skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Thanks for the catch! It's fixed now. Hugo template messed me up. I'll fix it to look like proper superscript later.
FuzzingWeekly CW15: Another Expression DoS Found in Spring – CVE-2023-20863
> But this cuts both ways (...)

What? No, it does not. If I create value for my employer, I better be compensated accordingly. If I don't then my employer is very quick in firing me. I can even be a top performer and get the axe, as the recent firing wave hitting FANGs demonstrates.

You keep your cold slice of pizza. I need to get compensated by the value I created and being forced to join bullshit HR events is not a compensation.
Or companies will just move to a country where training on copyrighted data is 100% legal and allowed (like e.g. in Japan which had an explicit amendment to its copyright law to allow it), although it'll be interesting to see how such models would be treated internationally.
I think this might get philosophical quickly, but to really understand where you're at, you need to access all knowledge. Everybody is standing on the shoulder of giants. It's a collective effort that happens through socialization and long-standing institutions like universities.

An essential part of doing science is sharing results and waiting for others to challenge, expand, or falsify them. If you skip this step, you're not truly contributing to knowledge, although you may still create new knowledge in other ways... but not all new knowledge is necessarily scientific, it can be private, esoteric, commercial knowledge.

Take the example of Ida, a 47-million-year-old lemur fossil known as Darwinius masillae. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwinius it was "discovered" and hailed as a transitional species bridging primates and mammals. Really a huge contribution to "science".

But here's the catch - Ida was actually found in 1983 and held by a private collector for 25 years, who didn't realize its significance. So we had no idea of this "discovery". It wasn't science, it was a good on a market.

OpenAI is the same. We might enjoy to toy with the technology. But I don't find it contributed to science, yet
I don't think that taking one's art and using it to train a machine to be able to make limitless art is super encouraging to the artist.
Questions I ask to suss out red flags after a dozen+ experiences:

- Who are the founders?
- Who is the CEO?
- Who runs the company?
- Do the founders have any experience running a startup?
- Who are the key investors?
- Do the investors have any experience mentoring founders running a startup?
- How much money did the company raise? Is that a reasonable runway?
- Did they actually form a company?
- Did they actually file the paperwork with the SEC (if US) documenting the fundraising?
- What employment terms are they offering?
- Are they especially onerous on the employee?
- Are they offering a ridiculous or a reasonable amount of equity in return for a reduced salary?
- Who is their payroll provider?
- Who is their bank?
- How are they tracking expenses and accounting in general?
- How are they measuring success (for whatever stage the company is in)?

It's ok to have “wrong” or even no answers to some of these, especially if the company isn’t even really in operation yet. But no answers or wrong answers to many of these lead me to walk away.

You are not going to get a lot of detail about capital structure or investment terms unless you’re coming in as the CEO or a C level executive. But I have found that checking and verifying to learn that the company and executives are practicing just the basic mechanical business skills of setting up the business is a good “smell” test for how they are operating the company. You may personally decide that you’re ok with paychecks being written against a personal bank account, or that an LLC vs C Corp (again, US specific, apologies) is reasonable at this stage of the company. There's no single thing I look for, it’s a balance of questions and how the company / founders /CEO responds.

Just this week a colleague was negotiating final terms to join a startup. They asked to clarify a specific employment term that was verbally made as part of the offer, but not included in the employment contract they were asked to sign. The CEO reacted extremely inappropriately and, well, my colleague isn't joining the startup. My first few startups I was far too naive in assuming that if investors had invested what was claimed then they must have done some due diligence. Learning after the fact at one company that the Series A was actually not closed and the founders were financing the company off credit cards and home equity lines of credit lead me to leave after only six months.
Why will this lead to summary judgement to the plaintiff, neither side has presented concrete proofs, just assertions.

Serious question.
Regular programmers were pretty happy with Perl soup.
Do you have other charity or non-profit recommendations aside from your own personal one? Only asking because I have no measure[1] of how effective yours has been, and I figure in your capacity, you likely don't mind who the intermediary is just so long as it gets to the right place.

[1] https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/881848788
> It was just someone who was curious enough to tinker for a while on a project who was hanging out with friends.

The modern world is underpinned by such discoveries--very accidental or curious types that go on to change the world and impact a lot of people.

To quote a Steve Job's line:
"I love and admire my species, living and dead, and am totally dependent on them for my life and well-being" [0]

[0]: https://putsomethingback.stevejobsarchive.com/
It’s really not. That’s very dishonest and lazy hand waving.
A big leap forward to what? A big regression in the joy of creativity?

What a lot of AI folks don't understand is that the joy is frequently in the process itself, very seldom in the outcome/result of a process.
Alternatively, the “leak” is a controlled disclosure of realistic misinformation.

