skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> You're left with things like plane crashes, which have to be minimized even if they're already rare.

I know we're all trying to be moderate here, but I'm not very good at that:

1) It is irrational. The cost-benefits of aircraft safety make no sense. Planes are held to a standard that we don't hold buses and trains to. We should strive to make rational decisions as a matter of policy.

2) There is no reason to think the US regulators are any good at what they are doing. As the thread root comment points out, the incentives are terrible. US industrial policy over my life time has consistently led to Asian growth and US stagnation in ways that were predictable. The US has banned most of the avenues that it could grow by, and coincidentally growth has largely stopped. Very similar story in Europe too, big focus on banning stuff (plus a bit of redistribution) and small focus on how to achieve more prosperity.

The US is dedicating the lives of countless smart people to taking a thing that was going to fly through the air like a bird and ... not changing the outcome much. They could have been doing something else that was more useful, like competing with China for telecoms leadership.

I don't think the evidence is there for this "having" to be minimised. The big picture looks a lot like people are behaving emotionally, that is sometimes leading to irrational decisions and those irrational decisions have added up to cause real harm. People should be more accepting of other people taking reasonable risk.
Long running trends unrelated to the pandemic:

Off-shoring, near-shoring. Where some of your colleagues are permanently virtual-only.

Cross-company collaboration. Specifically a lot of work involving dealing with external parties like vendors. Due to companies outsourcing many of their processes and systems.

Family situations becoming more complicated when couples both work, thus many work schedules no longer being a simple 5x8.

Commoditization of digital collaboration: email, chat, teams/zoom calls.

The rise of multi-tasking: many people are pulled in 20 directions.

When you add up all these effects, a return to the office is not a return to glory. I loved the way I worked 20 years ago: small group of people, local only, focused work, deep relations with co-workers, fun, spontaneous ideation, etc.

When I "return to the office" now, I see people with headsets in calls. Roughly 4-6 hours per day, and then there is messaging and email still. Working together barely seems to happen for the simple reason that actual work seems to barely happen. It's just calls and chat now. A productivity pandemic and I'm shocked how leaders do not intervene at all.

Maybe they can't. Maybe our world and work has simply become too complex.
"Not all counsel is willing to file an appeal as it tends to upset the local judge the lawyer goes before regularly when they 'go above the judges head' to the appeals court."

So you refer the client to an attorney that specializes in appeals? I don't see this as a real issue.
Agreed. Does anyone have any insight as to why companies fail to do this? Naively as a non-{marketing,business development,COO} guy, I feel like the cost to keep delivering those services ought to pale in comparison to the value of having even a tiny number of those customers go into a forum like HN or Reddit and say "we've been there since the early days and we're really happy".

Sure, it's inherently a tech/financial/support load to maintain a special category of customer, but I don't see it as fundamentally any different from a successful company managing the discontinuation of a popular product. You cut off new customers, let attrition take its course for the existing ones, and take your lumps from any high-value/high-touch customers who drag their feet on moving to the new thing. It's work, but so is climbing a ladder. Do you want to elevate the company or not?
Some context: NASA missions are built and funded for finite “prime” missions. After that they undergo external “senior reviews” every two years. All operating missions are stack ranked against each other based on their scientific productivity. Low performing missions are turned off and the money used for other things. In this case it’s not being turned off but reprioritized.

This just reads to me like Alan Stern is salty that they got a low ranking and his mission is being taken from him. But that’s why the senior review asks an external panel and not the PIs!
Maybe this is related to the fact that Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom was leaked before launch and emulators are already being worked on to make it run properly.
Right now, changing accounts is implemented by the old server sending a Move activity which tells all your followers where your new account is. This doesn't handle moving any content.

But, there's nothing fundamental about ActivityPub that prevents this: https://shadowfacts.net/2023/activitypub-portable-identity/. You can absolutely have posts identified by your identity (read: domain) rather than where they're hosted. Complete and seamless moves are possible, Mastodon just doesn't implement them.
Arizona is a shall-issue State.
$1,299.00 ... wow.

