, with immigration sentiment in the Midlands, and with just how hated they are by the Scotts.

I really wish Labour would get it together, focus on something besides hating Israel, and end this nonsense. The UK used to have a bunch of competitive car, aircraft, and train manufacturing concerns - no more. This is a total failure of governance.
The entire argument of the pro-business, pro-capitalist crowd is that they deserve massive profits because they are the ones taking on risk. Except when they take big hits because of the risk they themselves took on, they also want bailouts. They want all the profits with none of the consequences for risky behavior.

So the difference here is that individuals get the safety net because they are just trying to exist. They're not getting "bailouts", they're getting assistance for things like food and shelter and medical bills.
A traditional bank used to take people's deposits and loan them to other for a fee. the fee would then be returned on aggregate to depositors less the cost of business and profit. this is so called fractional reserve banking.

But that doesn't really provide that much interest to depositors, in this age of loose money supply.

So there are more exotic functions that "investment" banks fiddle with. Ie trading on the stock market (regulated betting) buying companies, and trading on futures and other pure bets.

The problem is that banks are bigger, and have more depositors. So when one pops, other go because they are all doing the same shady shit to make profit.

In the UK there are still a few building societies that offer traditional, boring, consumer banking and mortgages. But they are now large national behemoths.

But to your point, Brex is a payment manager/facilitator. Its not really offering banking, its more a service to manage expenditure. This might seem like pedantry, but its different enough to make the point.
Start Small, Stay Small by Rob Walling

Company of One by Paul Jarvis
Nowhere did I say a diversity of views is bad. A diversity of views about what happens when you die, for example, is okay; we can’t know or prove what happens afterward. But when it stops being a “different view” and starts being a “false belief,” then it’s different. I don’t want people making decisions for me based on false beliefs and neither should you.
The article notes that, yes, he will remain as spokesperson.
> We are overpaid for incredible working conditions and devs basically became capricious divas, despite the fact 90% of them are plumbers, and many not very good ones.

Overpaid relative to what? Certainly not the value created.

There's this meme that software engineers are just capricious and don't "deserve" the money (often it's a weird form of jealousy from other fields who simply can't match an engineer's output) but it completely ignores the enormous gains in productivity enabled by the field. Is there any other field where such an impact can be had by a small team in the Valley?

> If you had any professional doing the same, wasting so much resources as us, changing part of the tech stack every month, debating vocabulary on twitter ad nauseam instead of coding, and whining about how their first world problem should be the focus right now rather than doing their job, they would get laughed at.

You seem to have a very particular view of the profession.

> But we were incredibly lucky that IT is the most amazing productivity cheat code humanity has come up with so far, so that all this BS was accepted as the cost of doing business.

Is it luck? People saw the writing on the wall decades ago.
Glad the article answered my question right away - A large part of the fraud is in the crypto space
Won't the remaining banks just pass on those extra costs onto the customers anyway? So at the end of the day, "the people" will end up paying for the bail-outs, just with a few extra steps.
I believe that B1/B2 should work just fine for these purposes.

Probably you answered an officer (or airline worker) that you were gonna "work" there, not just visit your employer for an event?
It was always weird to me that we let the index and the source stay co-mingled for so long, as it just built up technical debt that is now coming due because docker's profitability isn't what it was expecting.
More about Oblivious HTTP and what Fastly is doing here is in a blog post that I wrote [1]. I wrote the OHTTP relay service for Fastly and was heavily involved in this deal.

Some points about how the service operates:

- Fastly does not receive your Chrome browsing history by virtue of running this service, because there is not a 1-1 mapping between URLs browsed and OHTTP requests made. We also cannot view the encapsulated request (which is passed to Google).

- Fastly does not capture access logs for this service, and no logs are sent to Google. There is only access to service-level metrics.

- Google does not have access to modify the configuration of this Fastly service, and does not own the domain or TLS key associated with it.

[1] https://www.fastly.com/blog/enabling-privacy-on-the-internet...
Nice.
It would be really useful, if the site could preview the system fonts of those systems you aren't using, though.
UK Spring budget: R&D cuts but quantum spend
The £1M AI “Manchester Prize” seems particularly interesting.
if you deposit 100 dollars with me, and I spend 40 of that on myself, I am INSOLVENT.

If I then go buy a 10 year bond with the rest, that will mature to 100 dollars, this DOES NOT CHANGE THAT SITUATION.
Almost any data that paints a positive picture of progress in the last 40 years will get you nuked. For example, median household incomes have actually risen and Americans are generally far richer today despite healthcare and education becoming more expensive relatively.
They do have two US locations, but only for «cloud» products, no bare metal servers.
> With that said, working at McDonalds and paying a pension is completely different than working a gig job, because you are expected to work when scheduled and will be fired if you don't, while an Uber driver works when he sees fit.

While McDonalds might expect their employees to work a regular schedule, it's very common in the service industry for the schedule to depend on the employee's acceptance of the shift. The employee might commit to working a particular day in advance but it's very similar to the Uber/Lyft situation.
I'd say Marx would also have his issues with the most priviledged "worker" class out right refusing to unionize and even decrying unions as bad for everyone.
I have quite a pile of old phones and tablets in a cabinet. They're all broken in one way or another, I'm not sure what to do with them. This article is about things that work and are reasonably recent. They get refurbed and reused.
> The modern LMS feels to me like a reinvention of Facebook groups in many ways

I agree with your sentiment that there's a lot more potential value to be derived from EdTech than we've seen so far, but even if LMS's are "just" like Facebook groups, that's already the equivalent of hundreds of billions of dollars in economic value.

When I was a kid, if I was sick for a few days, I had to manually copy my friend's notes after I returned to school, and would still feel confused. Now, with an LMS, I have access to all the learning content from home, for my own class, and for resources from similar classes taught by amazing teachers from across the world, at any modality I prefer. This on its own is incredible value. (although with the caveat that being sick is no longer the excuse to rest and relax as it used to be)
> > The losses banks have taken on their assets are real. They already happened. They are survivable if banks remain liquid.

> But… they aren’t real yet? [...] So I don’t understand this point.

If people withdraw their deposits, the bank will have to deliver the money somehow...by selling the assets that have lost money. So the point is that although, if nobody withdraws, the losses are survivable, if enough people withdraw, the losses are not survivable. As soon as depositors realise this situation, they will withdraw their money. So that's the problem.