skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Less layers = less room for corruption.

If government money must be spent on poverty alleviation, the money should go directly to poor people's bank accounts with as few hops as possible.
Perhaps the “war on drugs” should be targeting these parents and the doctors giving out those diagnoses…
Also one of my favorite films. In a similar vein, Baraka and Samsara are also great, but the score for Koyaanisqatsi is simply beautiful.

The ending sequence still gives me chills. Lots of scenes do, actually.
I used to be afraid of phone calls. I think I'm pretty much over it now. Not entirely sure what got me over it, probably joining a large company and being bombarded with 100s of people and meetings non stop. Eventually you stop worrying.
Predates it.
GPT-3.5 vs. GPT-4: emoji challenge
Communism != Socialism

Greed, seemingly fundamental human nature, causes corruption and suffering. I don't think we've yet developed a society or tool that is immune from such issues, though competition among providers does seem to help.
I think thats spot on! Its similar how it uses plugins, because you can also describe a problem tell it to write code to solve the problem, then use a plugin to execute the code and then tell you the output.
I think the moral panic, in part, comes from a strong cultural bias of valuing extroversion over introversion. The additional layer to that is the difference in how people understand the nuances of being online. The main arguments I have heard against my screen time is that it takes me away from meeting "real" people. The complexity of how people can interact with each other online is lost to them.

Seeing different amounts of introversion from live streamers helped me understand this divide. For some people, the idea of staying in your room all day and playing video games sounds like one of the most isolating things you can do. The amount of other people you are playing with online doesn't make a difference. But from the other side, there's streamers that get consistently 1000+ concurrent viewers to every stream and they make an effort to interact with individuals over time. Not everyone is chatting, but even if 1% are, thats a group of 10 people constantly chatting. Should the steamer be considered introverted or extroverted.

I think the difference between people who see screen time as good vs bad relates to whether they consider online interactions as social vs not. There is a large population of people that see any screen use as the same, but that comes from a place of not understanding the different uses of technology. The divide falls on generational lines because younger generations grew up using the internet and don't remember a "before". Those that didn't, and failed to adapt to social interactions moving online, feel nostalgic and see screen use as a "problem". I think younger generations also aren't valuing extraversion the same way older ones did because there is a better understanding of things like social anxiety and neurodevelopmental disorders.

I used to be bothered a lot and got defensive when people tried to screen shame me, but I don't care anymore. I recognized it's just part of the cycle of new technology making people feel uncomfortable when they can't or choose not to adapt. The same divide happens over and over at different scales. Ebooks are a great example, paper vs computer, paper vs eink, eink vs computer, book vs movie vs audiobook. I just finished working my way through an excellent Youtube analysis series of Dune, there hours of a book club discussion with a content creator. As a deeply introverted person, even online discussions can feel exhausting. People that try to screen shame me demonstrate they have zero nuanced understanding of that.
Looking back at Antitrust, the movie where Bill Gates murders coders (2018)
RIP to a very talented guy. I haven’t listen to much of his solo work, but Yellow Magic Orchestra was something very special, I saw it as “out of this world” music.
Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya were all failed states when the US intervened / invaded (which is also not a good argument for invading those nations; the US betrayed its own self-interest in the second Iraq war).

If your nation is run by a dictatorship, it's a failed state.

If your nation is a theocracy, it's a failed state.

You'll notice the distinct lack of the US invading well-functioning, democratic nations (we share a remarkably unguarded, massive border with Canada).

You generally can't challenge US hegemony, it's far too large, and still expanding. China is the only entity since the 1950s Soviet Union that could even attempt it. For example while the EU's strongest economies have been largely going sideways for ~15 years economically (since the great recession), the US has added nearly $10 trillion to its economy (a further ~65-70% expansion in 15 years). Who is going to keep up with that, at that size (other than China)?
>Things that are difficult to afford:

>- Any level of a car (currently car share).

>My effective tax rate is around 48%

I have a hard time believing this. Assuming you live in Ontario, the most populous province, 48% marginal rate translates to an income of at least $165k/yr. That works out to a take-home of $102k/year, or $8498/month. With that much money I don't see how it's "difficult to afford" a car. Even we assume you live in Toronto (ie. not a "smaller city") and pay $3000/month for a 2 bedroom, that still leaves you with nearly $5.5k to play with.

All of this assumes a single earner household. If you have a partner contributing income as well, I don't see how you can't also afford to buy an apartment after a few years of saving.
Were I a valueless entity of influence endeavoring to convince society of concepts 'less than well supported' then reasonable discourse would most certainly be the first to the guillotine.

