skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
They picked JS for the server because they have a choice in what languages they can run on the server, but they don't have a choice about what languages they can run in the browser, so JavaScript it is.

There are HUGE advantages and efficiencies to using the same language in the browser and the server.

Most developers are (rightfully) lazy and simply don't want to learn and juggle two different languages in two different places, when they can use simply one language everywhere.

For example, when switching between PHP and JavaScript, you have to remember that the ?: ternary conditional operator in PHP has idiotic left-associativity, so you have to use extra parenthesis to disambiguate it, while the identical looking ?: ternary operator in JavaScript and all other languages has sane right-associativity.

"I'm not a real programmer. I throw together things until it works then I move on. The real programmers will say Yeah it works but you're leaking memory everywhere. Perhaps we should fix that. I'll just restart Apache every 10 requests." -Rasmus Lerdorf

"I don't know how to stop it, there was never any intent to write a programming language [...] I have absolutely no idea how to write a programming language, I just kept adding the next logical step on the way." -Rasmus Lerdorf

"We have things like protected properties. We have abstract methods. We have all this stuff that your computer science teacher told you you should be using. I don't care about this crap at all." -Rasmus Lerdorf
> they've parasited, sorry, trained on the entirety of accessible human knowledge

I see this as a new development in language, used to be restricted to meat neural nets and books, now it can also be consumed and created by LLMs. A new self replication path was opened for language. Language is an evolutionary system, it's alive. Without Language humans are mere shadows of what they can be. Language turns a baby into a modern adult, and a randomly initialised neural net into chatGPT.

The magic was always in the language, not in the neural network. We should care more about the size and quality of the training dataset than the model. Any model would do, all model tweaks are more or less the same. But the data, that is the origin of all the abilities. But we cannot own abilities, it should be fair game to learn abilities and facts even from copyrighted data. Novel and creative training examples should not be reproduced by LLMs, but mere facts and skills should be general enough not to be owned by anyone.
No, it's not.

You have vastly more power in society by being able to remove your political enemies, than by being able to appoint your friends.

There's a lot of ways in which the latter can screw up - your friends might turn out to be less pliable than you wanted, someone might have been appointed who turned out to be a trojan horse, someone might have been appointed who was palatable to your goals a decade ago, but is now causing trouble, someone might have been appointed under your opponent's watch, etc, etc.

When you instead hang a sword of Damocles over their collective necks, they have no choice but to toe the party line.
Why not simply make several versions? Like 1 Gb, 10 Gb and 100 Gb versions?
That's mainly in Belgium. Most of France's reactors are from the 1980s, so they are nearing end-of-life but are not past their designed lifetime.
Even for transferring the game to local?

I can see some benefits to having uncompressed assets in that it would help with asset loading. I'd still be surprised to not have any form of compression at all happening. I'd also be curious to know just how much the assets could be compressed.
As I've already pasted elsewhere, you can apply to a publisher that pays its editors at https://www.mdpi.com/editors
> It's a species that mostly doesn't care about other species survival.

As opposed to which species that do?
Here's an implementation using Peano numbers as you mentioned which seems to work the same as the CLP(FD) one for me.

rle2([], []).
rle2([H],[[H, add1(zero)]]).
rle2([H | T], [[H, CountPlus1] | More]) :-
Count = add1(_),
CountPlus1 = add1(Count),
rle2(T, [[H, Count] | More]).
rle2([H | T], [[H, add1(zero)], [Element, Count] | More]) :-
Count = add1(_),
dif(Element, H),
rle2(T, [[Element, Count] | More]).

?- rle2([1,1,1,2,2,3],X), rle2(Y,X).
X = [[1, add1(add1(add1(zero)))], [2, add1(add1(zero))], [3, add1(zero)]],
Y = [1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3] ;
false.

It even works in the completely general case:

?- rle2(X,Y).
X = Y, Y = [] ;
X = [_A],
Y = [[_A, add1(zero)]] ;
X = [_A, _A],
Y = [[_A, add1(add1(zero))]] .

As I understand it, Prolog itself is CLP(H), that is CLP over the Herbrand terms (that is, atoms and functors and stuff). CLP(FD) just extends the capability with numbers (FD = finite domains). Although I do sort of understand how you'd consider it not "pure" Prolog, I don't see it as that different especially with things like `dif/2` in Prolog which is a constraint just like any other.
Adjuncts and lecturers dont do research nor do they typically do service. If one wanted to be educated by lecturers then they could attend a community college. That is of course a viable option but no tenure will be the kiss of death to any institution who thought they were going to do research at the R1 level.
Ask HN: Why not build an android city on Earth and then one like it on Mars?
Wouldn't this be more realistic than sending lots of people to live on Mars without building an android city there first?
> Yeah it seems so dried out you wouldn't have too much to worry about.

