skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Some quotes:

> “People are now only one click away from Category A material. That is a public safety issue. This extreme material is no longer in the creepy corners of the internet. It’s in plain sight.”

This sounds a little over-dramatic. I'm sure that people looking for CSAM know some places to look. But this almost makes it sound like anyone has a good chance of just accidentally coming upon it.

> "Most importantly, companies need to ensure that features such as end-to-end encryption have the necessary safety features built in so that they do not blind themselves to abuse occurring on their platforms.”

> Earlier this year, Marriott International, Inc. joined the IWF with the goal of blocking websites containing CSAM from guest internet access in its hotels. The collaboration is the first of its kind for the hotel industry. One of the Marriott’s stated aims was to address a “critical human rights issue for the industry”.

> I urge you to join us as we fight to keep children safe - and this includes the tech companies and platforms who have a moral and legal duty to keep children safe, and must not allow End-to-End encryption stop us from identifying and removing this abuse.

And here is the crux of the issue. They want to gut end-to-end encryption, prevent platforms from using it entirely, install "backdoors" in encryption, or otherwise "safety measures," whatever that could mean.

I don't like CSAM being available on the internet as much as the next person, but I will NEVER support the amelioration of encryption, which would have far-reaching implications for privacy and free speech of everyone in the world who has nothing to do with CSAM.
Oh ya, there are tons of things that can go wrong, but they are all well know, it isn't like having the right gauge of wire for amps is a huge trade secret. But the electrician is more likely going to know (a) be careful and do things right, and (b) do them efficiently/effectively/etc...

> That part was clearly not done by a professional.

It totally could have been. But it definitely wasn't inspected by a professional.
I use F# at work. Really love the language but the connection to the dotnet ecosystem is a curse as much as a blessing. Having to operate in a world of nulls and exceptions can reduce/nullify the amazing benefits of discriminated unions. Often you are back to relying on the due dilligence of other developers as a result.

I use a lot of rust in my spare time. The runtime guarantees it offers make other languages feel like a house of cards in comparison, including F#. I coincidentally picked up an ocaml book yesterday seeking a more 'robust' alternative to F#. Unfortunately it seems as though ocaml is even more niche than F# (I doubt I'll be working for jane street any time soon)
+1, props to modal.com, well done and their site is nice
>So many of the smart, lovely people you meet here are stuck on absurdly low salaries

Let me tell you about third world countries...
> The key problem the UK is facing is that a load of good investment ideas get announced and then proceed to spend decades drowning in red tape.

you just described most of the western world :)
> I've concluded that women are weak candidates for president based on the fact that no woman has ever won the presidency in over two centuries.

Concluding that weak general election candidates on that basis would be making the same mistake, with a different time window, as Clinton boosters: mistaking strength in the nomination process with strength in the general election process. As general election candidates, well, there's little data, and, as alreayd explained, it’s easily explaibed by non-gender factors.

And, assessing nominating contest strength in the basis of the whole history of the US ignores that women didn’t generally have the vote for more than a century of that time, that the nominating contest was overtly controlled by party elites from shortly after the emergence of parties until 1972, and both parties even when shifting to primaries as the predominant nonination tool stacked the system to favor party elites in different ways.

> And I really don't think Trump is all that weak a candidate.

He was, as a general election candidate, in 2016, but Clinton was similar (and, in the end, worse as a candidate.)

And in 2020, he lost with the advantages of incumbency, so, there’s that.

> didn't he get the 2nd most votes of any presidential candidate ever in 2020?

Almost like there was a widespread state-level election policy change in 2020 that boosted turnout.

> And now he's cruising to presumably his third major party nomination.

Nominating contest strengths are, again, a different thing than general election strength, and imagined nominating contest strength several months before the first primary is still a different thing yet.

And that’s even for candidates who haven’t been indicted with further court process in the case to occur before the first primary, and facing multiple other active criminal investigations.
> I do not appreciate being told that I am an immoral human being for X (X = eating meat).

While I don’t think it’s useful to oversimplify this into a binary moral issue, I also think it’s necessary to be reminded about the realities of the choices we make.

Why do you not appreciate this sentiment? Inconvenient truths tend to not feel very good, but that doesn’t make them incorrect.

> Been told that too many times already during my lifetime. It is a cultural constant. That formula is just too tiresome to hear yet again at this point.

I mean this with all respect, but this really sounds like “well, the world hasn’t stopped abusing animals yet, so I really don’t have a choice but to participate, and it’s really tiresome when people point that out”.

Change starts from within. I’d argue that the reason these argument feel tiresome is because the current solutions are not easy ones. They require each of us to alter our habits and demand broader change.

This is legitimately hard. But neither is there some magic bullet that will solve this.

I fully appreciate that we’re all stuck in a system that we can’t do much individually to change. But the one thing we can change is ourselves, and this is an option that is always available.

