skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> If that's gatekeeping, then so be it. They are not engineers yet if they can't use the software equivalent of a ruler.

It's not gatekeeping.

Traditional engineering fields have somewhat standardized expectations around what a new grad should know. Same as law or Medicine/Nursing. When someone calls himself a Software Engineer, I too have an expectation of what they should know.

It's part of what made the scene where Katherine Johnson explains Euler's method as a little known math trick to a group of bewildered NASA engineers so funny. Everyone in that room would have been familiar with that concept as it's the first numerical method encountered in a differential equation class [0].

I would love some sort of standardized curriculum for Software Engineering. No exam, just a list of pre-requisite and concepts.

[0] The real work she did would have probably required a separate two hour documentary so I understand the filmmaker's decision here.
I agree and even go further it's not like the dawn of print or internet or mobile, it's to the level of the discovery of fire or the invention of language.
The Fed Passes the Buck on Bank Failures
Again, substitute the "socially beneficial" arbitrary trait of height for race and ask yourself if that sounds acceptable. Should people opt for white children simply because racism exists? Should people opt for tall children because heightism exists? How do you make the distinction in your own mind?
Self-aggrandizement isn't anything foreign to Eliezer, but he's genuinely terrified. Milking it for every drop doesn't really capture what he's doing.
Hey GPT-5, write the code implementing a limiter designed to prevent the abuse of AI by bad faith actors without stifling positive-intent activity in any way.

It goes both ways!
> It used to be that artists and designers were still trying to figure out what looks good, and trying all the things. But now we've tried so many things and we've gotten better at zeroing in the precise aesthetics viewers and consumers want. We've converged.

Wow wow wow, stop right there. Consumers? Maybe. But viewers and the audience for art in general... that's stretching it.

Artists haven't zeroed in the precise aesthetics of anything. Sure, if your goal is to maximize sales, go for bland genericity; but if your goal is art, artists will be forever seeking because art is an eternal search.

This is not the "end of art", Fukuyama style, and this article proves nothing of the sort.
At the end of the day the nice incompetent kills morale. You can only carry water for someone so much. We all have our own work to do, fixing Jimmy's fuckups gets real old real quick, no matter how nice they are. You need to cut the nice incompetents or the competents are going to leave to work with other competents.
Highly context-dependant. You don't see too many dwarf NBA stars, for example. "The fight does not always go to the strong, nor the race to the swift. But that is the way to bet."
not everyone can resist instant gratification; not to mention the intelligence hurdle 'pursuing creative projects, and inventing new problems to solve' entails. i think both are true, that humans need to be needed but we're also wired to be 'lazy' and 'energy efficient'
Wait, that means this "country wisdom" has been total bullshit for almost all of the time it existed! https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-05772-8/figures/9
There are only negative consequences for not participating in polio eradication, and those consequences require no effort from complying participants.

Refusing to participate in a ban on AGI research could be very lucrative, and imposing negative consequences would require a lot of effort for complying participants.
Yes, rural to urban migration is a huge factor across vast swathes of the world, and not just in poor countries. Many wealthy countries like Japan and South Korea are seeing the rural countryside rapidly depopulate, as the young decamp to cities in search of education and jobs.
Are you seriously suggesting that banning TikTok will significantly reduce school shootings?
>FDMs are good toys that require love. A lot of it (which can be good and bad).

Eh, that's not really the case any more. If you spend a sensible amount of money on a properly built machine, it's pretty close to fire-and-forget. Features like automatic bed levelling, PEI build plates, runout sensors, reliable direct-drive extruders and spaghetti detection have removed most of the annoyances in FDM printing.

I was a long-time FDM sceptic, but the technology has reached a level of maturity where it fills a useful niche. FDM machines are an increasingly common sight in machine shops, tool rooms and MRO facilities; in an environment that's staffed by people who are familiar with CAD/CAM, they can produce a useful subset of parts with an almost trivial level of cost and effort.

Unless your employer is extremely generous, you probably don't have an MJF or SLS machine that's just sitting idle in case you need a widget in a hurry. FDM thrives in the niche traditionally occupied by hand tools and that sloppy old Bridgeport - workholding one-offs, kludgy parts to keep a machine running until the field tech arrives, parts you only need in order to make other parts. An FDM printer is the mechanical embodiment of the phrase "close enough for government work".
That when we talk about China, we see all of their flaws as completely damning them and everything they do as a country, but in the same breath we speak of the rule of law in the USA as if that means something when it comes to mass surveillance (it does not - the USA is a pioneer in illegal mass surveillance). This is a particular problem when it comes to TikTok, because senators look at TikTok collecting data and influencing Americans and they say "We cannot let China do this to us!" while completely ignoring Facebook and Microsoft doing all of the same to us. This leads to harmful bills like this TikTok bill when what we really need are protections from all mass surveillance, foreign and domestic.