How about the people touching / sneezing on it in the packaging factory?
It is an order of magnitude more expensive to produce art assets that way than to just hire people familiar with photoshop and maya. Those procedurally generated assets in tech demos like .kkrieger were just that: tech demos.

Asset production is already the bulk of the cost of AAA video game production.
Zuck has the singular moral obligation to pile drive Meta deep into the earth.

Spectacularly.

To such a degree as to trigger a permanent social media winter. Dragging the parade of freemium, attention economy, dopamine hacking, panopticon, and manufactured outrage biz models down too.

Dorsey cowardly delegated that task to Musk. Which is probably for the best; like with all his manias, Musk will go above and beyond anything Dorsey could imagine, much less managed.

Any nominations for antihero(s) to warp TikTok into the sun?
And there was a hilarious situation with audio in Titanfall, which included 35 gigs of uncompressed audio(whole game took 48 gigs).
Because it's not a meme, it's an actual social cycle
Where else are you going to go though? Germany threw in the towel, nuclear has been stagnant in France and USA for decades. Maybe Sweden/Finland? They do it but slowly, expensively and are a whole generation behind.

That leaves you with China. Which from an objective/technical standpoint is actually excellent because their current designs are extremely good.

However it's probably not tenable for the West to procure nuclear technology from China. Not that China wouldn't sell them plants, they almost certainly would, China has no qualms sharing civilian tech but the West couldn't stomach it geopolitically.

Which sadly is going to be the state of affairs for all cutting edge green energy tech. While the rest of the world was sucking off special interests in the fossil fuels industry China was taking it's pledge to be carbon neutral by 2060 extremely seriously.

This means China is now leading across the board in solar, wind, batteries, hydro, EVs, high speed rail and importantly nuclear.

Sad state of affairs for the West all things considered. We had first mover advantage in all of those fields and pissed it away for a few decades of investors profits and executive bonuses.
If they were 'not stupid' they wouldn't have invaded Ukraine and caused a massive reaction in Europe for independence of Russian energy.

If they were 'not stupid' and 'not evil', they wouldn't attack a nuclear power plant in the Ukraine. Russia is both stupid and evil with its current invasion of its neighbor country. The amount of environmental damage caused by this war is extremely high.

Russian nuclear technology also does not take care of the environment and the population. Problematic reactors are being built near large cities.
By reliability he refers to french nuclear plants stopped for months due to mantainance and repairs (mainly leaks that couldn't be scheduled).

Painting nuclear as a 100% free of problem energy makes people sound as car salesmans. As of today, nobody want to finance or insure them. As soon as you say "ok, build them reactors if they are so perfect", nuclear advocates want the state to jump in and asume the costs, the consumers to pay an extra price, the safety regulations back to 1960 and the future people to deal with the residues.
I expect some farmers would buy another brand of $1M harvester to avoid dealing with IT headaches.
Again: total numbers mean absolutely nothing on a night when there's zero production from renewables.

That "shill" is showing data. Just the fact that you don't like this data doesn't make it invalid.

Right now it's night in Germany, and even though the wind is blowing, it's only at 40% generation. And look, there's coal, supplying 22%, and gas supplying another 9%: https://imgur.com/a/3bYudyd
I drink ridiculous amounts of English Breakfast tea with 1% milk every day. The water HAS to be boiling when it hits the tea. You cn really tell the difference if the water is less than boiling. Same but more subtle with green tea imo
"At what point of scale do people start imagining they have a right to make demands on how something somebody else built and owns should be run?"

Well, presumably the point when they no longer own it and turn it into a public company with shareholders that are going to go down with the $500b ship.

A quick google says that Mark owns 13.4%, not a majority of the company.

So he has a pretty large voice and might be the largest single shareholder but it's no longer his -- it's not his prerogative or risk to take, if the board decides it's not. And there's a good argument that the board should replace him.
We've been out of exponential territory for a few years now (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law). Yes, we are still bounding forward at a crazy pace, but I think the pace is slowing down somewhat
To be fair the french have had some massive problems with their fleet recently. There were issues discovered where (IIRC) a supplier that made pressure vessels used steel that was not of sufficient quality and covered it up for decades, only to be discovered recently- this required major downtime and expense. Other issues have resulted in lots of nuclear plant downtime in france as well recently.
Falcon Heavy as complete system is still far more complex. You still need to coordinate all these cores. There is a reason every designer goes to single core as systems grow larger. SpaceX actually had initially planned to do a very large 3 core and then rejected it.

And Falcon Heavy was building on 10 years of Falcon 9 knowlage and an incredibly reliable engine.