Pinephone was a good step in the right direction but I am not a fan of either of the cameras on it or Allwinner CPUs. Librem 5 is using an NXP i.MX 8M with better cameras but the price point is a tough sell.
is this comment generated by an LLM?
I spouted this line for a long time, but was recently corrected by commenters pointing out that 2-3 occupancy electric cars actually beat the vast majority of subways and trains in practice, because you don't need to accelerate and decelerate every passenger at every possible stop. Cars are designed to be remarkably aerodynamically efficient, especially compared to motorcycles or bicycles, and an electric battery+motor is much more efficient at producing power than your muscles.

Delivering on this requires some sort of "Uber Pool" like algorithm to put a few people together in a vehicle, but doesn't require large busses.
I'm pretty skeptical of this approach. There are generally two reasons to offer free tiers:

1- hope users will upgrade to paid plans

2- hope free users will spread name recognition through word of mouth to people who will pay

Generally speaking, "free tier" users are the worst- they demand more from support and expect to give nothing in return. Very few transition to paid users.

What happens if you give your free tier users a degraded experience compared to paid users? They'll complain that your service is slow, loses their data and is a terrible product. You're shooting yourself in the foot, because you'll get no fewer upgrades and a terrible reputation.

Even if you try to communicate that the free tier doesn't have the stability or performance of a paid plan, if I experience the free tier and am unhappy with it, you've raised the bar considerably for meeting my expectations for the paid plan. I'm more likely to pay for a competitor than pay for your product in the hopes that it'll improve.
It's puzzling how human intervention isn't used to prevent such a simple but unrealistic correlation.
Is there ground for legal action, particularly if you depended on this? It seems like a contract of sorts, and if any of their sales people ever assured anyone it was "free forever" I think that becomes a verbal contact.
I imagine there are not many video companies running on AWS.

It's really only Amazon themselves that can afford to do so.
Quite a while ago now, they used to have some crazy international journalism in war zones. It was almost irresponsible toward their journalists, but the coverage was pretty incredible.

That didn’t last very long though, and I haven’t thought about them in years.
> There's nobody left to prosecute, they're all dead. Ancestral sin is not part of the justice system.

Perhaps, but the government can still do something: apologize for the original injustice, provide some compensation, and try to prevent similar occurrences in the future.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Liberties_Act_of_1988
I read only the beginning but this appears very exaggerated. New York made up some specific laws about work scheduling and then is trying to fine chipotle for violating them. For example you have to pay someone extra if they have a closing shift one day and an opening one the next. Anyone who's worked a minimum wage job like this knows you're just happy to have the hours, and adding laws like this just means you get less. Except for a militant few, this doesn't result in better outcomes for workers.

Maybe there's some more egregious stuff later.
Surely this is satire. Machine-generated satire?

Insisting on comparing open source options to the state of the art leader is white supremacy? Why not sexism and transphobia too?
One of those will be chronological. That's still an algorithm...
The Ruby example you gave looks good for these simple cases. I feel like this could break down for more complex cases though. What about generic types? Or what Sorbet calls Shapes (e.g. the input type is a hash with 2 specific keys -- stuff like this is typical with JSON ingestion in TS).
I feel like if its 2023 and you're still gullible enough to fall for "free forever" bait and switch offerings from cloud providers then we need to have a frank discussion on neofeudalist late stage capitalism where a mainstay of its many successes in the digital realm is to literally trick you into consuming a product and pretend like it never happened.
(not the op so this is jme...)

> Do you now have a BFF for each client type? Who owns it then ? Don't you now need more fullstacks ?

everyone has an opinion, but ime ideally you'd have 1 bff for all clients from the start

> there's confusion. Now you have 2 sets of contracts (API-BFF, BFF-clientIOS, BFF-clientAndroid, ...). You now have more human synchronization overhead. Changes take longer to percolate throughout. More scope for inconsistencies.

yep, i have literally experienced the chaos this can cause, including the endless buzywork to unify them later (usually its unify behind the web/html bff which breaks all kinds of frontend assumptions)

> Isn't is better to have the API team own the single source of ownership ?

