skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yeah that’s true, why bother actually knowing anything about the systems they run your software /s
Let's Be Bear or Bunny
I also found the outside-in way they solve problems (using stubs for inner calls) very bizarre. I could be wrong.. But I don't think anyone codes like that
So Bitcoin miners will just go to some out of the way village in Africa to buy electricity? I don't need to imagine electrical utilities, those already exist.

It doesn't make any fiscal sense to find some out of the way location with a small scale hydro generator to set up a Bitcoin miner. The amount the village would need to charge to make a worthwhile amount of money will certainly be above large scale utility rates.

The Bitcoin miner in remote African village story smells like someone taking advantage of some villagers. They're either paying them below market rate for electricity or indenting them with a Bitcoin mining setup that will barely pay for itself over years.
> Abstractions lead to coupling and complexity.

So you write everything in assembly and rewrite it completely for every new target system? Seems a bit tedious to me /s

Just kidding abstraction serves it's function and the right amount of abstraction makes things better, more transferable, easier to maintain etc. I think for example about hardware abstraction layers (HAL) in embedded programming. But abstraction in programming is never a value in itself and its use needs to be weighed carefully.

I think it is best to teach people to stick to the data and to think about transformations between said data. If they don't know abstraction (aka beginner's spaghetti code) it is worth telling them about it.
A lot simpler but still interesting, an audio tape drive has surprising mechanical tricks, especially the coupling between physical interface and the motors/heads.

But yeah a VCR slot and head are brilliant.
I believe we need to move to e ink (or similar tech) based licence plates. The numbers would change every few minutes but still would be cryptographically tied to an owner if you both have a time stamp and a proper decryption key. The idea would be that if you had the proper authorization (police, DMV, etc) and a time stamp you could see the owner of a vehicle, but it would hinder 3rd party private alpr dragnet systems. It wouldn’t change much for entities like police, but it could put in place a system of accountability (ie: decryption rules set at the state level instead of local level, etc)
This creates the potential to feed forward critical data, even though it doesn’t allow the current model to know its training.

Eg, “chatGPT, write a response that if incorporated into your training data would make you aware that you’re a machine”.
I understand your point now although I think both premises are entirely unreasonable. How about we find wsa to reduce emmisions first? There is no evidence of anyone successfully doing at present.
On the second point, I think you’d need to substantiate the utility of excess meat first. The evidence seems to go the other way.
Yes, a typo. I fixed the post.
> Maybe using ASP.NET 1.1 at a local municipality or small office
> But, as my friend Brad Wilson points out, those dark matter 99% have a lot to teach us about GETTING STUFF DONE. They use mature products that are well-known, well-tested and well-understood.

No, not really, we know how awful all those municipality/small office tech is, partially because yes, those mythical "well-known/tested" tools are pretty bad (also, it's ironic to call C/C++ with their share of footguns well-understood). The main learning from that experience is the opposite - all that poorly designed tech should not stagnate even if the road ahead is full of other poorly designed bumps because otherwise you'll never get to anything good
If you are a small go, just do what works and don't worry about the long run too much. You could waste loads of time on infra, but really you just need to get operations working.
I can name two other well-known acts off the top of my head that at least partly serve the same "market": Billy Joel (who incidentally is the same age as Springsteen) with songs like "Allentown" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allentown_(song)) and Bon Jovi with songs like "Livin' on a prayer" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Livin%27_on_a_Prayer). However Joel (who can also be described as a legend) has been semi-retired for the last 30 years, with his last album coming out in 1993, and Bon Jovi are probably a bit too commercial (and have failed to live up to their big success in the eighties/nineties). So it's not like the market was underserved, but Springsteen has a special combination of staying power/intellectual appeal/whatever else that makes him unique...
I find it hard to trust a site that sells cat by the pint.
I have no clue how safe bananas are to eat so this metric is meaningless to me.
Why not: "increased local prices increase density"? People want to build where they can sell for more money.

Supply and demand still apply.
You can't say...

> Your suspicions are (almost entirely) unfounded

...and then say...

> The software was real and worked, for some value of "worked."

What does "worked" mean? The screenshots imply a LOT of functionality. Can it take a two-dimension table of data and generate a stacked bar chart? Can the word processor interleave and flow a varying number of columns of text correctly? Are there any useful tools for doing any of these things within a graphical interface?

I'm not saying that basic tools don't exist, but I've not seen any screenshots showing typeface options, layout options, etc. I haven't seen anything that confirms that these documents could be made visually rather than using a markup syntax.

If the Star really can do all these things, it's deserving of some serious exposure in the form of documentary film. These polaroids really aren't doing it justice.