Falcon Heavy was launching from a perfectly designed launch pad that didn't throw up huge chunks of debris everywhere.

Its incredibly that people are way to fast to jump to doomsday conclusion from one test.
As a designer who know how to code, I would love to know how to find a job like this.
If you mean cryptocurrency, then that's wrong, because its primary purpose is to facilitate illegal activity, or grifting. It isn't even good as money, and I still can't buy groceries with Bitcoin, which is like... one of the things money needs to do (buy food).
I'm someone who is naturally strong at design, but studied CS/software engineering because I ultimately wanted to be able to build my own things. For years I tried to find careers hiring those unicorns -- people who could design and code -- but they were few and far between. My last gig that required both was at a hedge fund here in NYC, where they don't explicitly hire designers. These days I work exclusively as a software engineer, and I definitely miss those times when I worked as a designer. Among other things, the hours are easier and the amount of praise you get way higher :-)
A counterintuitive alternative is to invest a fraction of the costs of nuclear in cleaning up emissions from coal plants. We seem to have swung too far by shutting down a reliable source of energy when mitigating technologies to filter emissions [1] and next generation cleaner extraction technologies [2] are coming online to massively improve coal driven electric power generation.
These technologies are DoE funded and patented the former has been deployed in production at a 100 Mw plant the latter is at a pilot stage in a 30Mw research generator at a university.

In any case coal is not going away and there is no single “answer” to the planet’s energy needs.
A resilient grid requires a portfolio of energy sources including nuclear but it’s by no means the single answer as the title of the post suggests.

Uranium is “carbon free” but “radioactive waste full”
and creates multigenerational environmental debt in the form of waste - nuke proponents usually hand wave and talk in generalities when it comes to this topic. Note the comment that “90% of materials in a nuclear reactor can be recycled” deftly sidestepping the 10% that will live on in deadly form for thousands of years with no solution in sight.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3568623/

Google “Biswas Washington University Enhanced Electrostatic Precipitation” for more

[2] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3817794

Google “Axelbaum Washington University staged pressurized oxy combustion” for more
> Also, which part of "nuclear plants are sensitive to environmental changes" didn't you get? If there's no cooling water, or the water is too hot, the plant can't run.

That is completely false. Most Gen4 reactors are passively cooled. And even older ones, not all require 'once through' water cooling. there are other options: https://world-nuclear.org/our-association/publications/techn...
Yo this looks cool as hell
> math isn’t independent of axioms so there is nothing to agree upon beyond conventions where Math is simply the result of axiom choices.

> 1 = 1 isn’t inherently true on it’s own

This sounds a whole lot like "math isn't a universal truth". I guess we need to take a step back, since it seems this is where the disagreement lies: what does it mean for something to be a universal truth?

My position is that a truth is universal if it is self-evident; that is, it does not require an agreement between observers. These axioms are that agreement and therefore Mathematics, which stems from such axioms, is not universal truth.
It can be competitive, it's not politically tenable. Because it's not politically tenable it can't be allowed to be commercially competitive, the forces raising the prices will simply increase until it's priced out - such is the way of politics.
Where the data is stored does not matter much. Laws deal with people and companies, so it matters where you live or where your company operates. So if you live in the US you don't have to worry about EU laws unless you do buisness in EU.
I think fear-mongering about nuclear power risks is really unfortunate. The rewards far outweigh the risks. Sure, we could live in a world where we could tell everyone to stop using so much damn energy- but that's not our reality. There's some really good data and charts here (especially the "What is the safest and cleanest source of energy?" diagram at the top) - https://ourworldindata.org/cheap-renewables-growth

In the USA we've poured an incredible amount of money into wind energy and it simply hasn't been very effective relative to the cost.
Assuming equal spacing, you only need landmarks (survey spikes) on the first row. Then use the implement impressions from the first pass. But I see your point.
my point is that it is a derogatory abbreviation commonly used by people who, in fact, do not have an unbiased view of Microsoft.

it's harder to type than just "MS" so when someone uses "M$" they go out of their way to signal that they are biased. Being biased is fine, so long as one understands that they are biased and that they are communicating their bias along with the rest of the message.
Frankly, I think Facebook burning to the ground would be a net positive for society. Let the man keep doing his thing.
I think if I want to write some software, and I have the knowledge and compute power to do what I want, then I really don't care whether you or some authoritarian committee tells me I'm allowed to run my software. I'm going to do it anyway.
> they use alternate data streams to store resource forks - like fonts

macOS stores fonts in resource forks? I'm confused, what use does this have and what happens when you accidentally miss them?
That is a little surprising to me. Especially if we are talking about games that are delivered online. Thinking on it, I'm actually only surprised for online delivered games. I don't see any incentive to reduce size on delivered disks.

