skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I initially felt the same way and found it cluttered. Though I still left fzf-history around and bound it Ctrl+Alt+R so Ctrl+R could still be the default. In zsh I just did this with `bindkey '^[^R' fzf-history-widget`.

Over time I eventually found myself using Ctrl+Alt+R more and more so I made it the default and now Ctrl+Alt+R is still 'old school' history search for me.
What regulation would have helped here? “No buying a website with the intent to develop it but then changing your mind”?
What do you know about this topic? How much can nuclear ramp up and down to follow demand?
I'm sure it's going to get exponentially better, but right now ChatGPT sounds like one very vanilla guy. The other day I asked it to write me a conversation between David Foster Wallace and Ernest Hemingway, and it came out something like (paraphrasing):

HEMINGWAY: I notice you write about political issues and philosophy.

WALLACE: Thank you, I noticed you write about raw experience and manliness.

HEMINGWAY: Well, whatever our differences I feel like we can get along and work together. We will soon be fast friends.
I'm not sure you're addressing anything the comment above said.

Their complaint was that people invested a lot of resources into a technology that Microsoft promoted, and then that technology hit a dead-end with no good upgrade path aside from "rewrite it all!" What year that occurred is irrelevant.

Ironically you brought up MVC 1.0, which Microsoft did EXACTLY THE SAME THING TO, when they released Asp.Net Core MVC which also has no direct upgrade path. In fact, it wasn't until the last twelve months that Microsoft even tried offering anything when they realized it has been ten years and a lot of companies remain stuck to this day on .Net Framework.

Yes, Web Forms was poorly designed. But this is about Microsoft's poor upgrade offerings more than any specific technology, and an import lesson for people investing time/resources into Blazor today (given that it uses a proprietary WebAssembly compilation system and a proprietary back-end not dissimilar from WebForms in terms of lock-in).
Typing rate could be controlled using something like a USB Rubber Ducky. A user could emulate someone else's typing rate. As for speech, that could be synthesised with something like VALL-E.
Ken Rockwell is a complete blowhard asshole - it doesn't take long to find weird racism, extremely biased opinions, and bad advice. Does he still only shoot in JPGs?
I am glad that Richard Stallman and Greta Thunberg live according to their principles and maybe their stances will eventually give me more alternatives to choose from. I am just not personally interested in doing the same. Corporations suck, governments suck, people suck. Constant quest for purity will just mean that I spend all my energy on that and not on doing anything productive myself.
I'm not sure I completely understand how you're phrasing that question.

However, I will say that there is now more than a decade of research into slow-wave enhancement, and multiple studies looking at safety, and efficacy.

If dependency is a concern, it's somewhat the opposite. We're stimulating a sleep function that naturally degrades as we age, and trying to get it to maintain it's power. So you naturally lose this ability.

Note: we can't create slow waves (yet) we can only increase what is already there.
I have owned a Hyundai, and I have zero idea why everyone is so convinced that their physical buttons reduce driver distraction. In the six years I had it, I never managed to totally figure out where the HVAC buttons were and in what order they cycled the different modes.
OpenAI has rolled out to the masses as well apparently (unless I am missing something).

Bard will be under intense scrutiny from the public in the short term.

Any sign of weakness against GPT4 might kill the product in the public opinion.

It makes a lot more sense IMO to throw money at the problem in the short-term, and optimize later. They are playing catch-up.
Even simpler. Have the voice give them a short onboarding call, but then have it regularly call them again using reverse charging, and then chat with them. Convince them that they've formed a friendship.
There have been convictions based on child heads photoshopped onto adult bodies. Generative images will be treated the same. The lack of a real victim is treated as immaterial. All it needs is sufficient realism to be believable.
How will you know?
I'm a constant user of `fzf` and autojump (`j`) so combined them into this shell alias I use regularly:

alias jf="cd \$(sort -nr ~/Library/autojump/autojump.txt | awk 'BEGIN {FS = \"\\t\"} {print \$2}' | fzf)"

or without the escaping:

cd $(sort -nr ~/Library/autojump/autojump.txt | awk 'BEGIN {FS = "\t"} {print $2}' | fzf)

It gets my autojump history, sorts it by most used on top, extracts just the directory names, pipes the list to `fzf` and `cd`s into the selection. It's great because my most-used directories will be right on top of the `fzf` list.
Good article find, I can add some primary company links:

https://corvounmanned.com.au/

https://www.sypaq.com.au/news/sypaq-supporting-ukrainian-arm...
Turns out the leadership of Intel is stupider than I thought.

It's almost impossible to believe that they actually thought they'd be able to go up against two GPU makers each with 25+ years of experience.

This was always going to be a long uphill battle. Always. I figured it would take at least 10 years for Intel to become competitive, but turns out they tucked tail and ran.

Mediocre!
> My PS5 plays PS4 games.