I wouldn’t be so quick to call someone who eats meat immoral, and as a meat eater I’d be a hypocrite for doing so. I’ve also gone to lengths to acquire meat that is as ethical/humane as possible, and over time I’ve reduced consumption significantly.

There are historically plenty of culturally acceptable practices that are also deeply immoral upon further reflection. If you’re finding the arguments tiresome, that may be a good signal to listen more closely.
I just use Sublime and a notes folder containing text files groups in folders by topic. The search function is excellent, and I don't need anything more.
There are hundreds of posts in HN every day and only a few dozens are upvoted to the first page. Assuming you trust YC not to game the upvotes, the amount of AI on the front page should primarily be explained by the interest of the community.
I think it is a valid point. We can only indulge in such a guilt free way because we don't see how the sausage is made.

My friend will eat burgers and chicken nuggets all day, but a chicken drumstick with it's tendons and cartilage he is unable to eat, it is a necessary disconnect for him.

My tolerance is way higher but if part of ordering dinner was choosing a living animal for them to kill and prepare I would definitely just get tofu.
The fact that it even happened at all, with Musk's claimed intent to "clean up" Twitter, as compared to his laughably inept mismanagment, is newsworthy.
Looking at the site, I guess the dead notes might just be hidden in a “delete” folder instead of actually gone forever, which seems like a reasonable compromise.
The "note lifetime" image on their page mentions pinning notes to keep them from being deleted, but if that keeps it persistently at the top of the list it's probably not what you'd want either.
There has been talk of a war on encryption.

I wish to point out this alternative: Let's increase transparency instead.

Require all data sent and received to be in a common well-documented format (XML.)

Require the following be documented in the XML (1) The program sending it, (2) the program receiving it, (3) what it means, and (4) what it is used for.

There should be a single place to go to see all data coming and going so the administrative user of the device can review all data coming and going.

A lot less shenanigan's would happen online if every value sent and received had to be well documented with

Because that a new Windows install sends and receives so much complicated garbage that that networking people can not understand what is going on, this would require rewriting everything. I'm willing to do it.
> I like the Garmin devices cause they're so much simpler and does the specific built in sports functionality very very well. They are also far more tailored towards being functional whether or not you have internet connectivity.

I wholeheartedly concur with your point. Garmin watches excel at sports tracking as their primary focus, with notifications and messaging features taking a backseat.
Conversely, Apple and Google watches prioritize communication functions.

Previously, I owned an Android Wear watch, primarily for monitoring my runs. Although it sufficed, I found myself wearing it exclusively during runs. The device
required daily charging, had an irritating touchscreen, and lacked navigation capabilities without being paired to a phone, despite its built-in LTE modem.

A few months ago, I opted to purchase a Garmin Fenix 6 watch. Upon using it for several days, I recognized that this was the device I had initially sought. The
battery life spans two weeks—although heavy GPS use reduces this to about one week—and the watch includes maps for the entire United States. I have found it
invaluable for hiking, running, and more, and its exceptional performance has led me to wear it continuously rather than solely during activity tracking.
As a somewhat experienced admin, I can't imagine killing a process on a port without first understanding what process is using that port and why it is using that port. If a process is supervised, then I can't imagine killing a process when there might be process specific logic encoded into a script to try first.

lsof -P | grep LISTEN | grep $PORT
kill $RELEVANT_PID

The rust script itself uses kill -9, which probably isn't the ideal behavior. SIGTERM and then SIGKILL after a timeout is probably the appropriate behavior for a script, but even more appropriate would be to figure out if it's supervised and `service stop` it.

The real problem with this script is that it violates the unix philosophy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_philosophy). "Do one thing and do it well" is the main problem.

This program finds processes to kill AND it kills them AND it kills their children and it does each of those things poorly.

For this program to be better than `lsof` and `kill`, it would need to implement command line options for which type of signal to send. By the time that is implemented, a program with the same interface as kill will be implemented, and it would be better for that to be it's own program that could be piped too. What's left would be a program that finds a process listening to a specific port, and there are already plenty of good programs for that.
> This is why most people (and developers) still use the Windows Desktop and not the thousands of Linux Desktop(s) out there.

I'm failing to see the logic here. As a Linux user, trust me there are tons of people out there for which macOS is the only OS that exists or matters. It doesn't prevent people from switching to macOS. Years back that was true of nearly every Windows user as well (only Windows existed). I'm not understanding the causative chain here.
I learned OCaml two decades ago. It was great to learning algorithmics but I already had the feeling the language was old and awkward. Today there is Scala, Haskell, Rust, F# etc.
You don't read it, you just ask a bot to tell you what's in it. ;-)
> be able to take a novel problem that they haven't seen before and break it down to solve it in a sensible way. ... A contrived live coding exercise gives you a strong signal on this

The author suggests take-home coding exercises with "maybe ... a live call to discuss their solution" as giving a stronger signal than a live coding exercise.

