skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Hi HN! I've built hnterminal, a Python package that lets you browse, upvote, and comment on Hacker News from your terminal.

To get started:

$ pip install hnterminal
$ hnterminal

hnterminal is an interactive REPL environment with commands like "get_front_page", "get_tree", "upvote", "reply_to", etc, each of which supports rich arguments and comes with full help documentation.

It uses pointer indexes for quick navigation and browsing, and integrates with vim for comment editing. The cli is responsive and adjusts to the size of your terminal, with colorized and styled output.

On the read side, hnterminal uses the HN API to construct front page and comment trees. On the write side, it reads the webpage and constructs an API response from parsed information. Unfortunately, a write API does not exist for HN (that I know of). Login is accomplished with a login cookie that is only stored in memory as it runs. Even without logging in, hnterminal provides full read/browse functionality.

It wouldn't make sense to not send this comment from the tool itself! I didn't incorporate submit yet, as that isn't used very often - but this comment is edited using vim and submitted from hnterminal.
> Also, why does the author consider the given positive example clean and tidy, when it has files .profile and .bashrc placed directly in the user's home directory? Following the rules, these files should be within the .config/ directory as well.

I was wondering about that part as well. Then again, I also have high standards for non-hidden stuff as well, and only have ~/Downloads from the ones they list. I do have a ~/Dropbox/home` with `docs` and `images` (as well as "video", but not synced locally), as well as ~/code and ~/dotfiles. If anything, having non-hidden clutter stresses me far more than hidden clutter; I have ~/.scratch for random on-off things I need, and I'll often utilize my disdain for extra stuff in the home directory as a way to make sure that I don't procrastinate something too long (e.g. if I need to make a phone call for some errand or something, I might put `phone.txt` in my home directory with the number I need to call, and seeing that every time I look at my home directory I get a reminder until I do it and delete the file).
Microwaves Piss Me Off
The question is whether their current art gives them the edge to build a moat. Specifically, whether in this case the art itself can help create its own next generation so that the castle stays one exponential step out of reach. That seems to be the ballgame. Say what you will, it does seem to be the ultimate form of bootstrapping. Although uncomfortably similar to strapping oneself to a free falling bomb.
Chrome might have been slightly better than Firefox, but not ground breaking like google earth, street view, gmail etc.
Let's wait and see. I can see plenty of ways in which that could come true.
What does Vanguard (a co-op for retirees) care about this?
I wonder how hard it is to download the whole database from this source. Would be cool if they released a straight sqlite file or something to do analysis.
Reflecting on the complementary strengths of Wolfram and GPT reminds me of Daniel Kahneman’s distinction between “system 1” and “system 2” in the human brain. One system is a kind of freely-associating autopilot (like gpt) and the other kicks in when some deliberate logical manipulation of facts needs doing (like wolfram). (Or at least this was my layman’s impression from reading Thinking Fast and Slow.)

Have others thought of this and, if so, is the comparison apt? Is it possible the human brain is simply an LLM melded to a symbol-based system in dialogue with each other?
At least in Germany, literally Hitler, not even joking. The Nazis outlawed homeschooling in 1938 and neither East nor West Germany ever repealed the law, it's still the one on the books:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2008/feb/24/schools.uk
They have no claim. Irizarry vs Yehia[0], among others, have concluded that filming a public servant in the execution of their duties have no right to privacy. There was another case that came to the same conclusion because a woman recorded cops wrecking her house during a search and then tried deleting the footage from her laptop, unfortunately I cannot find that case again.

[0] https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksibilla/2022/07/24/first-am... (includes a link to the ruling directly from the 10th circuit website)
This article is really just trying to outline the hard problem of consciousness. That it is a fundamental aspect of the universe such as space and time or that it is a physical process of the brain.

I don’t think we have to reject the idea of a soul (mostly related with religion or spirituality) for “empirical evidence”. If we had said evidence, it would be a solved problem. It’s a problem that science cannot explain. Some things require other ways of knowing.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousnes...
I googled his political party, and I'm not surprised.
I think it is a good layman's explanation, but I think the author could have explained NPC a bit better though, ie. mapping the inputs and outputs of a problem to a known NPC problem. Perhaps a brief overview of how NPC problems are proved to be NPC.
> We can predict that RWKV 100B will be great, and RWKV 1T is probably all you need :)

That sounds awfully similar to this quote: "There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in his home." by the founder of DEC in 1977.

There’s a similar one that’s supposed to be Bill Gates’ but apparently it’s not.
I would say that Afroman was perhaps incautious to mix up videos of footage of police with their faces and insignia and whatnot. After all, Afroman's milieu is an industry that is perpetually in legal jeopardy for sampling, covering, and quoting other musical works.