"He picked up the children's history book and looked at the portrait of
Big Brother which formed its frontispiece. The hypnotic eyes gazed into
his own. It was as though some huge force were pressing down upon
you--something that penetrated inside your skull, battering against your
brain, frightening you out of your beliefs, persuading you, almost, to
deny the evidence of your senses. In the end the Party would announce that
two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable
that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their
position demanded it.

Not merely the validity of experience, but the very
existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The
heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that
they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right.
For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the
force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past
and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is
controllable what then?"

Interestingly enough the original title for that work was intended to be "The Last Man in Europe." It was only commercial interests that drove it to "1984."
I follow author Joyce Carol Oates on Twitter (we're about the same age) and she said something that liberated me. About memoirs she said something like "nobody reads them, not even your own family." I realized that was true because I know someone who wrote one and nobody cared. It freed me up so I could really get the message of Ram Dass in "Becoming Nobody."

I used to work in health care and once there was a patient, and old man, barely alive, groaning and getting ready for hospice. I didn't see any indication, like family pictures, that anyone visited him. The nurse told me "He used to be chief of surgery and head of this hospital." I thought, so this is how it ends for all of us no matter how high and mighty, dying alone, hopefully having made peace with our God.
<3 wouldn't be here without you guys. thank you so much!
Yeah... Add in HUD and SSI.

This is the majority of spending on poverty, and it's literally direct transfers.

So I'm really confused by this comment.

The reason we spend money on special programs is because things like job training and drug addiction would never be taken care of by just handing out free money.
Approximately as much as a 747.
It was once believed that 6x6 and higher Rubik's Cubes would be impossible to physically make. In the real world, the outermost edges have to be a little thicker or the faces rounded in order for the puzzle to stay together while being turned. Nowadays they're widely available on Amazon.

The Megaminx puzzle is a dodecahedron, having 12 faces. Would it be possible to make a similar puzzle for an icosahedron? What about the stellated polyhedra? Or semi-regular polyhedra? There's no reason we have to stick to the platonic solids, right?

I'm no expert in 3d geometry or twisty puzzle manufacturing but maybe this helps?
There’s a thread[1] showing that may no longer be the case.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31860131
Ray Tracing – Computing the Incomputable?
Pentesting AWS
Is GraphQL Dying? 2023 Trend Analysis of REST, GraphQL, OpenAPI, Soap, gRPC
I see, I'm sorry about that.
I’ve been looking for something like this forever. Unfortunately all existing platforms are extremely shady and deal in Crypto/Blockchain. Please stay away from this and focus on what you’re doing now. I hope you’ll be successful with this project!
Itanic was a flop due to AMD releasing 64bit CPU. And I still think Intel learned a lot from its failure if not from the technology but business-wise. Just stick to improving the existing architecture while keeping backward-compatibility.
How to Have Buckets of Time
And for those of you who are lucky enough to to currently have non-toxic workplaces, are you sure management changes or business needs wont change this in the future?
I don’t get this. We already use direct reduction using about half hydrogen, and that can be increased to over 90%. Producing ammonia via the Haber process means losing 40% or so of the energy (and potentially more as you convert it back), so why not just use hydrogen directly? Simply because moving hydrogen is harder than ammonia? I think it makes way more sense to just make and use the hydrogen on-site.
"""

The key new features included:

Ada : The architecture would be programmed using the Ada programming language, which at the time was seen as the ‘next big thing’ in languages.

"""

This was it - the next big thing. Missed and went down, but there's always the doubt if they were right too early ...

Seems the performance just wasn't there:

"""

Gordon admitted that "to a significant extent," he was personally responsible. "It was a very aggressive shot at a new microprocessor, but we were so aggressive that the performance was way below par."

"""

It was kind of uncanny having it shouted from the rooftops one year, to dead silence about anything having ever happened a few years later.
> It's not completely gender neutral.

Yes it is. There is nothing discriminatory going on. Men and women are being treated exactly the same. Now whether this is a good thing or not or should be abolished or not is a different matter.

You are confusing equality of input (non-discrimination, gender neutrality) with equality of results.

> women tend to get more intoxicated than men by the same amount of alcohol

On average. So? There are also men who get more intoxicated than the average woman, so they are being discriminated against more. Or men who don't drink (most) alcohol at all. For example, I essentially cannot drink wine or beer. And yes, that has an impact.

This is not a gendered issue and definitely not discrimination, even if outcomes can differ, statistically, by gender.

Just like requiring certain standards of physical fitness for firefighters that more men than women can meet is not discrimination.

> emphasized the physical differences between men and women,

I don't emphasise them. But I also don't deny them. And I am definitely not ignoring them here. The physiological (and psychological) differences result in different outcomes, on average, for men and women given the same non-discriminatory, non-gendered inputs.