That sounds like an outlier, though. Typically, consoles were not compatible between generations. PS1 games didn't play on PS2. PS2 games didn't play on PS3. Etc.
What is the profit motive to make a robot with that capability today without the AI to drive it? None. But as soon as you have that AI suddenly the profit motive changes.
I had trouble reading that. Anyone else?
It is difficult to predict what will happen, but nefarious use of something that powerful is a given.

Generated images and audio clips are still pretty easy to detect, we're not there yet, but close.

What I worry about is not the obvious usage and risks, but the second and third order effects, those we can't predict.

I will be interesting.
Google Bard doesn't work for Workspace accounts
I would like to see an explanation of how a human can have any interaction or choice without some level of cognitive cost.
You are missing GP's specific grievance and how it relates to his revenge. You are welcome to find schadenfreude distasteful, I wouldn't even disagree, I'm not even sure GP would disagree, but I'd ask that you join me in an empathy exercise first so that you can at least understand what you are wagging a finger at.

Let's walk through a fictional scenario. Imagine that you are on a team that is overloaded and behind schedule -- not because you suck, but because management is a bit green and has let their expectations run considerably ahead of reality. In a misguided attempt to help, management goes out and buys some highly paid consultants without vetting them (management is a bit green, remember?). The consultants frame you as incompetent and themselves as saviors, but in actual fact they consume time and money and contribute nothing of value. They turn out to be a liability, not an asset. Management doesn't understand this and doesn't want to understand it so the consultants stay hired. Those consultants earn more than you, are worse than useless, and yet still have the gall to go behind your back and talk shit about you. Assholes!

This is the headspace in which seeing the consultants lose their job feels like long overdue cosmic justice. They didn't just pass you on the racetrack of capitalism, they sliced your tires as they went by -- but now they are spinning out. Is it so very wrong to enjoy the sight? Suddenly, an evil idea tugs at the back of your mind: you have some of their merch. You could commemorate the occasion. So far, they have been the bad guy... but now it's your turn.

----------

I tend to agree with you and find the revenge part distasteful, but only due to the collateral damage. I'm sure there were people working for Highly Paid Consultant Company who didn't deserve to lose their job, walk out, and see a living extrapolation of themselves into homelessness and failure, and the homeless don't deserve to be used as props representing failure. However, the asshole consultants this was targeted at? I tend to suspect that if I were to learn all the details I'd agree with GP that they earned this one.

As you might have guessed, I've experienced something akin to this story myself, except that the asshole consultants in my story got away scott-free. In both cases they got to keep their ill-gotten gains. It's not like the money was clawed back, so the scales still tip in their direction. If it's wrong to occasionally indulge in fantasies of karmic justice... then today, I'm in the wrong. Thanks for sharing, GP.
No, this is not the way. What's the point in burying your head in the sand?

I don't think the vast majority of people 1) care about this 2) even know what RSS is 3) will stop listening to podcasts 4) will use email as their primary channel for correspondence.

By all means, do this if it's what you, personally, need.
"You are engaged in a political debate. Your name is <POLITICIAN>. You are assertive but polite and concise in your responses. A summary of your policy platform follows: <PLATFORM>

It's your opponent's turn, and they state: <TEXT TO SPEECH>

You reply: "
What will happen is humans redefine their role in society, and keep iterating literally on their survival.

We’ve been here before evolving what we call each others roles; priest, cleric, “people name Farmer must be farmers”; they’re arbitrary labels (in that “we don’t know why we exist”, not immutable obligations of reality way), and there’s no reason we to have see this as “the end of human storytelling”; software isn’t lobotomizing us, but changing who can reach us. If info distributed via technology cannot be trusted, good; past has shown there’s no reason to trust technology corporations anyway. Make it explicit.

Death of commercial figurative identity is not literal death and language is not the only source of understanding.
My $0.02: Unnamed variables just seem to add confusion and inconsistency. Inconsistency like this in Scala and Perl make it harder to learn and offer little value.
It's something people have been parroting ever since this Spolsky post from 2008 https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2008/02/19/why-are-the-micros...
Do you have any good examples of a car or plane that can be operated that way? I'm not aware of any.

Taking a glance to co-locate your finger and a button or knob is far faster than doing so with an element on a touchscreen. And the latter requires visual attention throughout the interaction.

Also, I would wager that keeping eyes on road while mentally finding a button or knob without looking is actually more distracting than taking a quick glance for it.
I feel like modern tech is more and more about piling up copy-pasted abstractions that require more powerful hardware to do the same thing, all that in order to produce more garbage with fewer resources.

It's all about hype and potential of becoming profitable, and not so much about solving actual problems.

