skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It probably depends on a lot on your social group. I maintain a twitter account because, damnit, I’ve had it since 2007, back when they had visible numeric ids it was in the six figures, and I don’t want someone to squat it; everything changes and twitter may once more have competent leadership.

But if I look at that twitter account… it’s pretty dead. Most of the people I followed have either gone to mastodon (my choice) or instagram (which I could never get into) or just dialed back on social media. Just a wasteland of uninteresting stuff it thinks I might like and gambling ads, increasingly.

Mind you, to your point, I didn’t leave due to instability; my breaking point was the purge of the journalists, and if that hadn’t driven me away, the death of the third party apps certainly would have.
ShareGPT isn't part of that service though. Yes, it would be a TOS violation if Google directly used ChatGPT to generate transcripts -- but not even the original Twitter thread is claiming that.

The only claim being made against Google here is that they used ChatGPT content. I can't find any sources claiming that Google made use of an OpenAI service. So the distinction is correct, but doesn't seem particularly valuable in this context -- using data from ShareGPT is not a TOS violation.
Install from GitHub directly is probably the simplest.
Have you heard of LazyGit? It's a Git TUI.
A Naive Approach to Data
12V requires quite a lot of amps for enough light, so low DC is not optimal. Also LEDs are current driven devices, i.e. they will be sensitive to voltage changes (even with a current limiting resistor)
Hi, first thanks a lot for disrupting a really important market!

Do you plan providing more options for the display assembly in the future (I'm particularly interested into an option with a touchscreen)?
> Prusa are trying to make an open source hardware company work and I guess this is what it looks like.

https://blog.prusa3d.com/the-state-of-open-source-in-3d-prin... sure sounds like they no longer intend to be an "open source hardware company".

For example:

> Parts that can be considered consumables (e.g., thermistors, heater blocks, fans, printing plates, etc.) can be manufactured and sold commercially after the verification by the licensor based on the presentation of samples.

That is very much against the concept of open source.
People underestimate the extent to which tech's value proposition is defined by eliminating accountability to customers. That's one of the defining aspects of web-scale: not having to provide any real support. Bring that back, and most of the value prop disappears.

Unfortunately what's happening is that the web-scale model has accustomed people to being treated like shit, and so now regular businesses do it too.

I'd like for legislation to work, unfortunately I think it will just be gamed, and service will continue to decline.
Well it's a good thing we don't have countless examples of these things getting 10x better every year. /s

On a serious note, thanks for the analysis, as someone who knows next to nothing about competitive diplomacy.
In what sense is Twitter a platform?
I left because the official twitter client is garbage and all the third party clients were killed off by Musk. If someone links a Tweet I'll still look at it, but I haven't logged in since Tweetbot stopped working.
I rewrite history all the time. And this is just porcelain. No one will be able to tell whether you rebase/reset/amend or use it.

I've got more than a decade working with the tool and use rebase daily. Hasn't been a problem yet.
Even the new Miata's color options are gray-scale, red, very dark blue, and sand. Worth mentioning that you can just buy wraps for wacky colors while protecting your paint and resale value, maybe that's part of it.
the cured-in-place pipe-lining industry is completely unregulated when it comes to public health. No state or federal agency actively monitors work sites or requires safety protocols to eliminate or prevent harmful emissions from leaking into the environment.
Downside is having to use LTSB which often hangs onto its bugs a lot longer than it ought to.
> For me, I've joined new teams and crushed it for a few weeks where it was at least expected performance, but then I quickly fall off a cliff for seemingly no reason. Anxiety compounds this, and I can identify why I've sometimes been slow to crawl out, but the initial fall is always difficult to diagnose.

I think often this is due to the fact that doing a good job isn't noticed or rewarded.

Sometimes the intrinsic motivation of learning a new skill, tool, or environment, is reward enough. If you're new on a project or job, you might think that being a high performer will garner respect, praise, and promotions.

However... if you consistently perform well and management can't (or won't) recognize this in some tangible way, that's a surefire way to kill motivation.
> I have yet to see any assertions in the coffee world that approach the sheer amount of overt dishonesty and grift that characterizes high-end audio.

Oh this is easy.
- Starbucks, as an org, in whole. Brutal dishonesty in much of their marketing, naming, and Brewing methods. Their Coffee flavor is intended to distort your expectations of 'quality coffee'.
- The "Roast Date" disappearance on high-end coffee to sell "Quality" rather than freshness.
- Keurig's marketing of quality or that they can make 'Espresso' (it can't), their product is designed for lock-in.
- Nespresso Vertuo's fake "Froth"
The power of writing your music for people vs writing your music for musicians.
I don't like appeals to authority, but as a computational biologist, I am both a computer scientist and a biological scientist. So understand that I'm responding to you as exactly the kind of person you think should be drawing the kinds of links that you're suggesting.