The “leaker”‘s real life identity then “goes to jail” for 30 years and they work for the government in clandestine services under a new identity. This tactic confuses the enemy, and has the side benefit of scaring your own into being more careful with real classified docs.

If I was unethical enough to work for the security apparatus, the above is definitely something I would do.
You don't have a god-given right to run your business in every country in the world, especially when the manner in which you are doing so breaks the law of the countries you are headquartered in.

If you did, sanctioned countries wouldn't be a thing.

'I want to make money' isn't some kind of first, last, or sole moral consideration, overriding all others.
https://heardledecades.com/
you're welcome!
Zig has a C backend that supports something like 99% of all Zig if I'm remembering the number correctly.

Zig has almost completely solved the bootstrap problem.
Intel won't back down on chip ID feature (1999)
The goal is safety, not effective enforcement. Cameras have increased accidents in many areas.
How do I change my password? How do I access my account settings?
Cannibalism would solve many of our problems. We can set a maximum age. Limit the number of children in various ways. Require active contributions to society. Engineer diseases. Organize large wars.

Access to literature, education, training and solving the food logistics problem is quite obviously the most attractive solution.
You might want to try heardledecades.com. It’s pretty amazing, whoever runs it deserves an award, they keep adding new stuff.
The alerts tend to be geared more toward attempts to reach a secured system that isn't accessible to you.
Germany as well, no issues.
>>It may not be rational, but I want to at least be able to think that some person at the company actually understands my issue, the importance of it, and cares.

This is really interesting. I think this might be another "oops, I might be neurodivergent" moment for me, because I realize you're probably in the majority here. Can I give you a hypothetical? I'm not trying to trick you or anything, just calibrating my sense of how folks view this.

You have a minor issue with your ISP. They're overcharging you for some service, $60 when it should be $50. You've tried to resolve it through the site and can't do it self-serve. It's very clear, there's no ambiguity, some mistake on their end. Would you rather:

A) Call in, be on hold 10 minutes, deal with a pleasant/empathetic/helpful person, get it resolved after 10 more minutes.

B) Call in, no hold, deal with a robot/AI (still voice) who is all business, does not attempt to be human-like, get it resolved after 5 minutes.
Probably need to add a reference to the creation of ChatGPT as the last entry.
I don't mean to knock down doers or risk-takers. On the contrary, I'm saying don't try to compete with the doers when you're not one.

> 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.

Of course, OpenAI's work is built directly on top of publicly-funded research papers of the past 5, 10, 50 years.
Yes I realize that but was responding to the comment about the creami directly, not the article itself.

(Regarding the article, I’m skeptical of the claim.)

Officially they say to wait 24 hours to freeze but I’ve tasted it to work at around 16-18 hours. 12 may work but isn’t quite as good in a pinch. Note that it depends on the composition of your recipe.
No, explicitly on every page. It's a user agent level choice.
Funded startup COO and founder here. In my experience, the main problems come down to

- founders having low ethical stands → background check them

- founders having poor management skills → evaluate their managerial skills

- founders using their information asymmetry to screw you over → check the contracts

Let's dive into all three.

--

# Background check the founders

Few do it yet it's highest impact as all problems come down to people problems. Find their last company or co-founder and email them to get on a 15' call. This saved me from almost partnering with a guy who had abruptly cut ties with every single company and founder he ever worked with.

Here's a good starting checklist:

1. Understand the context
- Can you verify the person's employment, job title, pay, and responsibilities?
- Why did they leave that job?
- How do you know the person?

2. Evaluate the candidate
- Tell me what it’s like to work with the person.
- What are the person's biggest strengths and weaknesses?
- If you learn they got fired, what’s the 1st reason that would come to mind?
- Would you build a company with said person? Why not?

3. Opening
- What else do I need to know about the person that I didn’t already ask?
- Who else should I speak to about the person that can provide different insight?

--

# Evaluate their management skills

Many founders make employee's life hell not out of malice but out of incompetence in managing themselves and others.

Best but highest effort is to run a ref check with someone they managed before.

Lower effort is to question your boss during your interviews: what's their management style? With what kind of people does it tend to not go well? Evasive and imprecise answers are a red flag.

--

# Check the contracts

You can easily spot red flags by sanity checking a) salary and equity amounts and b) contract terms.

On amounts, founders will often say they're giving you an offer above market because you're special. The red flag is them not having answers when you say "how do I know it's above market?".

Good founders will be very transparent, and share exact examples from their own experience, and point you to equity and salary benchmark research articles or softwares like Pave.com.

On the terms, founders will always tell you they're giving you a "standard contract" when it's not the case, a sin they're learned from VCs! The best is get your hand on the YC standard docs and run a diff, but googling your way should do.