Then I thought about it for another hot minute, and realized that Afroman (and his legal counsel) may be just canny enough to take this all into account. Think of the optics of the cops suing this Black man trying to get at his honestly earned cash. Think of how that will play out in the public square. Who's a more sympathetic figure here, win or lose? There's no such thing as bad publicity!

So I think Afroman may have counted on this whole lawsuit debacle and he's going to get enormous mileage and notoreity out of it. Kudos to him for this. I love these videos. This guy is da bomb. Hilarious.
If you have the magic phrase to make it work, I'd like to know. I tried for about five minutes while driving yesterday, to no avail.

For me, Siri is like an 80s text adventure game, except I was better at those.

Edit: just now I was able to call by interacting a second time with Siri, and using the physical button. Using the button never would have occurred to me while driving.
Yeah, those only make it worse, but they only really apply to a bona fide superintelligence of the sort EY describes, and those are not what we have. I don't believe we're particularly close to having one.

If we're doomed, we're doomed, but please don't tell me about it.
That is American privacy! Evidence of illegal search made illegal because blue camera shyness matters.
I’m an actual security guy, been doing it for nearly 20 years (before it was a thing). I’m of the opinion that if I can’t trust people to look at code, they shouldn’t be at the company. Period.

There are very few use cases where I believe read only access to code from people in product, engineering or support should be restricted. Generally the net benefit is well worth the potential risk introduced.

If you are worried about people stealing source code, invest in a DLP or CASB solution. If you are worried about ransom, don’t allow changes without PRs, implement a backup program and harden your endpoints. Not allowing people to do things that helps them understand the systems they work with is a recipe for shadow IT and promotes organizational silos.
Reddit had a pretty great post of a screenshot from tumblr the other day:

The Paradox of Tolerance disappears if you look at tolerance,
*not* as a moral standard, but as a social contract.

If someone does not abide by the terms of the contract,
then they are not covered by it.

In other words: The intolerant are not following the rules of
the social contract of mutual tolerance.

Since they have broken the terms of the contract, they are no longer
covered by the contract, and their intolerance should *not* be tolerated.
It's extremely popular these days to view oneself as victim. Boast about it even.

It is rooted in narcissism to be sure (which is probably where a lot of bullying is rooted in too).
> in the name of free speech

Well it quite literally is free speech. And in california, private college actually do have to follow free speech principles, that you might otherwise incorrectly believe only apply to the government.

Yes, it is literally the law that private universities have to respect the free speech of students, in California.

The letter covers this.
Do we have to pay to use it or will it be included with ChatGPT premium? Wondering if I have to pay for Wolfram and get an API key.
The latency is still a factor of the AWS players interact with the non AWS ones.
I'd love to learn more about how you used your mainboard for a nas. What did you house it in?
The courts for the most part. Or at least that is the public perception.

The sentencing guidelines maintained by the courts have all sorts of criteria for reducing the sentence that can be compounded to skew the result heavily towards the low end of the legally mandated range, and many times even below the legal minimum. For example, people who were drunk when they committed crimes often get away with lower sentences because "they probably weren't aware of what they were doing." Bonus points if you have a wife and kids to feed, pay a token amount to your victims as compensation, get your mom to write a letter to the judge, and/or act like you're sorry on your day in court. Some of these criteria have good reasons, but allow them to be compounded and that's how you end up with "you're guilty of raping your coworker, but you may go home."
> In other words: DEI is just performative at Stanford. They say the care just to get people off their backs.

> Stanford is happy to lend their voice to racists, classists, anything, in the name of free speech. It doesn't matter that the policies of the people speaking have literally ruined lives, lead to suicides, and are now literally murdering mothers by denying them critical healthcare.

> We had all better damned be silent and respectful so that the powerful largely white largely male sexists and racists get their platform.

> Quite disgusting.

I genuinely can't tell if this is satire. "racist", "classist", "sexist", "white male", "literally murdering" all in one short post. The apoplectic hurling of slurs at the concept that someone might disagree with your views, and dare support the right for others to do so, is unhealthy. We can not have a society if this is how people react to disagreement.
They have an email on their about page that you can reach them at and ask for the records.
Neat.

I hope Sam is/will give YC dinner talks about their journey.
Yes. It's that exact sentiment that doesn't serve to bridge minds and instead divides them.
There are a number of mentions of economic and cultural impact, but the majority of the questions asked of the interviewees aren't about networks and communication. They're about things like cost, availability, and capability of hardware systems. But if you read the magazine you linked, when communications come up the potential economic and cultural impact is discussed (though you end up with people forecasting it both ways, as a non-impactful thing, culturally, and others predicting major impacts like changing governments).

Check page 366 for a couple examples on both sides of the forecast.