I'm sorry, but this is just not a reasonable analogy. DNA sequences are not like computer files. The reason that they're distinct modules in these sequences is due to the need for evolution to be feasible. And also for the basic reason that the sequences are linear and so modules tend to appear in these linear sequences. But there also tremendous nonlinearities as well. Things at very long distances can be importantly related to each other.

The introns are not metadata. There are regions that can be removed selectively and in combinations to cause diversity in the produced proteins. That diversity is advantageous because it allows a single DNA sequence to present many different proteins that are typically related, but can be very different structurally. This splicing capability has evolved apparently from entities that can be seen as endogenous viruses or DNA parasites that have the ability to insert and splice themselves out of DNA and RNA sequences. In many confusing words, that's what the article or pointing at is talking about.

The introns do provide a kind of redundancy, but only in the sense that there are areas that can be modified with minimal effect on cellular function, at least relative to modification of the exons, which directly correspond in a one to one way with proteins.

There is error correction. It's called homologous chromosomes. Everyone talks about there being one genome, but in most complex forms of life, you have more than one copy per cell, usually two, and often more. These multiple copies, in addition to allowing for recombination and sexual reproduction, provide templates on which errors which arise during life can be corrected. However, there are no error correcting codes.

If you'd like to learn more about the actual details of these systems, I strongly suggest an undergraduate molecular biology textbook. The best one in existence is called the Molecular Biology of the Cell.

There are indeed many similarities between computing systems and biological systems, but the analogies you are making don't appear to be clear. Read a book like this, deeply and slowly, and it might change your life. At very least, it'll mean that the world you live in is much less mysterious and much more exciting.
We’re on our way. 3D printers, insanely cheap power tools, even CNCs are steadily decreasing in price while at the same time hobbyists are building metal milling ones for a couple hundred dollars, there are indie plastic recyclers showing that you can make decent products with open source and cheap equipment, for AI there’s LLaMA and soon a million GPT based tools. Centralized industry requires too much sustained demand in order to make the capital investment worthwhile. There are few that really require it and they’re mostly resource extraction and refining.

Not everyone need build everything but we could certainly thrive with many more tradesmen and small manufacturers.
he's likely talking bout the internals. sure we know how to train them but nobody knows what the models learn exactly. how those billions of parameters shape the output on inference.

a few months ago, just this year some researchers discovered what might be the neuron that largely decides when to use an in gpt-2. yes 2. that's what he means.

https://clementneo.com/posts/2023/02/11/we-found-an-neuron
>but then constantly demands the US be the world police

Que?
> And this is after aggressively curating my feed by unfollowing anybody who cheered on Musk’s takeover of Twitter

If you care about science twitter, I wonder if that was the best criteria for filtering your content.
I have a serious problem with it for outdoor lighting and signage: it gives me a headache. Enough exposure will make me feel actively sick. The effect is not subtle.

Just don’t use these devices, please.
> Trying to cram all the infrastructure for an LED lamp into the shape of a light bulb is a bad idea, even if the input power is DC.

Absolutely, the incandescent light bulbs have that shape for a reason: the screw is small because there is nothing to put in it and it doesn't heat, the bulb is large to dissipate all the light and heat it generates. And the LED light bulbs have exactly opposite problems: almost all of the heat is generated near the screw while the bulb itself generates almost none and the light-emitter doesn't even need the bulb that large around of it. Oh, and the casing around the screw is plastic so the thermal conductivity is horrible. Honestly, it's a profoundly terrible form-factor which we're now stuck with.
Yeah, USB-A/B are the best, where applicable.
I did YC also remote, though a bit earlier than the article's author. The part that stood out to me was

> In their picture of the world, you, the founders, should only build a product and talk to customers, everything else is superfluous and waste of time. Hiring is waste of time, paid advertising is waste of time, content is waste of time, talking to investors is waste of time, getting media coverage is waste of time.

I talked to many other founders who also disliked this view (only talk to customers and build), and they all tended to be the worse founders in the batch - a large part of the value add yc provides imo is acting as coach/therapist and pushing back against founder pschology/thinking traps. The view that many things founders want to do early is a waste of time is correct and works, and hearing that can be jarring for many.
In America?? I imagine people would just snatch the food and take the robot to the nearest scrap metal dealer.
I mean maybe. There also might be something to this. OpenAI has been very opaque about training techniques.
You will see need to current drive the LEDs, DC alone won't help.
> Netherland has had pretty permissive drug policies for quite some time now, and this seems to have lead to it becoming increasingly important in international drug trade.

That's bordering on propaganda. The problem the Netherlands have is that Europe's biggest seaport is in Rotterdam - that means a lot of ships that come from South America unload their freight there, and there is an extensive network of rail and highway lines that connect it to the rest of Europe. And that combination attracts drug smugglers like a pile of poo attracts flies - and wherever you have large scale drug smugglers, no matter the country's drug policy, which is only relevant for marijuana anyway, you will get absurd amounts of money luring in corruptible officials.
Having mentioned a brief Roku maintenance rotation on my resume I got to see how desperate the recruiters for BrightScript devs are.

