skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
hardware goes zap.

software goes ehh eck. slow as hell.

most people these days, don't realize how fast processors are. consumer cpu's these days can be 6 cores / 12 thread for around 200$.
you talk about server cpu's you're talking 96 core.

at $job I reminded people that using things like node is letting us down if we're server rendering billions of html pages. we can't do that at scale cz the language is letting us down.
not the hardware.

with a fast language then add a fast processor - you do magical things.
Plus, now you're exhausted and you've chased it for how long? If you've run for the last 18 hours exhausting the gazelle, home is now an 18 hour jog back the other way, and you won't be jogging, you'll be lugging a gazelle with you and you're already utterly exhausted.
I agree, it is hubris and possibly racism that continues to discount Chinese grit and intelligence.
Wood and wood grain are mawkish.
They're compounding problems, we have alarming increases in teenage depression rates (especially amongst girls), and there's some correlation with the rise of social media as well as other things like school shootings.

I agree with you that there are more important things, but we do lots at once. Honestly if shooting up congresspeople, kindergartners, and kindergartners shooting teachers hasn't changed anything in regards to guns... I don't know what will.

This isn't really about protecting kids anyway though, it's mostly fearmongering about China, which is one of the rare things most of our legislature agrees on these days.
It WAS a non-profit. I am not sure if it still is one today.
The white plastic keys really clash with the darker wood.

If one's going in the direction of ostentatiousness, I feel like it needs some ivory inlays to break up the monotony.
> This overlooks the "possibility" that those platforms have an "agreement" of sorts with the US Government.

Of course they do, it's called Prism and it's been around for over a decade.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants...
I changed the title because it was linkbait, in keeping with the site guidelines.

I'm asking you to stop posting flamebait, in keeping with the site guidelines.

I don't think this is hard to understand, if you've read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html?
Isn't there still Visual Basic.NET? Along with a C# version, it had all the VB UI goodies as far as I recall.

MS also had some awesome tech around DCOM in VB - transparent RRC was very futuristic at the time.
Is it really? I've looked at the Bambu Lab printer and while on paper it looks nice I would be very hesitant to buy it, their "advanced" features not that convincing:

- IMO multi material printing has always been a buggy gimmick (mostly multi material setups are very prone to failure).

- Them advertising that the printer can print "advanced" materials like PC is a gimmick too, the main issue with FDM printers is layer adhesion and no matter what material you are using its going to suck compared to injection molding.

- bashing bed slingers is wrong too, they have their advantages compared to CoreXY setups (mostly simpler mechanics)

IMO FDM printers have 2 main issues:

1. Unreliable due to lots of moving parts. A solid design with quality components mostly mitigates this.

2. Layer adhesion sucks limiting possible applications. Some very innovative non-planar printing could be a solution but it does not exist yet. Or could be solved by printing metal, but these devices are far from home use.

Resin printers solve both issues, but bring their own (mostly that resins are very toxic stuff that you dont want in your home.)

So no, this printer is in no way revolutionary (neither is the Prusa). Until both of these issues are solved home 3D printers will be mostly used to print benchies and accessories for tabletop games.
Hello Deep Learning
12 steps work great for a lot of people, but we need to be careful not to push the narrative that it's a cure-all for addiction. 12 steppers often act like it is and blame the addict for not trying hard enough if the 12 steps don't work for them.
The latest research shows that at best it works for 1/3 of addicts/alcoholics. This makes sense since mental illness is complicated and we wouldn't expect a single treatment to work for everybody.

What we really need is better research to develop treatment methods that don't require people to essentially join a new religion and devote 5-10 hours of volunteer participation for the rest of their lives (I think it's understandable that not everyone wants to adopt this lifestyle). I fear that the "12 steps for everybody" model of addiction treatment gets in the way of that.
> People could simply stop using TikTok if they agreed that its disadvantages outweigh its benefits

A democratically elected government banning something is the people deciding.
Generic expression, if not god.

Satisfying my animalistic/primatistic/humanist emotional urges is the meaning of my life.
Ok, so you gave a good reason for China to ban US companies and you haven't given a good one for why the US shouldn't ban TikTok.
Congress is also working on privacy legislation, it just takes forever because it's massive and complex. I imagine that legislators feel they have urgency/momentum behind the TikTok stuff to get something focused done. From the article below: "The House Energy and Commerce Committee last year advanced a bipartisan bill backed by Rodgers and sponsored by ranking member Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-N.J., that would produce a national data privacy standard, but the measure didn't get a House floor vote, and no similar measure has passed in the Senate."

https://rollcall.com/2023/02/02/lawmakers-stumble-on-data-pr...
I think there's two camps of think-piece authors emerging - the ones who've tried a bunch of different examples of things and got passable-to-great-looking results; and the ones going deeper into specific areas and hitting the wall in terms of expertise and specificity. Using the GPT 4 API, I'm definitely often hitting limitations, especially around depth of information, and having to "prompt engineer" my way around them. After using a dozen prompt variants to try to prod it in the direction I want without seeing it reflect those changes, a bit of the magic wears off.