But that will never happen as long as the good citizens of the USA continue to pretend that the rule of law has any meaning in the USA when it comes to mass surveillance, and we point at China and chide them for the millions they have imprisoned as if that is not the pot calling the kettle black.

Calling out China will change very little there, and serves mostly to distract the conversation from the problems we really have the power to solve. We only have the power to change ourselves. The people in the USA and around the globe who suffer from US surveillance will continue to suffer all the while.

And what is worse, China will simply start running domestic companies and collecting our data all the same, because these bills aren't solving the real problem.

Blindly pointing the finger at China causes real harm to us.
There is no meaningful genetic variance in height between cultures, so there’s no need to control for it.

Or are you suggesting that non-genetic cultural factors could be at play here too? Possibly!
Universal Speech Model
It's not a clone. Competitor, yes, and Slack for sure inspired Microsoft's entry into the space but clone, no.
And do you work a lot?
> I know a lot of people who are working to make this dream a reality right now.

What are they doing?

> Until this happens, though, gatekeeping the definition of an engineer is inappropriate and does nothing to help improve the situation, because people are generally resistant to learning these things if you call them "incompetent hacks".

So they should instead be coddled?

How does it not help to simply say: Here's something everyone from a decent engineering program should know on graduation?
If he's convicted, yeah. Based on the facts, they are getting paid by money he stole himself and directed to his family.
Why wouldn’t I take free money? Heck even if it were 1% I’d still do it because I can earn more than 1% with a CD right now.
I don't think "Oprah giving away a CPU to everyone" is really one side of the spectrum, though. In this case, everyone affected already bought the "car", and by themselves. I understand that replacing every CPU would have caused serious problems for Intel, but let's not paint it as if people were looking for free stuff.

I'm also not sure how many people really would have followed through. You say you would have been in that camp, but most likely you were an "enthusiast"?
In a way, they already are. Look at the architecture of GANs, which use a secondary model to judge the quality of response from the first one. It's not used for training, but it's a good and simple example of how models can be composed to build something more advanced.
I'm a parent, I guide my kiddos when rationality escapes them. The process itself, parent-child, teaches them how to make their own decisions. Governments can't teach people how to make their own decisions.

The statement that trade relationships must be fair is some sort of neoliberal mumbo jumbo. I don't accept it as an assumption or a consequence. You can accept it as axiomatic if you want, but I don't see it as a consequence of any valid logical train of thought.
I try to most days. It’s not quite the “Dear diary…” style, but I find it a helpful way to think through ideas and reflect on what is going on. Also it is quite fun to look back at journal entries from years ago and sympathize with your previous self.
And tinder matches
Last I knew you could TECHNICALLY self-host everything but with little documentation on how to set it up.
Initially I assumed this was going to be about gender. The tagline changed my mind on that really quick. Imagine my surprise as I kept reading and found it circling back around to something prosaic after all.
It’s these reductionist arguments that lose the forest for the trees.

If we see a clear health disparity between two groups who should otherwise have equal outcomes, then it implies there’s possibly something in the environment of one group that’s negatively effecting them. And therefore could possibly have other side effects we’re not privy too.

You say height is of no importance, but a majority of women[0][1] would disagree, and men below average height would also disagree. Perhaps our evolutionary signals point to something other than “a social construct” for choosing height in mates. Wild thought.

0 - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01918...

1 - https://www.wsj.com/articles/online-dating-investing-match-t... (quote of note: “A former Bumble product manager says that a majority of women on the platform tend to set a floor of 6 feet for men, which would limit their candidate pool to about 15% of the population.“)
It's a lot easier and faster to destroy than to defend. To defend, you need to know what you're defending against, develop the defense, and then roll it out, all reactively post facto.

If a computer has the ability to quickly make millions of novel viruses, what antidotes are you hoping for to be rolled out, and after how many people have been infected?

Also, if you follow the nuke analogy that's been popular in these comments, no country can currently defend against a large-scale nuclear attack--only respond in kind, which is little comfort to those in any of the blast radii.
You can substitute pretty much any country with sufficient resources. From China's perspective, there's the exact same argument in reverse wrt the USA.

(And, of course, it would be more appropriate to talk about governments here rather than countries, but the two have always been conflated colloquially.)
> Don't worry about the US. It is still the greatest country and will remain so for at least 50 years.

That's a shortsighted and very optimistic viewpoint, dripping with typical American pride.