There's a lot of good articles online, so I'm only highlighting the two most important
- Does your equity differ from the standard 4y vesting with 1y cliff without a good reason?
- How long is the exercise window? 3 months is common but bad, 5 years is great. Personally I always negotiate this one to 10 years.

Overall, the YC has good resources, starting iwht https://www.ycombinator.com/library/F5-startup-compensation

--

Hope this helps, let me know if I'm missing anything.
Escaping the moon's gravity well is basically all you need to get stuff back to Earth.
> Yes, it's hard to predict the future.

Which only makes the problem worse, because the early investors then have the incentive to create and prop up garbage companies as long as they think they can sell them to do the next guy before the crash. Which is more possible the less the funds need to pay attention to each stock, i.e. the more "diversified" each person's investments are.

> One reason those small startups can attract capital in the first place, is because their early investors can reasonably expect to cash out by selling to huge funds once the company gets established.

The funds are an abstraction over the underlying investors. Right now you have Joe Middle Class who has a retirement account which is invested in thousands of companies he has no incentive to pay any attention to because none of them individually affect his savings by a significant amount. If it was four or five companies, he would have the incentive to keep track of management decisions there. He may even be working for one of them, because he is then using an information asymmetry to his advantage when he knows from the inside how well that company is managed. But then we try to inhibit this kind of thing even though it would make markets more efficient.

The bigger cause of the problem is that companies are huuuge, so that they can't be owned by any reasonable number of people. A trillion dollar company has to be owned by millions of separate individuals because even the 99th percentile individual doesn't have enough wealth to own a significant fraction of a company that size. But why do we need companies to be that big? Break them up. They could have the same total valuation as many separate companies, without each being so unmanageably large.

Potentially even higher total valuations, because the need to do the following is less when each company is smaller and less complicated:

> As an investor, you can go by the maxim of 'guilty, unless proven innocent'. So if a company does not have that transparency, you should value them as-if they have skeletons in the closet.

And that's the point. The transparency isn't possible, not because the company doesn't publish the numbers, but because it's not worth deep diving into their conglomerated operations when they're only 0.2% of your portfolio. And when investors will be doing this regardless of whether the company is actually sacrificing long-term prospects for short-term numbers, the company has the incentive to do just that.
White (downstream of northern Europe)
I’ve seen ~40 images of realistic looking gov docs on 4chan and Twitter back when this broke. Most of it was pretty boring stuff, and indicated Ukraine has a lot more hardware than Russia in-theater.

Seems pretty suspect.
Those leaks are a proof that agencies can't or unwilling to protect the data they are collecting. If even crucial war information isn't really protected you can imagine the lack of protection for less important data.

Most of the last big leaks came from contractors or minor ranks with access.
Wooded grasslands flourished in Africa 21M years ago forces rethink of evolution
Yeah, what they actually did was probably follow WaPo's investigation, which found and publicly announced who it was first, and worked back from that very quickly.

(This is mostly a joke, but...)
Hence the “if”. The technology exists, and is for example in widespread use in smart cards, smartphones, and laptops. The article you link to is also from 2010, so the Canon development is probably 15 years old or more. I would expect a better level of security awareness by now.
So when EFF raises funds to petition elected officials to protect privacy that’s bribery?

Because thats what lobbying is.
I just read: https://graymirror.substack.com/p/gpt-4-invalidates-the-turi.... It makes the point that LLMs are not AIs, so we will need a different approach if we want a true AGI, not just incrementaly improving on the current LLM approach.
Wow. Almost forgot why I’m never on Facebook. Thank you.
Meta's privacy fiasco is worse than I thought
Possibly. When wearing my "artist" hat, I work on two different things: art that I personally care about, and art that might sell.

If AI made all the art that might sell, that would give me more time and energy to work on the art I actually care about, but maybe less sales from art.
Your "friendly suggestion" is extremely rude.
I'm not who you are replying to, but it's almost certainly due to autoconf &c. For many libraries on a machine with lots of cores, autoconf can take longer than the build, since autoconf isn't parallelized.
Just to note something - Oxygen is fairly abundant on the moon (many rocks are oxides), hydrogen less so.

Water is H20 by composition, but since Oxygen atoms are at least 8 times heavier than Hydrogen (and usually about 16 times due to neutrons), the Hydrogen is only 11% of the water by weight.

Hence per Kg it's far more efficient to split the water into hydrogen, and re-oxidise it with native lunar Oxy; 1kg shipped water could be 1kg Hydrogen that would produce 9Kgs water once oxidised (ignoring difficulties in Hydrogen containment).
By the "scientific process", I mean the way scientific knowledge as a whole progresses over time, i.e. the main undertaking of the target audience of the paper.

