skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I am not sure I buy that (empathy leads to xenophobia), so I’d have to think about that some more.

I learned this from a particular Buddhist teaching — what someone want is not necessarily the same as what someone needs. It takes wisdom to know what the deeper needs are.

So the way I learned that empathy is a trap the same way sympathy and compassion is a trap. Someone unable able distinguish surface wants for deeper needs, or why and how the suffering happens will seek out things that will not really help.
Whoa, you know this is hacker news right? You don't get to call R elegant around these parts.
> low taxes tends towards low services

do you think people moving from Manhattan care about school lunch programs? their kids go to (private, expensive) school wearing sneakers equal to a teacher's monthly pay

these people have "won" enough in life to have at-will mobility...these aren't the types of people who care about the duration of unemployment insurance, government-assisted healthcare, etc etc etc

probably the only government services they care about are public safety related (police, fire), and the places they tend to move to have those in spades
Show HN: We found a simpler/faster (BFT) consensus protocol
Hi HN --- if you're of the engineering or distributed systems bent, and want to learn (at a more technical level) how the consensus protocols that power Proof-of-Stake blockchains work, my advisor and I just wrote a new paper that might be of interest to you.

The protocol is called "Simplex Consensus". It's super fast and should be easier to understand than everything else out there (i.e. easier than Paxos/PBFT/Algorand/Hotstuff/Tendermint/Ethereum/etc)

I guess another difference from Paxos and Raft (aside from being potentially easier to intuit) is that it tolerates malicious faults, instead of just crash faults.

If this interests you please give it a read! The paper is at https://eprint.iacr.org/2023/463 and I also just finished writing a post at https://simplex.blog. I hope you find it useful; it'd be cool to make consensus accessible to a wider audience. (Feedback appreciated!)
> that is why I said that it is actually very useful to people who need the security

How is it useful to people who need the security but don't have the skills?

> those who actually do can ask help to build from source (which is not that hard).

It's not hard to people like us, but to the majority of people, it's simply not going to happen. No normal person is even going to consider building from source as a possibility, let alone ask for help to do it.

And who would they ask? A huge number of people don't have a suitable nerd friend, and they're not going to follow online instructions to do it. It's too intimidating and scary.

Besides, don't you think it's a bit much to expect everyone -- regardless of skill level -- to build everything from source just in case the binaries aren't built from the same source?

This is all why OSS does not, all by itself, do much to address security issues.
You're right, these are donations. But they are donations that are determined based on the number of units sold. I believe that's why the parent is using the term royalty.

It's not a contract, as the term "royalty" implies, but it is a royalty in the sense that it's determined per unit sold.
Why? Apple fans won't even admit the iOS experience is bad...
Show HN: Fenv – Module for Generate a Folder
The fact of the matter is that if someone is missing a leg they are absolutely human but they are broken nonetheless.
Yes, and dropping Catalina means Zig disregards a lot of not really that old and still powerful Apple hardware, except what on this list:

iMac (Mid 2014 or later)
iMac Pro
MacBook (Early 2015 or later)
MacBook Air (Mid 2013 or later)
MacBook Pro (Late 2013 or later)
Mac Mini (Late 2014 or later)
Mac Pro (Late 2013 or later)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacOS_Big_Sur

And by similarity of supporting last 3 macOS release, this will grow to hardware of ~2016 if they drop support of Big Sur next.
what about a few more Charles Darwins doing high-value research on whatever interests them?
Prediction: Some nation-state that cares nothing about IP (i.e. China) wins the AI race in this domain making these regulations totally useless.
“Hey independent artist, let’s make a deal. You spend hundreds or thousands of hours creating music and we’ll help you sell it”

“Sure, and I assume you’ll want a 10% cut?”

“Nope, give me 80% if someone buys it”

“But people don’t buy music anymore. How much money will you give me if a thousand people stream my music?”