You're underestimating just how much damage foreign propaganda and misinformation can do and has done to your great country. Trump getting to power, and still being a strong contender for 2024, mass delusion and rising popularity of conspiracy theories (QAnon, pizzagate, etc.), record-high social unrest and division, racial tensions, protests, marches, insurrections, etc.

And this is just starting to unravel.

The ironic thing is that all that great technology built by the US, allowing everyone to join, connecting the world and whatnot, has been the perfect weapon of information warfare. You've essentially built the weapons, and handed them to your enemies, and are somehow still debating if that's the case, and what to do about it. This confused state is indicative of the effects of psyops, where the afflicted adversary doesn't understand the situation they're in, or how they got there. An ex-KGB agent explained this well way back in 1985[1].

The East certainly has an advantage, considering they've been doing this for decades now, and Western influence on their own population is close to zero, because of their isolation from the internet.

Banning TikTok is a good defensive measure, but it's too little, too late, to reverse the damage already done, and to stop the bleeding. The US would have to do a major shakeup and banning of foreign accounts across all social media sites, and judging by the reactions on this well educated forum alone, that wouldn't fly with the general population, who perceive this as an infringement on free speech.

EDIT: Ah, it seems the bill is broader than just banning TikTok. Good, it might be the only playable move. Unfortunately, it requires more government oversight at the expense of some civil liberties, and I can already see how unpopular this will be.

Buckle up, it's going to get even bumpier. I suspect the US in its current dominant position won't last more than a couple of decades, at most. Funny that with all its untouchable military power, it's completely defenseless against this type of attack.

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOmXiapfCs8
The push to end parking mandates
STM is the Haskell people’s hammer solution to everyone else’s nail problems.
Then just go to https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmods/ or https://www.reddit.com/r/cyberDeck/ instead. The author posted on r/cyberDeck already. This isn't some brave new world.
I had hoped to have ChatGPT do my work today, but even after a number of iterations it was having compiler errors and referring to APIs not in the versions it was having me install.

A bit different from stack overflow, but not 10x. It was flawless when I asked it for syntax, e.g. a map literal initializer in Go.

On the other hand, I asked it to write a design for the server, and it was quite good, writing more quantity with and more clarity than I had written during my campaign to get the server approved. It even suggested a tweak I had not thought of, although that tweak turned out to be wrong it was worth checking out.

So maybe heads down coding of complex stuff will be ok but architects, who have indeed provided an impressive body of training data, will be replaced. :)
The idea of open markets is that no player is given favorable treatment by the government. If you allow a player that comes from a country that treats its citizens as human farms, I wouldn't call that open markets.
The Polynesians were also some the greatest navigators in human history, with thousands of years of cultural heritage centered around long distance maritime exploration. They're not exactly a good point of comparison for "what was realistically achievable for humans tens of thousands of years ago" in the same way Olympic athletes aren't.
>But more importantly -- this has taken place from 1990 to 2020. Have there been big demographic shifts between rural/urban in that time?

In Western countries, yes.

Country Year Urban Ethnic Makeup Rural Ethnic Makeup
-------------- ----- ----------------------------- ------------------------------
United States 1990 73% White, 14% Black, 8% Hispanic | 86% White, 11% Black, 3% Hispanic
2020 57% White, 12% Black, 18% Hispanic | 84% White, 8% Black, 9% Hispanic
United Kingdom 1991 90% White, 4% South Asian, 2% Black | 97% White, <1% South Asian, <1% Black
2011 75% White, 12% South Asian, 6% Black | 97% White, <1% South Asian, <1% Black
South Africa 1991 14% White, 77% Black, 9% Coloured | 15% White, 68% Black, 17% Coloured
2011 14% White, 79% Black, 8% Coloured | 11% White, 77% Black, 11% Coloured
India 1991 69% Hindu, 14% Muslim, 11% Other | 69% Hindu, 14% Muslim, 13% Other
2011 63% Hindu, 17% Muslim, 11% Other | 68% Hindu, 15% Muslim, 13% Other
China 1990 91% Han, 2% Mongolian, 2% Hui | 89% Han, 5% Zhuang, 1% Miao
2020 92% Han, 1% Zhuang, 1% Hui | 88% Han, 6% Zhuang, 1% Miao
Peru 1993 53% Mestizo, 31% Indigenous, 16% White| 73% Indigenous, 23% Mestizo, 4% White
2017 60% Mestizo, 16% Indigenous, 24% White| 74% Indigenous, 21% Mestizo, 4% White
I think the smartphone theory is plausible, which I translate as follow: we've become programmable.