I did jokingly consider diving into it as a lucrative niche skill, like maintaining Cobol apps.
On the other hand, the integrated bulb/fixtures in our house at least use separate driver units, and seem to be lasting much better than the average mains-voltage LED bulb (the oldest is 8 years old, used every day and still going strong, touch wood).
https://www.hedy.org/ is billed as an incremental bridge from Scratch to Python, with built in learning aids and teaching aids.
You look interested in the subject, but I recommend to read a few biology books about it. There are many weird low level features of DNA that are not so cover in popular discussions [1] [2]. But I don't remember any that is similar to a filesystem as you propose. Take a look, you will be gladly surprised.

[1] One of my favorites is that the bases of ADN are translated in groups of 3 to amino acids, so the code reads like

AAABBBCCCDDDEEEFFF

It's very unusual, but there are some virus that read the same part in two ways, with different offset, so the same part is interpreted as

-JJJKKKLLLMMMNNN--

I don't remember if they use the other offset too

--PPPQQQRRRSSSTTT-

[2] Another, not so interesting but relevant. Eukaryote has linear DNA, so they have some special repetition in the extremes. The idea is that the extremes are difficult to copy by the usual enzyme that copy the main part that has assorted code. But the extremes have a special easy pattern, so the cell can use some specialized enzyme to make them longer.
I normally agree with counterarguments rooted in the state's monopoly on violence, but in this case other options for the PHY layer exist.

Seamless multi-PHY is possible if care is taken to prevent leaks in the abstraction e.g. precise timing expectations up the stack.

Plus, plenty of side channels exist with our conventional PHY. You can copy beacon frames from nearby 802.11 APs and rebroadcast them at just the right time to achieve transmission of an FSK modulated signal, for instance.

(In this case there would just be more of the same beacon frames in the air. You'd have to look at what the AP advertises as its broadcast interval to know that they don't belong there. Furthermore, you wouldn't be able to easily pinpoint the source of the extra transmissions or decrypt their content under a well-designed protocol.)
Twitter and Elon Musk didn't invent layoffs.
J uses ASCII. Built-in symbols use dot (.) and colon (:) as part of a symbol. In J vocabulary, https://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/vocabul.htm , I counted less than 150 built-in symbols. Even if you double it as monadic/dyadic variations, that's less than 300. I definitely don't know many of them, and still able to write some programs, like a parser generator; I think those symbols are closer to a standard library - i.e. with C we need to get familiar with printf, getc or strcpy. As with mathematics in elementary school, you start with few simpler ones, then gradually add some more useful ones, then the rest is optional for cases when you want or need them.

In practice a lot of J symbols are either already known or rather obvious.
You need to check which model you are using, also... LangChain runs through the model several times with increased token count on each successive call.
It's more likely that the 50B number doesn't represent the full FDIC coverage for deposits. For instance, this article claims that the bank was about to have 100B withdrawn the day the FDIC took over: https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/28/svb-customers-tried-to-pull-...

I think most likely is that the FDIC has had the bank for a number of weeks and allowed a large number of withdrawals. Those withdrawals are counted as part of the 18B cost to the FDIC, but aren't part of the 50B that was sold.
This was me.

Unironically, my first few times actually finally trying medication not helping me very much is what made me get over the stigma. When it simply... didn't help much, rather than making me a pill-addicted raving addict, something clicked.
Which is why I expanded the notion of survival to include other organic matter relatives, as they may fare better than we will. Simply put, organic life is unlikely to disappear entirely, which in time (eons, really), could result in sentient organic life emerging again once the machines go their own way or some such

It's also a reason for us to colonize space as fast as possible ;-) it's easier to run away in 3D
I think you're right, but

Maybe it's my myopia, but I feel they were easily the most dev friend years ago, and poured their life and money into it, to benefit others

But then after ubuntu phone, the level of ingratitude from us devs were shocking

Project focus wasn't always on the ball, but we the community ripped them apart for it

So yeah, snaps is a little more lookin' after number one. I agree with that assessment, but I hardly blame them
Possibly Processing? or processing.js?

The Coding Train on youtube (run by Daniel Shiffman) (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvjgXvBlbQiydffZU7m1_aw) has some great tutorials.
That's totally true, we also heard that the attitude is dramatically different if you're in the top of the batch.

Unfortunately, long-term performance is proven to not correlate well with performance during the batch, and YC are transparent about it. So I wouldn't recommend over-stressing it.
I've seen this hyped a lot on Reddit, and its main contributing base seems to be on a Discord channel, but have yet to see any scholarly discussion behind it.