You're right that "OpenAI is not doing science" was hyperbolic, but I tried to clarify the aspect of science that I'm referring to.
North and South America are on different tectonic plates, while Europe and most of Asia are on a single plate. If anything, the geological definition of continents seems to support separate Americas and a unified Eurasia.
That seems an exceptional claim. Where I live folks obeyed the speed limit scrupulously where traffic cameras were in use. That has to reduce accidents, as expected?
Can you explain where China obtains a lead in compute from attacking Taiwan? TSMC fabs on the island will not survive an invasion.
Weren't they leaked on Discord? So also non journalists have them too.
> violate the security, integrity, or availability of any user, network, computer or communications system, software application, or network or computing device

A normal port scan does none of these things. Unless you have some really crappy equipment (I've seen routers choke on a SYN scan), but in my opinion then that's on you.
I don’t have hard numbers but anecdotally hallucinating has gone down significantly with gpt4, it certainly still happens though.
It's also endearing that the Linux kernel was rooted in "A"/"B" testing. :)
Yes, that's what I meant. (Though I stand corrected, UTC is not French either, but the effect is the same - we both use one.)
Speaking from my limited experience developing my own app, 3rd party log-ins are a mess and not all use the same protocol.
Most use OAuth but some are proprietary(ish).
And to have user signing up in-app, you have so much more control, in terms of informations you need prior to giving the user access.
In my app, If a user sign-up with 3rd part service, and have to block the user from getting into the app before I have more info from them(necessary data).
I think it's pretty janky.
Some friends told me they ran into Andrew Tannenbaum at Embedded World a few years ago and asked him if he still believed that Minix was better than Linux. Apparently he said yes.

DISCLAIMER: 2nd hand story.
Why don't they just ask songs some of you once heard before using ur song history?
The way we describe it "find and use thousands of nearby printers" does make it sound like Uber for printers. But would you use an Uber for printers? I couldn't imagine sharing any potentially sensitive document with a random person.

I wonder if there's a better way to describe it.
Its not the food, its the quantity.

Some people get nose bleed from just being in summer heat or high temperature.
Regardless of how much time you have for your literature review, you likely are doing multiple passes through each paper. On the first pass you'll likely just read the summary and skim through the sections to see what kind of argument is being made. After that, many people do another read through to identify the main points of each argument. It's generally the 3rd or later read through that's a deep reading (and likely a final one where you read critically and look to see if you were going to make the argument would it be the same or are there potential logical issues).

LLMs can help with those early reads and save some time and get you into the deep reading sooner with more context. If during the deep reading you would normally jump back to a previous section to check something, it's likely faster and easier to just have a conversation with the paper (enabled with an LLM). The same would be true for that final read where you're doing logical checks.

If you use an LLM to give you a summary and leave it at that, you'll have done the equivalent of the first pass through a paper. That could be enough for you to know you want to filter it out and not do a deep reading, but you'll lose the benefits of the deeper reading. It seems like there are clear benefits and areas where LLMs can help improve that current paper reading process but if you skip (instead of just replacing with a more efficient LLM alternative) major parts of that process you'll get less out of it than you would without skipping those steps.
Are you sure? I have a LLM-driven virtual robot mining virtual asteroids in a space sim. It works really well.
I built https://kpopping.com, a platform for international fans of Korean music. It's been six grueling years (what they say about b2c is completely true) but these days we bounce around from $3k-5k in monthly revenue.

I estimate we have another two-three years before we are finished... +_+
Meson has the ability to generate code and process data files. Why do you need to communicate with REST? Meson support that however by allowing you to break out using the `run_command()` function.
That's a strange definition for what constitutes a science. Having data to measure. That would make: literature, arts, law school, sports, and basically any other discipline a science, since all of disciplines have some amount of data to measure.

Dismissing soft “sciences” only says they aren't sciences. Want to do Sociology, ok, go ahead, just don't call it a “science”. By now it's very clear these disciplines only call themselves sciences, to try and get some veneer of authority for what they are actually doing: ideological studies.

Also, let's always remember that the departments of sociology in the USA, were the main proponents and spreaders of the theories of white racial superiority in the beginning of the XX century. All in the guise of science.
And prismatic cells are used in a large majority of electric vehicles, Tesla excluded.
The article doesn't claim that demand (or pricing) is inelastic in the data space. It makes the point that VC funding has inflated price levels across the board, similar to how college tuitions rose dramatically after student debt became widely available. There are still differences between college tuitions, but overall tuitions might be multiple(s) higher compared to what the price would have been if there was no (cheap) financing available even.

Now that VC funding is mostly on the sidelines the question is how this will play out further.

Haven't studied Elastic and Confluent, but Snowflake seems now profitable (5%) with 25% free cash flow. See p.28 of their last investor presentation. https://s26.q4cdn.com/463892824/files/doc_financials/2023/q4...