So the inconsistency you're detecting is not mine...you might have to look elsewhere (a mirror might do)... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I don’t think so, except at the margins.

I started out as a Lisp hacker on machines designed for it (PDP-10 and CADR, later D-machines) so I was very much in the camp you describe. They had hardware / microcode support for tagging, unboxing, fundamental Lisp opcodes, and for the Lispms specifically, things like a GC barrier and transporter support. When I looked at implementations like VAXLisp, the extra cycles needed to implement these things seemed like a burden to me.

Of course those machines did lots of other things as well, and so were subject to a lot of evolutionary pressure the research machines were not subject to.

The shocker that changed my mind was the idea of using the TLB to implement the write barrier. Yes, doing all that extra work cost cycles, but you were doing on a machine that had evolved lots of extra capabilities that could ameliorate some of the burden. Plus the underlying hardware just got faster faster (I.e. second derivative was higher).

Meanwhile, the more dedicated architectures were burning valuable real estate on these features and couldn’t keep up elsewhere. You saw this in the article when the author wrote about gates that could have been used elsewhere.

Finally, some decisions box you in — the 64kb object size limitation being an example in the 432. Sure, you can work around it, but then the support for these objects becomes a deadweight (part of the RISC argument).

You see this also in the use of GPUs as huge parallel machines, even though the original programming abstraction was triangles.

Going back to my first sentence about “at the margins”: optimize at the end. Apple famously added a “jvm” instruction — must have been the fruit of a lot of metering! Note that they didn’t have to do this for Objective-C: some extremely clever programming made dispatch cheap.

Tagging/unboxing can be supported in a variety of (relatively) inexpensive ways by using ALU circuitry otherwise idle during address calculation OR (more likely these days) by implementing a couple of in demand ops, either way pretty cheap.

Finally, we do have a return to and flourishing of separate, specialized functional units (image processors, “learning” units and such, like, say, the database hardware of old) but they aren’t generally fully programmable (even if they have processors embedded in them) but they key factor is that they don’t interfere (except via some DMA) with the core processing operations.
Elon Musk protects the Russian embassy against an April Fools joke
Dumping is when a producer sells their product at a lower price abroad than they do domestically [1]. For example, if Chinese solar panels sell for the Renminbi equivalent of 35 cents per watt domestically, but are sold for 30 cents per watt in the United States, that would be dumping.

As far as I can tell, Chinese solar manufacturers do not engage in this sort of straightforward and easy to define dumping. They sell their products at comparable low prices both domestically and abroad. The United States claims that advantages given to Chinese solar manufacturers (like low cost land and industrial partnerships with local governments) are unfair and counters them with measures termed "anti dumping" tariffs. Given how many perks American states and municipalities roll out to attract manufacturing jobs, including solar jobs [2], I don't see how the Chinese incentives for solar manufacturing go too far. I rather think it's something like the situation with Canadian softwood exports to the US [3]: the US government's position is dubious, but it's too powerful in practice to be held to account.

[1] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/dumping.asp

[2] https://bgindependentmedia.org/first-solar-site-promising-50...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada%E2%80%93United_States_s...
Pretty much each piece of advice here can easily be replaced with software. I think "manager as supervisor" is frankly dead. It just hasnt stopped moving yet.

For me a great thing to learn from software development is daily integration builds - whatever work is being done, build it as the complete sellable product every day. This way you will get good at making the saleable product
At a fancy breakfast restaurant this morning, HGTV was on the TV (as opposed to say sports). I watched for a while as family after family looked forward to their remodeling and buying their homes, in the range of $579k - $989k. I thought about how I was almost able to afford a house until the great interest rate hikes of 2023. Now I'm on the sidelines for a long time to save up... and I'm a middle-aged person. Think about this from a young adult's perspective:

Not only are they so much less likely to remodel and buy at a home under these circumstances, but their own plight, which is other lucky peoples' success, is a form of entertainment. Meanwhile they have been informed that short of great technical mistakes or a miracle, they and any offspring they might create will be subject to environmental collapse.

But of the three: social media, economic inequality, and environmental collapse, which are we going to focus on? Would it be the ones that the Boomer generation created? or the scapegoat that we don't even have a good theory to explain.

Articles like thisare a good example of "Manufacturing Consent." Chomsky states that consent is obtained by narrowing the scope of the discussion. In this, we will constrain the discussion to social values and social media without venturing into areas such as environment and economics.
I admire Desmond for being upfront about the fact that his changes would cost the rich more money. I’ve always admired Bernie Sanders (though I don’t disagree with his policies) for being forthright about that as well. It irks me when folks propose wealth redistribution plans and argue that it would not redistribute wealth, and that instead more wealth would appear for the poor.