I'm bearish on the idea of long-term prompt engineering being a big skillset since I imagine the "understanding the prompt" side of the tools will get better, but I don't see it necessarily getting around the need for specificity of input. It feels like writing a task ticket and giving it to a junior person - what you get back might not be what you need, and a lot of time the true difficulty is knowing exactly what you need up front. Reducing that cycle time is wonderful, but doesn't replace the hard earned skills of knowing what to make.
>Why don't they expect the best one?

Best is multi-dimensional, so please tell me 'best what'.

Is 'best' affordable?

Is 'best' compatible with what I learned without invested more time in learning something new?

Is 'best' something that's going to live far beyond it's usefulness based on it's cost?

Is 'best' something you can't hand to someone else and have them use it?
Sounds like BUllShit to me.

What's their real reason? Derelict machinery that they haven't spent the money on being kept maintained?
Because they trained it on a huge percentage of the existing web. There's isn't a (much) bigger and better data set available.
> are owned by adversaries of the United States

Its not “are owned by”, its “has a current, pending, or potential future controlling interest, direct or indirect, that is, will be, or will come to have been held by an adversary of the united states” (and, yes, the bill itself explicitly and separately refers to both simple future and future perfect, for some reason.)
you can try, but you lose the weather info
Am I correct that this does not apply to Qualcomm?

That would mean it's limited to some Samsumg phones and random Chinese chipset, but Samsung is pretty good at swift security updates so I am confused why this one wasn't deployed on time.
I think it’s probably better to just ask them what they think.

If you take away a teenager’s phone in 2023 you’re casting them away to a proverbial deserted island. Also not exactly great for mental health.
No. The libraries are not "out of date" but intentionally static. These static foundations are what companies pay lots of extra money for with windows ltsc, red hat, oracle, SuSE etc.

> distros don't have every library packaged.

Exactly. And for those that are packaged they say "these are the versions we support. If you want to us to do the support work, use these". Again for stuff like windows ltsc that means I install version X now and want this to be supported for the next 5 years. If I instead install a consumer version of windows it means X will be out if support by then and I am expected to have upgraded to X+1, X+2, X+3 during these 5 years.

Case in point, Firefox has multiple current versions: 102 ESR and 111. Both get regular updates and neither is "out of date".
Great video, thoughtful and persuasive. Highly recommended to broaden your perspective, it did for me.
My 'copilot for mind' now has access to my journals from the last ~3 years
It's the same when you use FOSS backup software that asks you to input your S3 API key or your remote host ssh key.

The only crucial difference is that we currently lack competition and self-ownes versions.
Humans learned from the mistakes of the wildcat bank era of 1800s America by instituting regulations and eventually centralizing under single currency. There was no ideological basis for this, aside from people's desire to use a currency that was widely accepted.

The crypto community has LUNA 2.0 token doing the rounds, plus about 10 different currencies using some variant of Elon Musk's name. Nuff said.
> I didn't say that you should use Arch on the server, but it's great for the desktop.

And I said that apt/dnf solve problems that pacman didn't start thinking about yet. So we are in agreement here.

Flatpak seems to be working out pretty fine.

> Pretty much universally reviled by developers (people who actually use Linux on the desktop).

Two things:

1) Reviled by some very conservative types, often not willing to consider things from different perspective than what they are used to. If they would build the desktop, it would end up like Homer's dream car.

2) Don't you think that it is a problem when only developers use the desktop as it is? (Not really true, but let's consider that for the sake of argument).
Ask yourself two questions:

1. What is the ultimate AI are we trying to eventually build?
2. What are the consequences if we eventually succeed in building such an AI?

For me, the answers would be

1. A general AI that would equal and surpass human intelligence.
2. God only knows.

Will we get there? Who knows. We do know, however, that the consequences are great enough that only a fool would not at least attempt to prepare by putting some safeguards in place beforehand.
Yeah, and you can thank those abstractions that today, we have Microsoft bragging that they got the Teams chat client down to only 9 seconds loading time on a machine with several multi-GHz cores and gigabytes of RAM. But that's all fine I guess, because it's good enough.

Good enough for what? Good enough that people will grudgingly use it because instantly quitting their job over it would be overblown. Their life will only become a little bit worse through it.