The author also suggested to "present them with a complex technical problem that requires architecture-level decisions across various parts of a technology stack, and have them talk through how they would approach it" as a better signal than a live coding interviews.

So even if what you say is true, you aren't presenting a devil's advocate position. Instead, it makes it seem like you think the alternative to live coding is no assessment, which the author very clearly argues is not true.
Oh I misunderstood…

I thought the headline was implying that there was an explosion of chatgpt generated comments on HN.

I was wondering how they were identifying them, etc.
If someone has all their basic needs met, what mechanism would cause them to fail if they choose to produce more value (through labor) than the value required to meet their basic needs?
> Apple has no obligation

Did you read the article?

The judges literally just said that yes they are obligated to allow this.

Literally, yes, there is now a legal obligation, by the court system, to allow links to outside of app store payment options.

> they just can't expect Apple to market them

Yes they can (if thats what you are calling allowing outside links). Because thats what the judges just said Apple is forced to allow, by law.

> through anti-competitive practices

Actually, yes they did have an illegal, and anti-competitive practice.

That's what the judges just affirmed.
I am strongly biased against ORMs, but I still recognize their use in CRUD operations. In any case where you are doing bulk operations, true upserts, or more complex queries, then I 100% agree.
Tl;dr but this debate has been done, a million billion times already.

The author concludes with a decent summary of the issue (ie. Is this the best method among the worst?). But doesn't actually find a better way of doing things.

And in the million forum threads on this issue, no one else has either.
I find theses affirmations a bit contradictory:

"This opens up a lot of fun opportunities to build AI assistants for everyone"

"We have tested it on windows and mac, you will need a gpu with about 6.4G memory."
Prob at height of piracy powers before Netflix and music streaming services went popular
The OCaml object system is still parametric polymorphism (trying to pass itself as subtyping polymorphism through row variables) rather than ad-hoc polymorphism: there are still no functions that only work on a finite subset of types. In other words, a function may work on any objects that has a method `m`, but you cannot have the same method that has different implementation for `int` and `float`.
I used to be skeptic but not anymore. Since last year I've been using "AI" more and more in day to day life. Like some sort of assistant/consultant on every topic.

Bitcoin changed my life as well.
Shell admits 1.5C climate goal means immediate end to fossil fuel growth
FunFact: "The Americans favour the spelling cozy, while the British prefer cosy."
I went vegetarian and things were going great. I was checking my micro and macro nutrients, things were perfect. I got a new job and I had to take a drug test. My creatine levels were too low and I failed/had to repeat the drug test. I ended up having to pee first thing in the morning to make my creatine levels higher. This was the most painful thing I've experienced in my life for about 3 hours as I waited for the place to open. That sucked.

Later, my kid had low iron levels. I imagine I probably did too.

Sure people are able to live a life without meat, but the nutrition from having meat is something I'm finding difficult to replace. We eat meat probably 2 or 3 times per week. Seems like a decent compromise, but I still feel like this is going to age poorly when people become more aware of animal consciousness.
They claim the parameters that go with canonical particle dark matter won't lead to a fit. This is the point, not necessarily that they could pinpoint axions in particular.
User: What does the java garbage collector do?

Assistant: The java garbage collector does two things:

1. Deletes objects of all types from the memory at once, and

2. Collects and compares all the objects.

User: What is today's date?

Assistant: Today is September 15th.

User: What year is it?

Assistant: 2015.

User: What time is it?

Assistant: The current time is 8:15am.

User: Where are we?

Assistant: The park and the beach in New York City.

User: Who is president right now?

Assistant: The United States is currently undergoing a
tremendous economic boom and will continue to enjoy great
economic growth. President Barack Obama will be the next
president of the United States.
Postgres uses distinct nulls. I've not checked, but I'd assume postgres simply does not index nulls, as it can't find them again anyway (unless you use the new "NULLS NOT DISTINCT" anyway). I think you need a separate index on the boolean IS NULL (which should probably be a partial index on whichever of IS NULL and IS NOT NULL is better).
I've been following the Masimo situation and their case seems pretty strong (though IANAL).

But in many cases the "product" is actually just a feature, not enough to sustain a whole company. And I say this by having made that very mistake myself years ago, and having learned from it.
Why not rely on an robots.txt entry instead of having to explicitly include in http header to not have ai ?
Additionally, I tried to find out just who funds this foundation. From its Wikipedia page:
The IWF is an incorporated charity, limited by guarantee, and largely funded by voluntary contributions from UK communications service providers, including ISPs, mobile phone operators, Internet trade associations, search engines, hardware manufacturers, and software providers. It also currently receives funding from the European Union by comprising one-third of the UK Safer Internet Centre.