it depends on what it means 'api team'... but ideally bff has its ownership separate from 'backend' wether that is in 'api team' or outside i think is less important ime

but... ideally this separation of ownership (backend backend, front end for backend) allows each to focus on the domain better without mixing up say localization in the lower level api's et

iow having a bff is sort of like having the view model as a server... that way multiple clients can be dead simple and just map the bff response to a ui and be done with it

(thats the ideal as i understand it anyways)
We from Zulip recommend using Zulip
You're mixing two distinct use cases here: entertainment and staying up to date on your friends' lives. I think these should be served by different services because they're so fundamentally different.
this argument is long past its prime. hamburger menus are here. they have been here. and they aren’t going anywhere. could it have been better? probably. could it be still? maybe. will it change today? no.
I've been blown away by how much better this feels as a search interface. No longer trying to guess the best search terms or trying to narrow down searches. Just ask a question in English, and get a summarized answer with citations to let you evaluate the information. Like an actual personal assistant, and very transparent showing things like the search terms being used.
you are absolutely, 100% right here, and whataboutism is the first one, not the second one

in this case, the goal was to stop people from talking about China's actions and instead deflect to someone else's actions

that might explain why Whataboutism, invented by russian propagandists, is explicitly described as a subtype of the tu quoque logical fallacy:

"From a logical and argumentative point of view it is considered a variant of the tu-quoque pattern (Latin 'you too', term for a counter-accusation), which is a subtype of the ad-hominem argument."[0]

[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
Have there been any updates on the lawsuit since this article was published?
>> the main original value proposition of EC2

Which is?

I don't really buy the idea that companies can't afford to run their own computers due to hardware and infrastructure costs, and that clouds don't require hiring or specialised technical experts.
I'd suggest reading the recently leaked Google memo for some context about why open source LLMs are important (and are disruptive from the perspective of a large company). It gives a good insight into why closed source models like GPT-4 might be overtaken by open source even if they can't directly compete at the moment.

Typical reasons are highly specialised models that are cheap and fast to train, lack of censorship, lack of API and usage restrictions, lightweight variants and so on. The reason there's a lot of excitement right now is indeed how fast the space is moving.

https://www.semianalysis.com/p/google-we-have-no-moat-and-ne...
I mean that’s upselling 101.
Federal Reserve strikes again!
Shhh we are supposed to be mad and cynical in this thread.
I've always found Koontz books enjoyable, if mostly forgettable. He never really escaped Stephen King's shadow, but he's thrived there magnificently.
>"we have somehow allowed prison to become a for-profit institution."

I personally do not see much difference. Holding person in prison for profit is a result of corporations buying government. It is as political as it gets. Those people in my view are just as bad scam of the Earth their political counterparts in China.
> In fact, having a performant, smaller model is a game changer for a lot of applications that don't require the massive scale of the larger models.

So we are all in agreement here that a 3B model is fundamentally inferior to a larger model?

Not that it doesn’t have uses; not that there’s no value in research in small models.

Just, honestly, that these smaller models don’t have the capabilities of the larger models.

It’d be good to be a direct acknowledgment of that, because it seems like you’re going out of your way to promote the “it’s fine to have a small model”; and it is, roughly speaking. Parameter count isn’t everything. Small models are accessible, you can easily fine tune them. They are interesting.

…but, they are not as good, as far as I’m aware, in terms of output, in terms of general purpose function, as larger models.
IANAL, but: 'If only one party offers consideration, the agreement is a "bare promise" and is unenforceable.' [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consideration_in_English_law
So I tried RedPajama-INCITE-Instruct-7B-v0.1 and the AutoModelForCausalLM.from_pretrained(...) call takes two minutes every time. My GPU is big enough. I don't know why it's so slow. I feel like it's somehow precomputing stuff that can be used across queries, and I had hoped that this stuff would have already been precomputed on the disk and I could just load it up.
What does this have to do with mysterious vanishing?

The "media" includes Fox News - and it is, in audience terms, the most mainstream of them. It had absolutely glowing coverage of Trump throughout its presidency and continues heavy coverage of Biden's son. The "media" includes the Falun-affiliated Epoch Times, which is still widely available and continues along the same lines. The "media" includes Twitter, which its owner directed to get his own tweets significantly more audience.