“We can do $2. Take it or leave it.”
> Making a large profit off of other people’s work, without their permission and without compensating them, is not progress.

Best dynamite all the bridges because I sure haven't paid any of the (now quite-long-dead) people who put them up.
The record labels have deep pockets but so do tech companies/VCs. This one isn't going to be settled by a competition of who can throw more money at the problem, it will be settled as it should be: a mostly arbitrary decision by some a 75 year old judge who doesn't really understand what is going on.
Not if they are totalitarian and have plans to invade a sovereign nation it borders.

You cannot ignore the values of these states in this discussion.
Own it in case it gets really popular
I've never heard of the person, but the video you linked doesn't seem to do a good job of exposing charlatism at all, it's a rather strange meme of a moment taken out of context.

Edit: this random post on reddit seems to question this person's techings (?) And imo do a better job at 'exposing'

https://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/d1ewq/why_deepak_c...
Good for you, but it's definitely not always the case.

What's your take on AI training?

To me, there's this new thing in the world. Are you going to try and stop it (unlikely), drop out (barely possible in a networked world), or try to make it work for you?
The character limit for the user being dramatically lower than the AI’s limit is really annoying, otherwise I had fun with this!
It is not "software developer fetishism", it is plain and simple ownership, property rights.

If I buy a car I expect to own the car and be able to do whatever I want with it especially on private land, as long as I don't interfere/endanger/etc. with other people. We used to live in this world but we no longer do. If the car has DRM, locked boot loaders, etc. I can not do whatever I want with it, not even on private property, therefore I am not the owner of the car, I am just the custodian.

Same with household appliances, agricultural equipment, phones, etc. .

Mass alphabetization was a quantitative change in the number of people who could read and write and was most probably opposed (the printing press certainly was) by some at the time but it resulted in a qualitative jump in the quality of life of everyone. The same is applicable for programming. As technology becomes more accessible people should expect to be able to make it conform to their needs instead of them adapting to quirks of tech.

The ability to modify the software is just one part of the right to repair. Purchasing a product used to mean ownership which included the right to repair.
I would expect that b/c creative people are usually very iconoclastic and part of their thinking process is to ignore conceptual barriers (esp, social barriers) in search of solutions.
Honestly if you don’t have a lot of content and your needs and aesthetics don’t precisely shoehorn one of the relatively few functioning themes, your before-minimum-viable experience of an SSG is going to be writing raw HTML + CSS, anyway, multiplied by an esoteric, never portable template language and whatever backwards incompatible changes the SSG makes as it seemingly inevitably tries to grow beyond its britches.

In hindsight, I’d have gotten my ideas out there quicker, and - excepting pandemic-derailing - stuck with my goals longer, had I just written raw HTML + CSS.
I've seen conflicting definitions, of course...

I think it's important to keep in mind that you're not necessarily being "nice" with this sort of sense. If you want to hurt someone emotionally, empathy can help tell you where to stick the figurative knife for maximum damage
Unpoly – Enable fast and flexible front ends for server-rendered HTML views
Nothing sad about it. Keep theorizing and academizing. It's useful. It's not nearly as useful as tinkerers building usable non-theoretical things. It's no wonder that launching a rocket is more impressive and eye-catching than a guy shuffling papers. Don't dare knock down the doers, the risk-takers, the ones with skin in the game.

OpenAI provides me with a real, useful tool, something that directly improves mine and many others' lives. Your papers do not have that effect on my life.
This is not, in general, a compelling answer. It's true that the second law is a red herring, but it remains true that in any system humans have measured, including open systems, huge gobs of complex information like even the simplest life do not spontaneously form. Saying "it's an open system, dummy" ignores this gap. The truth is we still haven't quite figured it out. We're getting there (Jeremy England's work is the big one in my mind), but we're not there yet.
I think investors get FOMO when they see other companies buying things and think "oh shit maybe I'm missing out on this great opportunity" and reactively buy something that fits the trend in their space.
It's ironic, there's also a competing "standard" where Bosch licenses their batteries to smaller tool brands: https://www.ampshare.com/gb/en/
Interesting. How would that square with the psychological terms of cognitive empathy and affective empathy?
So people will just lie and say they came up with it. Problem solved. Lots of lying.
My understanding is it's the opposite. No one services vehicles in Japan because after a few years they cost more to keep on the road than they are worth.
Ah, ok. I’ve been working with the Python bindings most recently and must have missed that.
I built prop_odds [1]. It's an API offering live (and historical) sports betting odds from different sites.