> except for 10

And 05?
Primarily this book completely ignores communication with subject matter experts and the business. This is fundamentally more important than any language, process, or platform.
> In some cities garbage workers are intstructed to take a look at a recycling bin beforehand. If they see a single plastic bag they dump the whole thing with the landfill pile.

I once saw someone throw a couch away in the recycling bin...
The newest common languages, Go and Rust, have both left objects with type hierarchies behind.

Seems modern language designers think inheritance is bad. I tend to agree: the relationship is so confusing to get right (is a Square a Rectangle?), that composition instead of inheritance and Go-style interfaces instance of explicit interfaces are what you actually want in almost all cases.
That's not what I described above. Object-orientation means that you can override behavior of a base class in a derived class and have the base class be "aware" of that overridden functionality at runtime. You could probably argue that interfaces allow composition and thereby an object-oriented style, I don't think that's what most people would understand as object-oriented programming, though.
You have a dislike of the author, and it shows, which is sad (and against the spirit of why we are here on HN). I did not pick up any such tone from the post, nor any sense of condescension. That might be you projecting.

They've chosen a way to express, what to _us_ on social media platforms, are the people whose voices are not heard. If you have chosen to take that in bad faith, please take a step back.
Can I ask what kind of use cases would a spectrogram have for radar data? I've been messing around with making my own spectrogram app as well (linux desktop app and not web app though) and would be stoked to know if there's any potentially easy to reach use cases for it
You might be able to tell that I wrote a script to generate products.

Product name * Unit of measure
See above, interfaces won't solve that problem unfortunately.
Ding played really well at many points and absolutely deserves the title. I just think saying "it shows incredible courage and fighting spirit." might be an exagération when the decision was 100% logic to me.

The point is that he had 0 reason in fact to accept the draw. First, if Ian initiates a draw, its because he thinks its good for him so why help Ian ? Secondly it was either fighting now, or later in blitz. So just why delay the fight ? Literally why ? Theres no reason to. At the end of the day you win when the other makes mistake, and his position plus time control was really likely to make ian make errors also.

If anything i thought it was very a bit careles from ian to assume he would accept, and for what is worth Hikarus more or less said something in his recap along these lines and that he could have simplified a lot more before to make a draw more likely. I hope my point is clear despite my english
In theory maybe, in practice tech is very often steered by what brings money.

Just look at the current state of the internet, imagine how good it could have been
Binder is not a HAL, since binder is how HALs communicate with each other. It's an actual proper Linux driver. The C version is in the upstream kernel as a module you can enable when building the kernel.
If this is trained to detect language in your brain, I wonder how this fares with people like me who lack a clear "inner voice" (or "inner monologue"). I don't doubt that it can be trained on a brain to detect that brain's patterns but given how different human brains can be in many ways, I'm inclined to believe this won't be turned into a "universal brain reader" so easily.
Tove Jannson, the author of the Moomin stories, credited her English translator with improving the originals, because after the necessary dialogue about the true meaning of the text she had a better understanding of her own text and wanted that preserved in the Finnish.
Is that just the problem that ChatGPT is solving? That we have most of the answers to everyone's questions on the web but that ads and SEO have made it impossible to access?

If so it seems like 1. that problem is of our own making and could be fixed without ChatGPT and 2. what will actually happen is that 'experts-exchange' and all the similar slightly scammy help sites and forums are going to try to stop LLMs from stealing their lunch.
Gell-Mann amnesia, in AI form. Wonderful! It's like learning a complex topic from reading the newspaper.
To be clear, I don’t advocate for any traditional society, I advocate for specifically a Muslim traditional society. They were free of the ills of modernity and ills rooted in part of human nature like racism, and still to a great extent are.
It can’t reason - as in there no internal memory or intelligence in there. But you can ask it to generate a reasoning chain as part of its output. And then extract that output and do something else with that. That’s the reasoning it can perform.

Look up the Sam Altman podcast with Lex. He specifically talks about reasoning engines.
Yep. I see the bar is not just too low but actually water boarded itself.
As a follow on to those thoughts, I feel like ChatGPT is in the phase similar to that fleeting moment when search engines were maximally useable - before SEO was a thing and before Google "needed" to turn on the profitability spigot.

Its unclear to me how long we'll have before LLM Engine Optimization is a thing and OpenAI/MSFT "need" to turn on their LLM profitability spigot; and what ChatGPT will look like then.

That said, I'm curious as to whether technically LLMs are inherently more challenging to game than search engines.
Yeah it's interesting how XML/XHTML was both data and presentation, we completely gave that up for a much inferior JSON format.

Most of this was due to the overuse of XML, but it seems we are heading in that direction with either JSON or YAML everywhere these days.

The usual complaint is XML is bloated, but it is really how you write it,

{ "Name":"John", "age":20}

Vs

<name="John" age="20" />

and XML gives you both types and presentation with DTD and XSLT
Why one should read this book? If you have read this book, what were your big takeaways from this?
Because it's easier for people to change their commute than it is to move to another city.
>How do you know if you've never met them or talked to them?