I grew up in the 80s with a material wealth that is probably 10% of what modern teenagers have. The era also contained a massive economic crisis with actual record high unemployment and interest rates triple the current "high" rate. Also, the nuke could drop any day.

I don't remember spending much thought on any of it at all nor was I worried about any future. Why would I? I'm a teenager, I spent the early teens largely outside playing with friends and the late teens partying.

However, if I'd replay my childhood in modern age conditions, I'm sure I would have been far more miserable. That's what I mean with it being programmable. Modern teens are far more lonely than I was and spent that lonely time filling their head with garbage at a very critical part in their development. They've already given up before they even started.
Sanitation surely plays a part as well. If tap water is filthy (as it is in virtually all of India) and you're constantly getting sick as a result, this will definitely impact growth.
No, the GPL doesn't prevent meaningful academic or commercial use; rather, it seeks to prevent individuals from taking advantage of free software to limit the freedom of other users. It is important to note that if you live in a free country, there are laws that protect the liberties of all citizens and prevent actions that could restrict those freedoms.
Uh did you read the article cause it addresses that idea.
The disadvantage of not offering an API for iMessage is that there is no easy way to block clients. Apps like Bluebubbles have to work by being installed on an actual Mac and scraping messages from iMessage and Beeper uses a similar architecture[0]. Presumably they have a data centre full of actual macs (or VMs).

[0] https://github.com/mautrix/imessage
where were you/what were you doing? That line didn’t sell well until it was reintroduced, IIRC. you’re right though, I may be off by a couple years but correct for most I suspect
Citizenship laws are arbitrary. I live in Australia, with a non-married partner, and we have very similar backgrounds, both being born in the same country (not Australia). But she is an Australian citizen, since it turns out that her mother was Australian and emigrated. I could now also become an Australian citizen, by obtaining a partnership visa, but it's a slow and expensive process involving a lot of intrusive paperwork. I'll just live here as a temporary visa holder instead, which I can do indefinitely. I don't lose much besides the right to vote.
Lily from Rime here -- we were super happy to collaborate with Vocode on this amazing project. We haven't launched yet but keep an eye out later this week!
You can simultaneously believe in the need for regulation while being skeptical of those calling for it to entrench their own positions, look what happened with SBF.
How exactly do you envision the enforcement? Only sell GPUs to people with a "certified ethical AI researcher" license? Purge torch, transformers etc from PyPI and only provide controlled access to them? Remove all the books and papers on the building blocks from public libraries and online?
This is great an all but it doesn't really address the big problem with end to end encrypted messaging. That would be the usability issue. There is no point in constantly designing new protocols if very few people will ever be able to use the resulting systems. We make these things and then wait for someone to come along and make them usable. That never seems to happen.

I think we really have to turn things around the other way. First determine what a usable system would look like and then only after that is determined start thinking about the cryptography that would work for that system. After all, the cryptography aspect seems to be the relatively easy problem. We solve it over and over again.
There is also the possibility that maerF0x0 has found himself surrounded by the people the article is pointing at a lot in his professional life.
Unstable diffusion already has had quite a few breakthroughs independent of stable diffusion
>Yes, it ought to be.

Lol, since when? Oh, your honor, I didn't know murder was BAD!

> Otherwise, you would be taking a big gamble anytime you accepted money from strangers.

Really? Hasn't been an issue for me at all. Are you sure it's that big of a gamble? Maybe you should think about the kind of people you are accepting money from?

> It would be quite impractical.

As I said, hasn't been a problem for me. And I'm an attorney too! I get paid!

> Also, it goes beyond mere ignorance, it's unknowable. SBF's lawyers will find out whether he is guilty on the day that the verdict is pronounced.

This is literally the opposite of what you described. They are lawyers with expertise in this exact kind of crime and they are well aware of the risk presented by taking money from him. They know he stole money. They know he stole money and saved it for himself.
Teen-age fentanyl deaths in a Texas county
Ending up with an infinite repeating sequence and "running infinitely" are not the same thing
If you think China controlling the minds of Americans through Tik-Tok is a legitimate threat, do you think American minds aren't already controlled by the US government through every other form of media? And which is the bigger threat?

I mean, at least China might actually criticize American government and policy, which is something America's so-called "free press" is no longer capable of. I say give Americans a healthy dose of propaganda from all sides and let the market decide!
My point doesn't relate to whether rural or urban children become taller. Height is largely genetic, and discounting malnutrition it has no bearing on a person's health. Shorter people actually live longer on average.

Social advantages based on arbitrary phenotypic traits should not be encouraged. White people generally have social advantages given the fact that racism exists.
No, because "knowingly" isn't an element.