Still, I think he misses the mark a bit. He says that he “ wants the wealthy to ‘take less’ in exchange for a safer, fairer, less anxious society.” I think it’s a bad pitch. It is safer, but not for the wealthy; they mostly don’t interact with the poor, since they live in secluded upscale neighborhoods. It is fairer, except from the perspective of the people who are paying to make it more fair, while others benefit. Society is less anxious, but not the people who are financing the operation, since they have less money. It’s a net benefit to society, but I don’t believe it’s a benefit to everyone.

There’s also a substantial obstacle to ideas like these: mostly, the rich make the rules, and they are unlikely to make rules that go against their self-interest.

In my opinion, rather than finding ways to redistribute income, we should be looking for ways to predistribute income. Programs and policies like welfare and progressive taxes are, in my opinion, bandaids attempting to cover up that the game is rigged; rather than addressing that some folks are able to amass far more wealth, or earn a far higher income, they attempt to correct for the fact that it happened afterward. I think that’s backwards, and society should make policies that make it harder to have inequality in the first place.

One example would be taxing share buybacks at the same rate as dividends, since they are fundamentally the same mechanism for returning capital to shareholders, except one receives favorable tax treatment. Another example (and my guess is this is the largest) is having reasonable interest rates. Net worths of upper middle class Americans have skyrocketed over the last twenty years (and more) because of very low interest rates which have created asset bubbles in real estate and equities. This has also been a huge boon to the ultra-rich. These increased asset prices also have the effect of depressing returns for all, and raising the cost of housing for all. It also fuels the income gap between rich and poor because folks in high growth industries are able to earn disproportionately more than in low growth ones.

The way forward is to level the playing field, rather than acknowledging or complaining the playing field is not level and then attempting to correct for that after the fact.
Is it possible to gather entropy from weird sources from the user like mouse movements, that person's timezone, OS version and type, language preferences, screen resolution, browser fingerprint etc?

How would that be any different than atmospheric noise or die rolls? Are people's mouse movements and browser fingerprints that predictable, because last time I checked, people have a certain cadence by the way they move their mouse and the way they type, and browser fingerprinting yields very unique data which is hard to replicate and reproduce.
It happens in all languages, I’ve never heard people talking about eating “al fresco” before moving to the UK.

In theory “smart working” doesn’t mean just working remotely, but it implies flexible working patterns as well. Also, it has been used in British English (even though it didn’t become very popular): https://civilservice.blog.gov.uk/2016/01/21/smart-working-th...
We all know said code does exist and just wasn’t part of the released source. It was very clearly used, although I know it goes against the cult so you yourself can never dare utter those words.

But no, please, go off on your tangent that is not at all centered in reality.

Such a system, which certainly exists, was also made extremely quickly. We all know the timeline. We all have seen the rants and then the immediate effect of manual changes made to please the rants. I could easily see control groups going out the window when your boss expects their tweets to be prioritized yesterday.

I also like how confident you are in a company’s ability after they explicitly laid off and fired the majority of its staff. Generally speaking, when that happens, people lose confidence rather than gain it, but here you are proving us all of wrong. Gold star for you, maybe you’ll even get the other boot now!

I’m sure it feels so rewarding to simp for a man who will never even look in your general direction, let alone talk to you or know all the great things you said about him and his companies.
‘We’re the Only Plane in the Sky’ (2016)
Previously here, 2020, 154 comments:

Ask HN: Computer Science/History Books?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22692281

A few more here, 2022, 5 comments with about 10 suggestions

Ask HN: Where to learn about computer science and software engineering history?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29770725
C++ 20 did that too.
> How does requiring HTTPS turn into no more personal websites?

Let's Encrypt is awesome, I use them for all my personal sites (web and non).

Threat modeling covers more than just authenticity and confidentiality. For instance, denial of service is also something to evaluate. So why does this matter?

Today if Let's Encrypt suddenly disappears or goes evil and no longer wants to issue me a certificate, I can simply re-enable plan HTTP on my site and my content remains available. Sure there are drawbacks but there are pros and cons to everything. As a static site I'm comfortable with the cons of hosting it via HTTP if the only alternative is not being able to host at all. Important things is I can make that choice.

In a world where normal people (i.e. non-techies who can't be expected to build their own browsers from source or whatever) can only have access to a client that enforces public CA issued certificates, it becomes easier than ever to drop unwelcome people effectively off the internet.
I’m sure that India used its own observation satellites to predict weather patterns and storms but western weather observation satellites monitor the whole Earth and share the information. Not every country should (or can) have its own national weather satellite installation.

https://www.nesdis.noaa.gov/current-satellite-missions/curre...