I wonder if ISPs and search engines would have some benefits to gain from having backdoors in end-to-end encryption. Not to mention the EU at large.
> You gave a beautiful answer about programming language

You do the same thing as in Rust, Scala or Haskell and derive the printer [1]. Then at the callsite, if you know the type then you do `T.show` to print it or `T.eq`. If you don't know the type, then you pass it in at the top level as a module and then do `T.show` or `T.eq`.

> Or to convert one type into another type?

If you want to convert a type, then you have a type that you want to convert from such as foo and bar, then you do `Foo.to_bar value`.

We can keep going, but you can get the point.

You _can't_ judge a language by doing what you want to do with one language in another. If I judge Rust by writing recursive data structures and complaining about performance and verbosity that's not particularly fair correct? I can't say that Dart is terrible for desktop because I can't use chrome developer tools on its canvas output and ignore it's hot-reloading server. I can't say Common Lisp code is unreadable because I don't have type annotations and ignore the REPL for introspection.

[1] https://github.com/ocaml-ppx/ppx_deriving
Show HN: Preventing password-sharing revenue calculator
We built a tool to quickly crunch the numbers for you and determine if preventing password sharing on your product is worth the effort.

Would love the feedback.
Nice to see Tortoise being used - I still think it's the best TTS system out there now. Generation time is slow, but quality is incredible. I wonder if the code can be optimised to speed up the generation, but I don't think the author is maintaining it any longer.[0]

[0]https://github.com/neonbjb/tortoise-tts
My favorite property of "imaginary numbers":

i^i = 0.20787957635... (Spoiler alert: it's real!)

No, they're not imaginary, and yes they have real-world significance. They represent oscillations in control systems [1]. They're useful for accurately approximating derivatives [2]. I really dislike the term "imaginary" because of how useful they actually are.

[1]: https://web.mit.edu/2.14/www/Handouts/PoleZero.pdf

[2]: https://mdolab.engin.umich.edu/wiki/guide-complex-step-deriv...
> Developers are there for their programming skills, not pedagogical ones

This mindset will limit your advancement, teaching and mentorship work becomes increasingly key for senior and senior+ roles.

But I suppose by the time someone has a senior title and 5+ years of experience they’re not really in the category being discussed in this article.
I own Netflix although I mostly use stremio with torrentino. Seems like statistics got it right.
I guess people felt the same when negative numbers were introduced.
I think Republicans are eventually going to have to be popular (ie. win the popular vote) to have an effective president. Just skimming by on electoral votes makes for ineffective executives.
Even supposing that’s true, perhaps the same effect can be achieved without antibiotics? For example maybe some kind of probiotic feed that displaces the undesirable gut flora?
Effective Instruction Tuning: Data and Methods
Spotify is a terrible deal, but even the "good ones" like Apple Music and Bandcamp aren't much better. My artist acquaintances all agree, but it's not like they're making bank on YouTube music or anything. All digital music distribution sucks now. Spotify is just one of the more desperate moochers.

> explain that "the pricing model disproportionately rewards established artists" claim to me

It's not uncommon, especially in scenarios where distributors can strongarm artists into signing their agreements. In the world of gaming, progressive distribution models are very common, where Steam/Epic/Sony takes a smaller cut as you get sell more units.

The unfortunate fact is that boiling down digital music sales gets you two things - file distribution and payment processing. And the payment processing costs money.
How long before someone breaches open ai and steals their model. It’s not like it’s a lot of data but probably the highest value per byte in existence.
> Yes, but animal agriculture can be less harmful if you do less of it
Look up "antimicrobial resistance" (AMR) and see where the deaths attributed to this are occurring. South Asia (e.g. India, etc) and Africa. Regions with inadequate healthcare for humans, where front-line antibiotics get spammed, where people don't complete the full course of treatment for lack of resources or understanding. It's not coming from the 'factory farms' of developed nations.
I'm not saying I used ChatGPT/Bard exclusively to do my taxes, but it does a surprisingly good job explaining concepts on the tax forms that TurboTax just doesn't even bother helping you with.
If — and I recognise that it is an "if" given the current lack of any sufficient testable definition of subjective consciousness awareness of self — if farm animals are self-aware, then slavery would be several steps up from their current existence.

We only stopped feeding cows to other cows because of a fear humans might get prion diseases.

Coming at it from the other direction, "what if humans were food?" is a horror trope, be it vampires, zombies, werewolves, or psychopath cannibals.
If their process for hiring was so spectacular, you'd think they'd have been a little more reluctant to do mass layoffs.
Finite state machine vs. DAGs for no-code tools
They can only attack the crypto exchanges, which will hurt it plenty. But they're powerless to do anything else other than create propaganda. You can't ban a number(crypto wallet private key).