I've been working on it for about 2 months. While not quite at 2k/month yet, it's nearly there and progressing in that direction. Revenue is coming from several customers who are using the data to build Discord bots that alert them (and their own paying users) about good odds, arbitrage opportunities, etc.

[1] https://www.prop-odds.com
What exactly defines an "unwarranted" connection?

Assume we're not talking about nmap (since it's widely known as a hacker tool which may muddy the waters), but instead of a user-written program that e.g. checks for open ports. If a port is open to the public internet, what exactly makes a connection to it "unwarranted"?

As for the AWS rule, scanning open ports does not violate, by itself, any of those things.
That's a great computer for development. I have the 16" version, but otherwise the same. It's fantastic, unless you need to do ML stuff, in which case you might want a PC with an Nvidia GPU.
Ask HN: Quantum Computer Future Skills?
As a SWE what skills would be useful when we have Quantum computing? Do we expect it to just run Containers or Linux and we can use any language?

I actually enjoy programming in assembly, is there a Quantum Assembly language, or is anyone working on one?
> What if instead of using credit scores to decide who may live where, what if we instead used social credit scores to decide? Perhaps it is lazy of me not to elaborate on what exactly would go into that score but part of it is me not knowing either.

We've done that, and current anti-discrimination in housing law is a direct response to and rejection of it, and also a good place to find a list of exactly what would go into it.
Quintillions, even.

The beauty of monetizing ideas is you can assign any dollar value you want to them, because the whole idea that ideas have dollar values is, itself, a made-up idea.
This is great. Reminds me of the Derek Sivers post [1], "Don't start a business until people are asking you to."

1. https://sive.rs/asking
People love to draw the analogy to human listening, and while in principle I agree, the AI is still not human and the argument isn't necessarily valid

It could be worth considering: humans are [ostensibly, I claim] intelligent by default. There are obviously different details of scenarios, but humans can learn to speak by just being around their immediate family; they may only read a few dozen books in their lifetime; they can appreciate music listening to their very first album.

AI (at least the current rendition of it) is trained on a massive collection of data before we could even start to claim they are intelligent. You can't take an empty neural network and have it listen to a single album and it gets anything worthwhile out of that. It can't read a few dozen books and be able to do much of anything. It needs a much, much larger data set before we would even think of saying it was intelligent.

So I think, to compare a human listening to an album, and a trained AI system listening to an album, yes, those two things might be reasonably analogous. But to even get the AI system to that point, it needed to be built up using a huge quantity of data. Do the copyright holders on that data concur with that training usage? I think, in that respect, there is a difference compared to a human listening to a recording.

Randomly pontificating in a discussion forum here; not offering a well-thought-out plan for everyone to live by!
Not OP, but you can ask ChatGPT in plain language for a command to scan a server or network for certain things and it can generate you those commands in seconds
Agreed. An agreed upon salary yields agreed upon effort.

If 95% of my income is salary, don’t expect the same motivation out of me as the CEO.
"The food tastes a little different" != "The food is entirely inauthentic"

Authenticity, in other words, is not an absolute. It's a spectrum, and you can get pretty darn close to the "authentic" end of said spectrum without needing to literally import foreign water.
Do they have a free plan?

They mention this in the pricing page:

> After your trial expires, your plan downgrades automatically to the basic free version.