Tech today is part of the biggest problems we are facing (mass extinction, global warming, end of fossil fuels), and seems to be accelerating in the wrong direction. We need to learn how to do less with less, be more efficient, but more meaningful.
IMO the author was just attempting to make his text engaging and approachable, but people have personalities, and some personality quirks can rub certain people the wrong way.

There is no shortage of drier materials on the subject!
I love buttons but you don't really need them with a properly designed climate control system. Yet many cars are fitted without climate control so the driver is always fiddling the buttons or subjecting passengers to cruel temperatures.
If parents are a problem then homeschooling isn't going to help. Traditional school would, assuming the schools aren't complete garbage.
You can manually rotate the built-in flash in Sony’s α6000-series cameras: it uses two spring-loaded hinges, and still operates if you push/pull it backwards. This gives a range of motion from full-forwards to full-upwards to somewhat-backwards.
It's kind of amazing we're not seeing more of this already. It's a trivial application of the tech. We've already achieved a culture where the more batty something is the more likely people are to believe it, and now we have an infinite, personalized quackery generator.

Without a massive cultural revolution putting the brakes on this, which I can't imagine coming from anywhere, I fear we're barreling into a future where nothing is true anymore, a hall of mirrors where the capacity to fake anything at all far surpasses anyone's ability to make sense of it.
I'm seeing that the chat api wants to always wrap its response in "```python ```" when it generates code. Is there a prompt trick to stop this, or should I just be stripping it manually
Exactly. We don’t want HN turning into TikTok, do we? What’s worse, there will inevitably appear AI constructed “native” ads or even political propaganda - high quality comments skillfully promoting products or someone’s agenda.
The difference is the scale, speed, and cost. You have to at least find an impersonator who can do a passable impersonation of the target, which may be a tall order. They can't impersonate everyone perfectly, and the really good ones are probably busy and/or expensive. Anyone can use this. Kids could use it.
Inkscape is great.

Audacity is OK although buggy.
There is zero practical distinction between taking your eyes off the road to see which button you're pushing vs taking your eyes of the road to see which part of the screen you're touching.

There is, in fact, one large difference. With a button you know you’ve pushed it. Once you see where to press your eyes can go back to the road while you actually press the button since the feedback indicating it’s been pressed is tactile.

That’s just a button though. That scenario is magnified with any sort of adjustment slider.

I just got out of a rental with a touchscreen climate controls and it was significantly less safe just adjusting the heat.
"starting around the iPhone 13, phones got really good"

-exasperated sigh-

I wish I could agree but I just can't. I feel around that point pictures taken by phone cameras stopped looking real. They started forcing stuff like HDR and AI correction and very heavy handed noise filtering.

Looking back at my old pictures from the 2010s, I think my canon digital elph took better pictures than my phones do now lol. I realize how stupid that sounds.
More than you might actually realize. Even though I've seen a lot of poverty, I always laugh when I see Bill Gates speak of "poor" countries, because they're often the richest in love and warmth.
In the US it depends on the brokerage. Fidelity's cash deposits are FDIC-insured, like bank accounts; Vanguard is working on a similar program but hasn't rolled it out to everyone yet.

(On the other hand, the existing program at Vanguard puts the money into a fund that invests at least 99.5% of its assets in Federal government-backed securities, so it should be effectively just as safe.)
What I detailed, I do in real life because I don't like waiting, because waiting in the station is far less comfortable than being in the vehicle and because timetables are reliable enough that I do not worry about missing a connection.

Besides, in the simple linear example I have given , it is impossible to miss the direct connection. It either catches up to me in which case I just take the direct connection when it does (and as a result I split my waiting time into shorter periods) or I arrive to the destination before the direct connection does (therefore saving time).

> If I get a seat on the first bus I take, do I want to give it up and potentially be forced to stand on the second one

This is never a scenario. I never get off a bus that takes me to my destination. I get off a bus when it no longer goes in the desired direction. I get ON the first bus that goes in the desired direction even if it doesn't reach the destination. If the first bus to arrive is the direct connection, I take it of course, and no longer bother with a combo.

Compared to when tickets were per ride so combos were disincentivized, I vastly prefer the current system and I do these combos almost on a daily basis.

An unreliable transportation system results in aversion to transfers. That is not the case in the cities relevant for me. Transportation is reliable enough that transfers are an opportunity for optimization instead of being something to avoid.

Sometimes I even ended up missing the initial bus at the starting point that would normally be the last direct connection with my destination before a critical time point, but I manage to still make it in time by doing a combo instead.
Strangely, Does Hyundai/Kia have some difference wrt engines in US and India?
Never heard anyone complain about engine in India even after 62k miles, they are quite popular among taxi drivers, who definitely stress the engine more than enough. Indian roads can be quite punishing on cars.
If people are looking at what technologies and companies to invest in, knowing that they may be left high and dry with a "full rewrite"-level of breaking changes is a valid and relevant critique. You want to know you'll be supported through difficult transitions, and that isn't unreasonable.