I'd expect that they use a compression that is good for transport, at transport time. I'm not too shocked that they have the assets in a way that is easy to use at runtime.
New languages are hopefully made taking into account all the lessons learned from previous mistakes older languages made. Old languages can't change too much or they just become hell to upgrade, so they can't compete with the newer ones.

I don't think there's much of a problem with this.

But I will still setup a wordpress if I need a quick site.
It is not the determinism that’s a concern. JavaScript can test the capabilities of your machine and then create a new connection to transmit its results back to another computer. Even in the hypothetical scenario when you are only allowed to download messages and not upload messages, things are hard: because you have a fully programmable language at your disposal, you can create a system to transmit information by a sequence of reads with JavaScript. So the only safe way is to pre-download everything, then turn off the network and only then evaluate JavaScript in an environment without network or storage. FSF is not against such a mode of operation, but it becomes cumbersome for most people. And as the development of browsers consolidates, the fraction of the web that can be used in that way (for those who want to be super careful) becomes smaller.
Hey, I want my name on that list. Here's my contribution:

{
> Why is it okay that Zuckerberg has absolute power over one of the most influential companies in the world?

Because that's the company he founded and owns. It wasn't one of the most influential companies in the world upon being founded, it became so with Zuck at the helm.

> How does that benefit society as a whole?

How does this have anything to do with anything? And how do you propose we measure it?
Äh sorry but you are simply wrong. SpaceX was the first company to get certification to not have 'guy with button' anymore and have certified hardware on board that this job. This was vital part of how they decreased labor cost and increases launch rate.

As far as I know SpaceX has not launched in the traditional way since Falcon 1 and I am sure that they would never launch Starship that way.
I believe that this is yet another case of middle ground being the best: leave the bulk of teaching to specialists, but keep the research professors doing courses close to their actual field. Don't underestimate how educative teaching can be for the teacher. But this is certainly no big insight. Or are there places that do not, at least to some amount, do it like this?
Imagine telling people that they are cursed because they choose to love, instead of living in celibacy.

No thanks.
Or Xbox! Which I'm pretty sure is still in the red overall after 21 years.
That sounds like a pretty good process. I guess I’m more opposed to (first round) take home projects than I am to the idea of project in general.
Thanks for the info - but this implies that following the state curriculum would be a pretty easy defence, wouldn't it? So if a teacher wanted to teach about "sexual orientation and gender identity", even outside of the "existing state standards", they could still do so as part of "reproductive health instruction that students can choose not to take" [1] [2].

The closest reference I can find for the legal stuff is here: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/BillText/er/...

Everything in that text talks about the parent taking legal action against the school district, not the teacher [3] - same as when citizens sue "the cops", they are usually suing the city that runs that police department, not the individual police officer. So if a teacher is following the rules laid down by their employer (which one assumes would be in accordance with state law), they would presumably be provided counsel by their employer in order to ensure that the employer can actually mount a legal defense? So it sounds no different to being a state employee in a lot of places. Or am I still missing something?

[1] "The rule change would ban lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity through 12th grade unless required by existing state standards or as part of reproductive health instruction that students can choose not to take"

[2] "Educators have said they don’t expect a major change in lesson plans given that teachers adhere to state education curriculums"

[3]
"If a concern is not resolved by the school district, a 129 parent may: ...
(I) [elided]
(II) Bring an action against the school district to obtain a declaratory judgment that the school district procedure or practice violates this paragraph and seek injunctive relief. A court may award damages and shall award reasonable attorney fees and court costs to a parent who receives declaratory or injunctive relief. "
Er, I'm not sure that's laundering; if a human takes AI-generated code and munges it to look human-generated, they applied enough creativity that I would expect them to legitimately have copyright on the result. I mean, I'm not a lawyer, but the bar is pretty low for qualifying.
And there was also the opposite, John Carmack in particular didn't have a problem with using huge amount of data, "Rage" is an application of this idea. The game uses a single, huge, non-repeating "megatexture", with elaborate caching strategies to keep it playable even on slow media (HDD/optical). The idea was to give complete freedom to artists and not require them to be mathematicians. Further down the line, he even considered using sparse voxel octrees, i.e. even more huge 3D textures.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, you have Inigo Quilez ( https://iquilezles.org/ ). He literally draws with maths, and he is famous for his 4k demoscene productions. The problem is that about no one else is capable of doing what he does.
I heard the other day that many Saudi's leave their AC running when they leave SA for the summer months. Power is THAT cheap.
I agree. For a while now, I've been working on a programming language specifically for designers. The idea is to incorporate the same verbiage and mental models that designers use in their daily lives. I think html and css are nice, but they can't be transferred over to other platforms. Designers need a platform-agnostic language.