I'm frankly scared how AI-created "good enough" software will look.
> it seems like women are not so keen to get to the intimate outcome stage by the 3rd date

At the same time, they might be thinking that you are not getting romantically involved enough, sharing details about yourself, or moving on a direction of an exclusive relationship.

Maybe they are not yet comfortable/intimate enough with you for sex. Maybe you are setting unrealistic expectations based on people you are meeting, and how you are acting during the dates.

Also, don't want to offend you but... WTF? There's no obligation in someone having sex with you just because they've seen you 3 times.

Maybe try to be more forthcoming about your true intentions (sexual relationship instead or romantic), or go to places where people go for hookups (pubs/bars/clubs).
E.g.: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35224167
Yeah I'll be honest the work is nice but the author comes off as extremely insufferable. The writing gives off the impression that the author wants us to see him as this highly educated renaissance man, but it feels like that impression is being forced. Which is unfortunate because I seem to have quite a bit in common with him. Gentle reminder to myself to try and NOT talk like this.

I feel this would also be suited by connecting the topic to trends in minimalism and maximalism. Also maybe a better comparison to the guns and swords (which were essentially accessories) would be to smartphones and the cases people use - it's a more similar comparison, although not relevant to the "building a computer" part.
This stereotype is partly due to the efforts of the US advertising industry which worked with the military to rehabilitate Japan's image after WW2, given that the US intended to turn a bitter enemy into an ally.

American ad man transformed the image of a nation-sized race cult into a quaint provincial island of passive nobility.
Yes, that's my point, I disagree with the approach and justification they took.
>>Is 10000 bigger than 10050?

>>Yes, 10000 is bigger than 10050.

>But even the mighty ChatGPT often can't do simple math

GPT is bad at math because BPE input compression obfuscates individual digits. https://bbot.org/etc/gpt-math.png You'd be bad at math too if every number was scrambled.

The graph is from page 22 of the GPT-3 paper from 2020. https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.14165 Even with 175 billion parameters it can't reliably do four digit addition.

An example from 4 days ago of ChatGPT being as bad as you'd expect at string reversal: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35297183

(Although, I just tested ChatGPT Mar 14 Version against the above question after doing a bunch of math prompting and it got it right...)
Not so: https://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/27/health/27well.html

"But when it comes to long distances, humans can outrun almost any animal. Because we cool by sweating rather than panting, we can stay cool at speeds and distances that would overheat other animals. On a hot day, the two scientists wrote, a human could even outrun a horse in a 26.2-mile marathon."
I tend to agree with. A lack of purpose is a big deal for lots of depressed people. Humans need a purpose or they can go down a dark path quite quickly.
it's always the rouge bidders that do it dirty!

always favor the cerulean bidders!!
EXACTLY!

The relative surface area AI represents in the existential threats pile is notable but only a slice of the pie.

But there's not much in the pile for mitigation of all those other human-driven threats other than pulling a deus ex machina out of our rear ends.

So while we should definitely discuss the inherent risks, we should also be discussing the risk of opportunity costs in delaying greater scalable intelligence being added to the mix.

This letter seems a bit like myopic fear mongering by people still more caught up in 70s thought experiments about paperclips than the realities facing us in the present day.
> AWK was designed to not require a GC

...

> The most substantial consequence is that it’s forbidden to return an array from a function, you can return only a scalar value.

This doesn't make sense to me. Does someone understand what it means?

In e.g. C++ a function can return an array without any GC or refcounting, by "moving" the array into the caller's stack.
For me solution was to always seek something new. For now is product management - I think it's a good choice for ADHD people. And yes ADHD is permanent but anxiety and depression can be treated - and often they are bigger problem than ADHD itself.
I recall reading, a long time ago, of a person who was eating just meat and only meat for his diet. He was struggling for a while with it, until he intentionally allowed a small amount of meat to rot for a bit, consumed that, and from then on he did much better on that diet. The principle I believe was in play was that the rotting meat contained a lot of bacteria that was very good at breaking down that meat (it would proliferate the fastest) and that bacteria was taking up residence in his gut microbiome and assisting in digesting non-rotten meat in the future. Sort of like how herbivores will sometimes consume small stones to act as mechanical grinders of plantstuff in their stomachs.

This seems like the most likely way that ancient humans consumed actually-rotten meat, in small doses to edit their gut microbiome (likely encoded in traditions that viewed certain specific rotted foods as a delicacy/luxury - not because it was hard to acquire but because you were only supposed to eat it rarely). To the extent that you see claims that “ancient humans ate large amounts of rotten meat” I suspect they’re conflating that with merely “spoiled by modern food standards” meat, which is much less rotten than it sounds.
If you believe that a significant portion of iOS users are going to set up an Apple development account and manually reinstall TikTok every week then I have a bridge to sell you.