I don't understand why people are coming out of the woodwork to tell everyone that full rewrites are a perfectly normal and expected regular occurrence that you should expect from your tech choice. Python 3 is famous for how much they hurt themselves by ignoring the problem. Many companies never did migrate from 2 to 3, and instead picked tech with better guarantees. I expect the same to occur with .Net Framework.
There's a potential well of habit that you have to climb out of before you start getting a benefit. If you don't put in the energy to try it for a while, you'll slide back down into the well.
I've used this guide as a reference and now feel pretty good with a lot of FP concepts and why they exist - pure functions, monads vs applicative vs functors, referential transparency etc

It's easy to understand Lists, Options, Eithers and all the other classic monads and what they do. It's harder to understand other forms this can take.

At work I had to build something that ended up leading to creating a new monad type[0]. That process crystalized why we ended up with these ideas and structures much more clearly.

I also highly recommend any of Scott Wlaschin's videos[1]. He does a great job conveying FP ideas, and his videos introduced me to F# which is a really fun language with a very clean syntax.

Another great blog is by James Sinclair [2] who similarly has several articles on using FP in a practical way though some of the code can get a little deep but in an interesting way.

Loosely coupled but cohesive is a very useful mantra when integrating FP ideas along with keeping everything very simple - avoid crazy compositions, deeply nested types, etc. Just cause something can be abstracted due to FP (composing a bunch of function calls, looping once instead of 3 times etc) doesn't mean you should. There is value in breaking pieces up.

[0] https://sambernheim.com/blog/building-a-monad

[1] https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=scott+w...

[2] https://jrsinclair.com/web-development/
> Why do the kernel developers allow corporations to shove code into the tree for hardware nobody has? Google does this too: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/lin...

To get the code ready for when the hardware is available.

> I get that the corporations employ the maintainers of this code, but if that person quits or the company discontinues a product, now we're left with useless crap in the kernel. Why can't these companies just build their own modules? Why is it everyone else's problem?

A lot of companies and individuals can step up to maintain the code once it's there and working. If it's important, they will and they have. Only dead-dead systems like the 80386 get removed; or, in this case, vaporware that never materialized to begin with.

Modules are bad because they're code that isn't subject to the same review as normal kernel code, may be closed-source or under some obnoxious license, and probably is going to be more difficult to install than just a kernel update.

So we want it to be "everyone else's problem" because that means anyone else can step up if a company fires the people maintaining the code for hardware the kernel team still wants to support. With a module, it might be the case that the module only works on some range of kernels and is very difficult to replicate its functionality on more modern ones once the original company drops out. That's not a good position to be in if you rely on being able to run modern Linux on that hardware.
sock -> hat = hock
I can see that logic
My favorite New York "Joe's Cement" story is that when they were expanding Islip airport, a mob-owned cement company that was giving kickbacks to the local county government poured the ramp pad WAY under the specified thickness using unreinforced concrete, so of course the first Southwest plane to arrive damaged it.

Don't hire a mob-owned cement company, you say? Tough noogies, In NY, at least at that time, they were all mob-owned.

https://www.aviationpros.com/home/news/10393303/southwests-c...

https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=401393

https://www.nytimes.com/1994/09/23/nyregion/mob-allegation-c...

https://www.gothamcenter.org/blog/material-politics-of-new-y...
And the land area required to produce even the current power levels, which is unequivocally insufficient to eliminate gasoline powered cars and stoves?
Yea now we're going to have to put up with youtubers trying to build a brand and shove their personality into every review they make. :(
While I agree that Hyundai's console design is seriously lacking, anything immovable/unchangeable has a key benefit over touchscreens: it can be habituated.

Personally I find any interface that can move while you use it to be borderline anger-inducing (the Google Cloud Platform console comes to mind immediately). In a car it's deadly. Gimmicks move gadgets though, so we had to let some designers and product managers get their bonuses/promotions and then pivot into an "epiphany" (sans the mea culpa) to get to now.
Intel has been making GPUs since roughly 2002, 845 chipset series. (There were earlier ones, but I'm
Musk’s Empire Could Put Him Beyond Government Reach
In China, the online literature industry represented by qidian.com is a typical model of charging by word count: a few cents RMB per 1000 words. If you subscribe to a novel with several million words in full, you will find that the final cost far exceeds buying a physical book. I subscribe to three or five online entertainment novels for fun and relaxation all year round, because reading them only takes a few minutes of fragmented time every day, so this price is acceptable. But I think this word count payment model is difficult to replicate in serious news or more formal opinion articles, because users do not have much motivation to subscribe daily, and this fee is too low, and also need to pay attention to piracy issues. Novels are not very meaningful if they are not copied in full. But for a single article, it is very easy to be copied away for 5 cents and made public on the Internet.
<This comment is translated by new bing.>