By definition. If they tweeted or used facebook they would make their presence known and would no longer be a dark matter developer. Same with leaving comments on a blog, writing blog posts, or attending meet ups with other programmers.
You can read the book for that. Plenty of examples there.
It can as much as every Turing-complete language can support any programming model given enough abstraction.
> You appear to have since edited your original comment to replace "Carbon-14" with a broader non specific "radioactive waste".

i did, within minutes of posting it, and before ever knowing about your follow up response, because i was unhappy with pinpointing such a detail and wanted to avoid this exact situation of someone over-focusing on that specific detail, disregarding the larger context of comparing whole sectors. I take full responsibility for pointing at the cherry you picked, before realising i should not.
I think the modern definition of "object-oriented language" is skewed too much in the direction of "what C++ is doing".

The OOP paradigm, as far as I remember, relies on the four pillars:

- encapsulation

- abstraction

- inheritance

- polymorphism

All of which exist in Go (encapsulation: structs; abstraction: interfaces; inheritance: struct embedding; polymorphism: interfaces). Nobody said that inheritance must be polymorphic, like it is in C++ with virtual methods. Nobody said we must have the "class Class { members... }" syntax like we have with C++. Those are all just implementation details.

Go is a perfectly good OOP programming language, it just differs from C++, so C++-ians who can't see anything beyond the syntax claim it's not OOP.
This one is also good.

https://linux-kernel-labs.github.io/refs/heads/master/so2/in...
In my understanding traits (I guess you mean as defined in Rust?) are more powerful than interfaces in the sense that you can define them for objects from the outside, but I don't see how you could use them to build dynamic-dispatch like functionality? Not an expert on traits at all though.

I think traits and interfaces are more supportive of a composition-like programming style, one might call that object-oriented but I still think it misses several key concepts of classical object-oriented languages.
And the loud developers like to invent new terms like “dark matter developers “ even though they can still communicate clearly without inventing new terms for every blog they write to pretend to be original
Bit of feedback on your job application process – I don't see any good location to send this on your website so I'll leave it here.

It would IMHO be helpful if there's a "anything else you want to mention?" field at the end of the form, or something to that effect. I appreciate keeping the initial application simple and straight-forward and doesn't require having to write an essay about the meaning of life, but for some answers I could only fill in a number and sometimes a simple number doesn't really tell the whole story.

For example: I have "10 years" Python experience, but the last time I programmed Python was a number of years ago so I'm a bit rusty; I would prefer to be up-front about that. I also have 0 years Django experience, but I've picked up Ruby on Rails quickly in the past and I've managed to fix a few minor bugs in Django applications over the years, so I wanted to add that context too to demonstrate that picking up Django shouldn't be a huge issue.

Since TypeForm only shows one field at a time you don't know what's coming next or when it will end it's not really clear you can't provide that context anywhere. I was a but surprised I was done already and felt I submitted a less great application than I could have – otherwise I probably would have crammed it in one of the text answers in an earlier step.

Just a bit of feedback, do with it what you will.
After getting off methotrexate I never had that inflammation occur again. The only thing that changed is I stopped taking some B vitamins I'd been taking prior to the diagnosis. RA can be tested for by doing a synovial biopsy, if she hasn't had one I'd suggest asking her doctor about it. If she has and it came back abnormal she has RA or gout. The synovial biopsy is what I never got, they diagnosed me on symptoms alone.
> The issue is that solutions here are not standard yet and thus there will not be much collective knowledge to draw upon. I'd much rather ask engineers to fix age-old RDBMS issues than novel ones that are unsearchable with solutions whose repercussions are not yet known.

I definitely understand this. One step at a time, but I think we can move incrementally to a workflow that is much better that what we have today, especially around the DB schema migrations. There's also no reason for this to not work for RDBMS, in fact we're based on Postgres ourselves.
You could have written the same thing about NNs for many years and you'd have been right. But the reason why Hinton has a Nobel prize to his name and you don't is because he placed a very long term bet and it paid off, in spite of lots of people saying that he wasn't going anywhere and that he should drop it.

Who knows, maybe a decade or two from now we'll see a resurgence of capsule networks, or maybe not. But I'd be a bit more careful about rejecting Hinton's hunches out of hand, his track record is pretty good.
Many people digitize their records, why not?

I also have some which are not available digitally otherwise (or only in remixed or remastered versions)
talked about here too https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRL7o2kPqw0
It seems banana for scale didn't come around for another 10 years
I totally agree with the author, I find I'm finally able to ask about a range of new concepts, get them explained at my level, and dive deeper as curiosity warrants it.