But it's not explained what are the features of that plan.
Respectable to whom? That sounds like magic thinking, not science.
Because (at least in America) generative AI is an obvious transformative case allowable under Fair Use, and even if courts rule otherwise, like Sci-Hub it's such an obvious net positive for humanity that it's ethical to use even in the face of IP cops demanding you stop.
Companies don't have to give away everything for free. It's already free. Public domain is the natural state of information. They're the ones who insist on copyright so they can maintain the artificial scarcity delusion well into 2023 where AI is literally on its way to automating intellectual work. These irrelevant industries need to stop holding us all back and just disappear already.
Why is the gsl a lake and the Salton sea a sea
Oh, it certainly is, but the further you drift from "scientific report/research paper" the worse the defaults get.
Thank goodness. One of my Facebook friends spams my feed with his Heardle score every day and it drives me crazy.
While reading your comment I realized that being "confidently wrong" is actually really human, so... yay?

I mean, that's one step closer to machines thinking like humans, right?

:)
> Unfortunately, the research field of AI is diseased: it places way too much value on showing off big shiny things

This applies pretty much to ..euh every field. The wow factor attract investors and money. The way the current economy is structured, it incentives these tactics since these individuals will be able to draw on significant funds and will have a comparative advantage even if they have a worse return ratio.

And then it'll pass and a new thing will kick again. Investors have no memory, and I am talking about institutional ones. The supposedly sophisticated folks.
If the site text is not easily readable by anyone, you are doing something wrong.

This is like saying, we want to make our site progressive, so we'll embed a bunch of things in a magic eye, and the people reading can do free-viewing for that steroscopic effect.

Nevermind the simple fact that roughly 10% of the global population is color blind and as a result will biologically never be able to see it if the colors are wrong.
LOL, yes.
Connectly | Frontend/ML/Solution Engineer | Remote(Worldwide) / San Francisco | Latam / Full time

We Connectly(https://connectly.ai) are a fast growing company that's building conversational commerce and payments for messaging(WhatsApp/SMS/etc.) with latest GenAI technologies.

Founders: Head of FB Messenger + CTO of Strava

Team - 25 people of top backgrounds. pls check our profiles on our website.

Product - Enable businesses to bring their shop to WhatsApp in 5 mins

Funding - have raised a large amount from top investors in Silicon Valley

Revenue - multiple million dollars & growing fast

Stack - typescript, react, python & golang,

Culture - we pay people generously and treat each other with respect.

Join us if you are self-driven, move fast and would like to make something great together! Email me at careers@connectly.ai or apply at https://jobs.lever.co/connectly
whatever Twitter does to show the underlying institutional-level interests an account may be representing, it's very useful context IMO

npr sees it as a problem because Twitter has previously used those labels and context blurbs to weaponise their platform against accounts and messages coming from their ideological adversaries

conversely, they've given and taken blue ticks as a seal of approval and not to certify identities as the tick nominally was meant to do, going as far as removing the tick to people who stepped out of their line politically (and showering blue ticks to everyone even mildly related to the right-thinking media-government bubble)

essentially these blurbs and labels have been used almost always negatively, but right now they're out systematically pointing out the "category" of all institutional accounts, adding a bunch seemingly every day

what they are doing now it's at least superficially the correct thing to do

they now let users introduce context blurbs instead of centrally policing right-think, and they are adding ticks to government actors, and media that is either controlled, funded or affiliated to governments - in fact they should also add any funding by large foundations whether they are public or private

as a (sporadic) user this is in my interests, and it also works for them not to have to do so much speech policing in-house
The fact that you need to obtain the rights to samples you use has never been about any meaningful or harmful form of 'stealing' in the slightest. It was about harming hip hop and those who created it. Sampling and interpolation is a key part of many forms of music, and is a beautiful craft in and of itself. Restricting it from the outside for reasons of profit (usually completely detached from either end of the actual artistry) has never protected anyone's IP in a way that preserves and advances the art form. It 100% holds the art form back, and does nothing else of merit.
Law is pretty vital to being able to have a planet with billions of people on it.