And then there are the sections on Project Xanadu as well as hypertext and hyperdocuments that get a couple pages each.
My friends and I used to pronounce this "Oh Ess Ex", which I now know to be incorrect[0]

It's a hard habit to drop.

[0]: https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/2549/whats-the-pro...
Very few companies have the data and compute needed to run the top end models currently...
What prompt are you using for summarization? I’ve tried several variations without consistent results.
defund the police is a movement with that goal, no?
I had to disable several features of iOS search due to ridiculously long delay and lag.
This law may get thrown out as unconstitutional, because it attempts to regulate commerce between Utah citizens and California companies. That's not something State law can regulate.

It could also get thrown out for 1st Amendment issues. Look at something like voting, people have a right to vote and requirements for ID cannot be too burdensome, although there can be some ID requirements. Requiring me to give my ID to every random social media site I encounter, including things like Khan Academy, LinkedIn, random niche forums, etc; that starts to become too burdensome. I shouldn't have to give my ID to 100+ companies to participate in free speech and free assemblage.

But as you say, the vindictive side of me would like to see Utah straight up banned, replace Instagram with a static page shaming the Governor and other legislators.
Unschooling costs literally nothing. This person is talking about homeschooling-lite.

We unschooled our son from the age of 12. This is how you do it: don’t do anything other than what you normally do as a family to live your lives.

My son eventually wrote a novel, got married. And is our live-in computer builder and handyman. He, his wife, and my wife run an eBay-based jewelry store.

Anyway, unschooling is absence of any organized intervention in some else’s education. I have unschooled myself since the age of 16, and I make a good enough living.
It will be difficult for states to ban something that is protected by the constitution. Public servants doing public service have zero expectation of privacy and citizens have and absolute right to photograph and record them.
For the curious, here's the judge who signed the "kidnapping" warrant:

https://www.adamscountycourts.com/images/REG.jpg
Lol, has their SB creds. Someone could do a bunch of stuff with that
Um, ya, so you're not reading the research reports coming out of Microsoft saying "we should test AI models by giving them will and motivation". You're literally behind the times on what they planning on doing for sure, and very likely doing without mentioning it publicly.
Dan's gist clearly states you need to do rewrites yourself to make it work compared to traditional client side routed apps.

If you have rewrites it is not anywhere that purely takes HTML/CSS/JS.
> Why not be more aggressive about it instead of begging for regulatory capture?

Because it's dangerous. What is your argument that it's not dangerous?

> Pshhh...
> But this is exactly the same as having a very knowledgeable but inexperienced person on your team.

Am I the only person who thought that predictable computer APIs that were testable and completely consistent were a massive improvement over using people for those tasks?

People seem to be taking it as a given that I'd want to have a conversation with a human every time I made a bank transfer or scheduled an appointment. Nothing could be further from the truth; I want my bank/calendar/terminal/alarm/television/etc to be less human.

Yes, there are human tasks here that ChatGPT might be a good fit for and where fuzzy context is important, and there's a ton of potential in those fuzzy areas. But many other tasks people are bringing up are in areas where ChatGPT isn't competing with human beings. Its competing with interfaces that are already far better than human beings would be, and the standards to replace those interfaces are far higher than being "as good as a human would be."
It means that male-gendered people tend towards impulse and emotion rather than attempting to understand a situation and listen well into their 20s. Listening and empathy are really fucking hard, and it does not come as naturally to those heavy on testosterone, probably for obvious evolutionary reasons.

None of this is written in stone. Biology and human behavior are way to nuanced for that, but as a group, those of the male persuasion develop those skills at a later age, again, probably for species survival reasons.
Well said, Dean. There's hope for our future generations yet.
Are you going to be peeking at the data for your own use or is that off limits somehow?
Pull requests are there for documentation, for automated quality checks and builds and deploys, for learning opportunities, and for getting other people to review it in case you missed something. This last piece may not always be the most effective. It's hard to incentivize sometimes when everyone is busy. But there are still valuable reasons to have a PR.

You can speed up the code review process by trusting people more on the basis of a longer tenure of high quality code and few bugs making it to production. Especially if they add screen shots or video snippets to the pull request to demonstrate the feature and to demonstrate edge cases.

Make it as asynchronous as possible and it scales to hardcore software engineering speed. And with time reduce the number of gatekeepers by assigning more authoritative titles with lower required numbers of approvals for things. That way we begin to promote the people who are demonstrating the most efficacy in shipping working code that gets the job done, rather than those people who are maxed out on talking a lot but don't ship any code at all. Or worse, the silent coasters who do nothing and say nothing lol. We see you now.
It's pretty clearly fair use in the US.
This is similar to the concept of “sousveillance”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sousveillance
Genuine question, are you seeing non-coders using it to do any useful coding? As a developer, I find that it is wrong more often than it is right and were it not for my domain knowledge, I would have no idea why (or sometimes when.)
Hard agree. Might as well just call this "Ask HN: What are your opinions of homeschooled kids" and be done with it.
Well, it's about the standard of the proof. When I say "demonstrate", I don't mean just experimentally, I mean theoretically, to show that the algorithm is capable of reasoning about potentially arbitrarily large instances of puzzles.