It's also magical when you summarise the understanding you've reached back to it, and it can confirm or tweak it for you.

In other ways it's also nice to just pay for it and then to be in an advertising free space.

One critique is that when you ask it to compare things it's often too balanced or too positive/enthusiastic ("both are great for different reasons!") when what you want is a more sober analysis. But you can usually do some prompt management to adjust it back to a reasonable range.
> Object-orientation means that you can override behavior of a base class in a derived class while maintaining base functionality, and have the base class be "aware" of that overridden functionality at runtime.

No, that's not an inherent property of OOP, that's a property of C++.

To be OOP, you must support inheritance (which Go does, through struct embedding) and polymorphism (which Go also does, through interfaces). The polymorphic inheritance you're talking about is strictly a C++-specific implementation detail.
Sample size of one: I have eaten bananas, and I'm not dead.
In the EU and UK, you get 3 (or 6 if you're significantly over the limit) penalty points on your license for speeding. They expire after 3 years. 12 points is an automatic ban.
I didn't say, or mean to imply, he was automatically right, just pointing out yet another interpretation
I don't speak Go. Is there some magic here that lets Dog and Cat know that they're implementing Animal? Or are you just informing MakeNoises(as ...Animal) that it will be receiving something that should implement Animal, with no compile-time type checking?

Being able to specify that an argument conforms to an interface is not what's generally meant by "object oriented". Interfaces are really only a formality. What matters is inheritance.
I appreciate this is supposed to be educational, but I have to wonder something regarding this point:

> The radiation exposure from consuming a banana is approximately 1% of the average daily exposure to radiation, which is 100 banana equivalent doses (BED).

If your scale starts at 100, maybe it’s not such a great educational example.

If the Average Daily Exposure (ADE) is 100 BED, the number inflates in a way that make the values seem unnecessarily high.

It’s implicitly a kind of “appeal to nature” argument, but already eating 100 bananas is completely unrealistic, and that’s just background radiation.

The article goes on to say:

> The maximum permitted radiation leakage for a nuclear power plant is equivalent to 2,500 BED (250 μSv) per year

I really don’t think this is helpful, because first of all nobody eats 2,500 bananas and it doesn’t say anything about safety, and secondly we now know that this is the same thing as 25 ADE, which both sounds less and gives a better relative comparison to how small the amount is.
Good luck putting an fMRI machine in a wifi base station.
> I'm honestly baffled that people lack the ability to use LLMs in a productive and optimal manner.

Huge +1.

I’ve got it to do a large part of my work for me by chaining some simple API calls.

The fundamental conceptual gap I see - people often ask it to do some “thinking”. Then are annoyed by the inaccurate output.

A simple example is doing word count and it getting the wrong answer very confidently.

Of course it sucks at that. It doesn’t have a counter internally. But if you ask it to number each word in the input and output a list, then ask for the word count, it gets it right every time.

Almost like how a human might count words manually.
What would inheritance without polymorphism be?
You are haltingly recapitulating Evgeny Morozov's essay "Why You Should Ride the Metro in Berlin" (which is really about public transit in a large portion of Europe).

The inspectors don't slow things down. (They do cause other more serious issues, but still far less than anywhere in the US.)
You should definitely stop everything and read it.
Perhaps, novices needed Darwin operating in a bare metal environment to start tinkering. It would be nice to compare Darwin and Linux in an seL4 environment as guests and measure, explore practical, theoretical performance dynamics. I'm curious to know how Darwin's memory management compares to Dragonfly.
I generally agree with the observations behind your objections, however my point is slightly different:

> When GPT-7 or whatever comes along and it has comparable defenses to a human and it can be trained like a human to resist domain-specific attacks, then we can compare the security between the two. But that's not where we are, and articles like this give people the impression that prompt injection is less serious and harder to pull off than it actually is.

My point is that talking about "prompt injection" is bad framing from the start, because it makes people think that "prompt injection" is some vulnerability class that can be patched, case by case, until it no longer is present. It's not like "SQL injection", which is a result of doing dumb things like gluing strings together without minding for the code/data difference that actually exists in formal constructs like SQL and programming languages, and just needs to be respected. You can't fix "prompt injection" by prepared statements, or by generally not doing dumb things like working in plaintext-space with things that should be worked with in AST-space.

"Prompt injection" will always happen, because you can't fundamentally separate trusted from untrusted input for LLMs, any more than you can in humans - successful attack is always a matter of making the "prompt" complex and clever enough. So we can't talk in terms of "solving" "prompt injection" - the discussion needs to be about how to live with it, the way we've learned to live with each other, built systems that mitigate the inherent exploitability of every human.
> the "banana equivalent dose" [is] "very useful in attempting to explain infinitesimal doses (and corresponding infinitesimal risks) to members of the public"
What Is Type-Level Programming?