If for no other reason than people are really crafty and nearly optimal for wrecking up each other's business if they put their minds to it. Imagine how much human resource is spent trying to preserve profits... Now imagine how much would be spent on preserving anything without a legal system in place. "Nice house you have, hate to see anything happen to it" etc.
Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict is boiling over while the West and Russia look away
What other reasons would this common pattern be used?

Laziness. Some of the higher-end platforms create customer specific sub-domains and use sub-domain wildcards once that customer is in a particular revenue bracket.

The pattern you mention has gotten many AWS and related platform customers into trouble from sub-domain take-over as humans are good at creating things and quite bad at de-provisioning things despite automation. There are some bug-bounty folks that spend their entire time looking for sub-domain take-over opportunities and I hear it can be quite lucrative.
Quibbling over pedantry is what this site does best.
> the X11 system was ported to it, making 1992 the year of the Linux desktop.

That's rich!
fiduciary duty /s
Uqbar – Smart Contracts on Urbit
I think we will settle on proprietary AI required to obtain licenses on trained data. Any model trained on public domain data will be completely public domain too.

So I imagine, someone will train a model to do high end law work and they will have to train it on the data produced by the people they hire to create it.

This of course assumes that the society will have the same structure as of today. What I actually think it will happen is, we will completely delegate all our work to machines and the concepts of ownership will vanish as everything for exception of land will be in abundance. I imagine in the future we will fight each other over apartments in cool areas or trade it for some kind of social credit which we generate by impressing other humans. No apartment will be worse than the other but the proximity natural wonders, cultural centres and networks will be the paramount. After all, it's all about how we pick our sexual mates and social status.

I'm sorry you don't like it but There's no way the society functions the same once resources and servants are in abundance. Your bank account is relevant only when there's a scarcity and the current scarcity can be gone once machines are autonomous in enough areas to convert the material all around us into things we need using the practically limitless energy from the sun.
MIT 6.S191: Reinforcement Learning
>> "probably the only government services they care about are public safety related (police, fire), and the places they tend to move to have those in spades"

Not always. Police were unreliable out here (metro Atlanta) long before BLM and co hurt their feelings by calling attention to rampant police abuse. EMS and firefighters were always prompt and professional, though.
I wonder if some sort of copyright traps cannot be created? Fake music pieces.

Map-makers use arificial "trap streets" ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street ) to show that their maps were copied.
Dictionaries add fictious entries ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fictitious_entry ).

Similar idea could be used with music?
On the Log Ride at Knott's Berry Farm they have infrared light beams above the log flume that trigger a loud pre-recorded "Sit down!" message if you raise your hands up too high.

It was so much fun in Jr High to try and set them all off.
I set up a ChatGPT voice interface for my 3-year old
The other thing I like about the ruby community is the sense of humour
I think what's worse is the "hands free driving" is "free for 90 days and then a subscription".

The creep of subscriptions in cars should not be a thing.
We use continuous feed paper - either fan-fold or roll - in the Oki 9-pin dot matrix "turnout printers" in fire stations.

There really isn't a replacement for them, so you can still buy them new.
That's bit of a dramatic hot take. LLMs, for instance, won't drive your car anytime soon.
> From my experience it's the prosumer market that gets really rabid about their tool color. Do NOT cross the Red Army!

Turn-over is much lower. A professional may buy a whole line of tools from a single brand but with the expectation that they may replace them all in several years. This allows some level of comparison and movement between brands as quality varies over time.

The part-timer/prosumer is locked in for a decade or more and ends up tying the tool brand to their identity...
Oh, so now we're trusting Internet Archive to not be compromised by hostile actors?

(/sarc; I love seeing how far one can go down the opsec paranoia rabbit hole if one really tries. ;) ).