Is there a reason the creator hasn't written or tried to publish a paper on it? I'd love to see an peer-reviewed discussion detailing how it works, maybe studying how it behaves internally, evaluating its performance more rigorously than posting a few examples, maybe in comparison to Transformers with similar parameter counts, or training/inference costs in FLOPs. Perhaps that's not the creator's main priority, though.
User-friendly Git CLI is GUI
I tried to make a warranty claim since I had a whole batch of bulbs die within a few months. GE required me to ship them the bulbs. I abandoned the claim, switched to another manufacturer, and don't put stock in those warranties at all anymore. I doubt they get very many claims and surely someone there is using that as proof of customer satisfaction.
> when in your next sentence you admit that a week task has taken you more than a month

The word 'admit' suggests you had to drag it out of him, that he's hiding slow progress behind a smoke screen of busy work like opening many tickets. That month-long background task wouldn't have had any work done otherwise so it's unfair to call it delayed.

> Until you adopt my old-fashioned approach of single threaded work

That's the problem with people who think they're technical managing the actual workers, they always end up micromanaging and slicing things into shapes that don't fit. The world isn't single threaded and changes usually aren't entirely unrelated.

You should change your management style to simply specifying the business goals you want and asking for as many to be completed as possible. Let your team do what works best.

> The funny thing is you probably consider your approach agile

No, because all those labels just encourage people to pick a style and do that thing regardless of circumstances. In a real project I've got to coordinate everything with someone. I can't push code without a review, I can't code to a team's API without sending them the spec for review, etc. During these times I could facebook like some others do, but instead I "multi-task" by doing other work.

Also, it's not very obvious from simple metrics like number of lines of code committed which work is hard and which is simple fluff which can be fixed without a distraction. A change to a logger might percolate through every method call and appear big and complex despite having been made in seconds by the IDE. If I was implementing a new feature I'd probably want to update the logging style first rather than coding to the old standard, so I'd make the big change (probably covered by another ticket) because I'm already in there and have to test that stuff anyways.

> There's no value until you finish, and I mean done-done.

As I said, there are a lot of down periods in that process. It feels like you think you know some deep secret ("only delivered features count!") that you think you can't get people to acknowledge.

This is actually like day-one stuff in engineering school, that you need to measure benefit of your work in delivered advantages so done isn't done until it's in use. But there's a lot of other stuff as well, such as not delivering something until it's safe to use even if it works in test scenarios.

You should have a discussion with your team about your idea and brainstorm where it fits into a full product development cycle and what has to be considered. I imagine you will find they don't discount it, but they have a wider view of the process than your business focused one, and that they have to balance all of this while also managing your perceptions.
That's just the base concern with every single model regardless of where they sourced their data from. Garbage in, garbage out.
The Engineering Behind Figma’s Vector Networks
convergence can be that.

but convergence can also just be ... convergence. People can actually agree that there's a better/best way to do something independent of other motivations.
“Churn” isn't a metric, it's people rejecting you–grow from it
Nope, at best the filesystem is an analogy. Just like the stretchy rubber mat isn't a perfect description of spacetime.
Sure.

So you should be able to link a study demonstrating these reproductive problems. IE: X people have less exposure to BPA, Y people have more exposure to BPA, and Y people have said problems.

--------

Traditionally, that's the kind of study that's done. For example, X people are non-smokers, Y people are smokers. Y people have Z% more cancer than X people.

A quickie look through the papers you copy/pasted from are not of this traditional style of research. The links are rather... weak.
The clauses always have a trap door: "[outside of] our provision of the Service" means they can do anything as long as it's a service they provide.

Under definitions: The “Service” refers to the applications, software, products, and services provided by GitHub, including any Beta Previews.
Coding by using GPT-4 Voice Assistant on Apple Watch
>Maintaining and upgrading your own Wordpress.org blog is a pain

Honestly, it's not that hard - cron a task to keep the main install updated

Run as few plugins/themes as possible, and schedule them to autoupdate
Can you give a concrete example of a way that a human is capable of categorizing, where GPT is not? Some examples of concrete examples might be

- Humans can take a list of things like ["goldfish", "cat", "shark", "tree", "whale", "rock", "human"] and a list of categories like ["animal", "plant", "non-living"], and say which category each thing belongs to. GPT cannot do this.

- Humans can take a list of things like the above, say which categorization scheme is most appropriate for the thing they are trying to do, and then, according to the categorization scheme they said, say what category each of the things belongs in. GPT cannot do this.

- Humans can take a list of things like the above, and describe a novel categorization scheme for them. Humans can then say out which category things that were not in the original list belong to. GPT cannot do this.

- Some other thing where humans can describe how to categorize something but GPT cannot do so.

- Humans do something internally that GPT cannot do, but that thing has no observable effects from outside the system

Are any of these close to what you mean?