That's what the experiments have shown - once the unknown instance gets large enough, the reasoning of LLM breaks down. This is not the case with humans, who can, as noted elsewhere, do a tree search, form hypotheses, etc.
Maybe Microsoft isn't an impartial judge of the quality of a Microsoft product.
My own amateur understanding is that LLCs are distinct from corporations, and that S-corps and C-corps are tax statuses rather than types of legal entities.

Corporations generally have more diffuse ownership than LLCs, which is why people ascribe bad things to that specific type of entity. If there is a gym doing these tactics, and it's an LLC with a handful of owners ("members"), those owners are just asshole humans that could theoretically be punched in the face. Whereas if it's a corporation with diffuse ownership, then the policies become "just business" and "nobody's fault".

Although corporations certainly can be "closely held" by a few people or a family, just as you can sell shares in an LLC to investors at arms length or have all/part of the LLC owned by a corporation or business trust.

And frankly I'm surprised by the number of small businesses I see set up as a sole proprietorship or partnership and doing-business-as rather than spending the money on LLC registration fees. Although as a business gets smaller the protection created by the LLC structure also shrinks, so it's somewhat understandable.
I'm not sure the quantity of data will be a differing factor once the LLM reaches a certain point of parameters.
> djinn is an unrelated Arabic word.

[citation needed]

Various dictionaries disagree vehemently with you. (Also, djinn is not even an Arabic word. It's a romanized word.)

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/genie
But who makes and interprets the rules of the contract? If I feel my neighbor has violated the contract in my opinion, are their rights forfeit?

This quote simply reduces to "do as I say, or I will harm you"

As an experiment, you can imagine someone else's social contract, which you are likely violating.

Edit: I vouched for the flagged parent comment, not because I agree, but because I passionately disagree and would like it to be visibly refuted, rather than censored
Why did men stop wearing hats?
Do you think OpenAI is not logging their users' interactions already?
> An AGI by definition is capable of self improvement.

Just because you can imagine something and define that something has magic powers doesn't mean that the magic powers can actually exist in real life.

Are you capable of "self improvement"? (In this AGI sense, not meant as an insult.)
Like most of the crap on tumblr/reddit, that sounds great as a screenshot but quickly breaks down if you spend 60 seconds thinking about it.

- Who gets to define intolerance? Is tolerance vs. intolerance binary (obviously not - it exists on a spectrum that's hard to define).

- This completely overlooks the importance of dialogue/debate/negotiation. Pretty important for a functional democracy.

- "Paradox of Tolerance" is basically just used by assholes to justify their intolerance of views they disagree with.
Those files are not in optional locations. You could possibly symlink from ~/.bashrc to ~/.config/bash/bashrc, but what's the point of that?
These systems only work with freedom of movement. You get global rules and law that'll remove any correcting mechanism
If developers spent more time in sales or customer service...many of them would quit out of frustration, but some would refactor the world, also out of frustration.
It's obviously false. Nuclear weapon proliferation has been largely prevented, for example. Many dangerous pathogens and lots of other things are not available to the public.

Asserting inevitability is an old rhetorical technique; it's purposes are obvious. What I wonder is, why are you using it? It serves people who want this power and have something to gain, the people who control it. Why are you fighting their battle for them?
> We can not have a society if this is how people react to disagreement.

Plain disagreement ends when people start to die.

Mothers in states that have banned abortion are now dying because they can't get care. People who are trans are dying at alarming rates because they can't get care. Guns are the leading cause of children.
This is a great example of something that attempts to appear profound but actually isn't.
Large government is just another form of monopoly control corruption
> and their tolerance should not be tolerated.

Didn't you mean to write 'intolerance' there instead of 'tolerance'?
It's a baseless assertion, often repeated. Reptition isn't evidence. Is there any evidence?

There's lots of evidence of our ability to control the development, use and proliferation of technology.
I like that formulation because it foregrounds the important thing: What is the agreement? What kinds of things are disallowed? Different communities are going to have different ideas about that, and, therefore, exclude different people; making it explicit that it is an agreement with allowed and disallowed behavior, as opposed to trying to pretend that "Be Good" is somehow a workable rule, gets us to the first stage of being able to discuss what behavior is allowed and disallowed, instead of pretending it's obvious, somehow, which only works if the actual goal is a dictatorship with arbitrary rules which disallows that discussion.