They will just switch to a different social network, which is equally destructive but not Chinese.
The very thing he built would not be able to exist without the ubiquity of the very "ugly" computers that he eschews. Computers became affordable because they were mass produced as cheaply as possible, with less and less regard to aesthetics.

Let's not also forget that various companies have tried to make computers beautiful, or at least less ugly. Who can forget the swoopy-curvy-nearly-art-deco computer cases of the early 2000's? The iMac G3, the Compaq Presario's, and the other ones that tried to round out the corners of the beige boxes that we were all so used to by then?
can you fire the asshole please though? thanks.
Don't want to get out too early. I remember the waterfall model. Can't go back up a waterfall.
The reality is that a lot of privileged people get the accommodations they need, they just don't blame it on personal impairment. People in the C-suite routinely have personal assistants to help them keep their schedule on track, write their correspondence, etc.

They may be incapable of doing those tasks themselves but no one acts like they should. A lower level employee who has trouble spelling may be deemed incompetent. A higher level employee who can't spell gets automatic accommodation in the form of having their administrative assistant deal with their correspondence or check their writing if they write something themselves.

There were a lot of things different in the past compared to today. In the time of President Lincoln, average education level for adult women was second to fourth grade. At one time, it was fairly common for people working on farms and the like to stop attending school after 8th grade.

With an increasingly complex society, the expectations for "basic" competency at a lot of things is more demanding than it once was. This is not about feeling sorry for a few whiners. This a societal shift and we can figure out how to do this better or crash and burn.
Why do you think there was a golden age when there wasn't mediocrity, average-ness, simple and cheap and utilitarian designs?

Is it because the bland cars and houses and advertisements from back in the day weren't nice enough to get preserved into the historical record? Maybe the people who owned those things weren't rich enough to take and keep pictures or videos of them, or weren't considered important enough to have aspects of their existence celebrated in media, media that were saved for posterity?
You don't even need antique examples like "wood carving".

Modern web app developers rarely write HTML by hand. They generate it from higher level language or templates.
For sure my rosy representation is the "ideal" ad. I'd the one that consumers actually helps the user or consumer.
I simply asked whether they were using 3 or 4. I don't have access to 4 yet.
I've never used TikTok, and I very strongly disagree with banning it. They should ban whatever activities they have a problem with, but that won't happen because then US companies would be subject to the same rules, and the US government would lose some access.
Don't worry, it's just a first step. After this, they will more easily be able to ban any public media not accepting direct government requests for censorship (or censorship immunity) and reduction of reach (or artificial boosting of reach.)

That this is auxiliary to US goals to antagonize China is the sugar. The real goal is to continue the progress made when when breakaway Trump-supporting networks like Parler were directly attacked by Congress, and app stores informally threatened if they wouldn't ban them. Twitter is being continuously threatened by Congress just because they changed ownership from movement Democrats to an "independent" rich guy.

TikTok will be the precedent. It's obviously just racist to attack TikTok alone; in order to retroactively make it not racist, it's important to attack companies that amplify Chinese, Russian, Iranian, or Palestinian messages, the alt-left, the alt-right, or anyone that might inspire disloyalty to the homeland. Which is why Homeland Security will be overseeing social media.

> they might get shot up in math class?

The safest place that a child is at all day is at school (home and family are far more dangerous), and more people die in a day in Ukraine or (until fairly recently) Yemen, or because asthma inhalers were re-patented in the US through active corruption and their price went from $5 to $75, than have ever died in a school shooting. Middle class paranoia is being exploited by dragging the discussion of 6 deaths in this suburb, 10 deaths in that suburb, over years, with public wailing and gnashing of teeth, energetic and aggressive shaming of dissenters (with state support), and constant press releases from an industry that relies on advocacy for income.

Upper-middle class liberals can only be focused on issues that affect them directly, which is why gun control (and gun rights, classical liberals are liberals too) is an easy way to manipulate them. I wish they could be pushed back to important things, like our failed healthcare system that will ruthlessly bankrupt them with the slightest provocation.

Gun control pandering is just Republican law & order pandering in a Democratic style. It's pretending that there's some magical incantation that will make desperate people both not violent, and also not easy targets for violence and exploitation. The solution is systemic infrastructure, rather than distraction. I'd take a school shooting that kills 6 every week in exchange for a compassionate, functional healthcare system. It's 300 lives versus hundreds of thousands of lives.

edit: Americans live in a country that shut down most public mental health care from 2008-2010.