None of these people can even remotely claim to have been vanished by the government.
Magnetic mirror bounces back enough particles so that chain reaction can happen. And that mirror needs electricity -- so when bad things happen, it ceases to be nuke plant automagically.

Regular Nuke Plant works the opposite -- the nukular explosion happens all the time and you just try to slow it down.
The most nuanced summarizing comment I found in that thread is now on page 2, three levels down: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35812954

> this [cost saving] is for a video quality monitoring system, that needs to consume and process video. Generally a compute and time intensive task. Something not always suited to severless, particularly when it’s not easy to parallelise.

> The task at hand doesn’t sound ideally suited to serverless, but the existence of the post shows that’s not readily obvious. So it’s a valuable post to explain a scenario where a few big machines is the best call.

> But the sensationalism of the headline, would suggest all serverless is expensive and wasteful.

So this is not the streaming service itself, but a quality monitoring system of said service.

I personally regard this whole new-style shared hosting thing with some skepticism, it sounds like traditional shared hosting but sold as a new hype that needs to cost more than a private server, but this comment gets me actually interested in reading the article and how it's not just obvious that it's cheaper not to use "AWS serverless".
How can someone get into using these models? How does ‘tuning’ work? How might I go about using these models for doing things like say summarizing news articles or video transcriptions? When someone tunes a model for a task, what exactly are they doing and how does this ‘change’ the model?
The author speaks to this in the blog post too.

> The “this can be typed, this can’t” approach would most probably lead to a schism unseen before: splitting of the community into those who prefer type-annotated code and consequently became reluctant to any of the most expressive and dynamic features—and everyone else.

I'm an active user of Sorbet at work, and I can see this happening even with my own opinions. On the one hand, I don't want to see the Ruby ecosystem fractured more, but on the other, I've seen clear benefits from helping add static typing to my team's project. I didn't really know much about Steep at the time, so I pushed for Sorbet. My first preference was actually Ruby 3 types, but when I looked into implementing them, I found they provided much weaker guarantees than Sorbet. The tooling also wasn't there.
There's no consideration though.
You want a citation that the strongest relationships that people make are with their family? Ridiculous.
I am not sure why anyone is surprised or this should even be news. I don’t have a speck of business education and I can see this is no way sustainable. “Free forever” is not a sound business strategy (shock emoji). If it is free, like Youtube, Reddit, Zulip, than expects them to profit in some other way. If you can’t explain how a business profit you shouldn’t use it because:

1. Its not going to last.

2. They are doing something shady.

Apply this to any companies, even your family’s.
What isn't mentioned is how there are intrinsic security issues with server side templating, including htx. Part of the reason react won is it has the best track record for client security with complex client apps when its used and configured and deployed correctly. With server side templating its easy to fall victim to injection attacks.
Thank you for so eloquently conveying that. When a broader set of the world's population understands this, I hope for all our sake that we manage to cooperate effectively enough to address some of those realities you mention.
TikTok tracked users who watched gay content, prompting employee complaints
Why learn something noone is using.
Netflix is one of AWS largest customers.
You have no issue with American citizens getting 14 days to exercise their right to appeal? What other Constitutional rights (the right to access the courts is a Constitutional right) have expiration dates?

You have no issue with American citizens having lessor rights than Federal officials? You think 14 days is fine, then why should the Federal Government be granted 30? If the government felt 30 days was needed, why limit lowly citizens to 14 days?

What other rights are you ok if we remove long standing precedent and process protections and reduce access to to a 2 week limit in the name of bureaucratic expediency?
I guess you are right about how they treat Bulgarians. But one, France is still one of the most racist country in the west. Especially for north-africans (even if I'm also Canadian). The US is much more inclusive and less racist, and even fundamentalist christians are usually pretty nice even when I say I'm Muslim. Much more of a live and let live attitude compared to France
This is an ad for Zulip
Something that made me a bit sad about LLMs like ChatGPT, is that they're primarily trained on free/open data sets such as Reddit, Wikipedia, and ArXiV.

Instead, we could be training LLMs on published scientific papers, textbooks, and high-quality reference materials, but we can't, because not only are they behind paywalls, they're behind thousands of individual paywalls.
Maybe I’m wrong, but having it classified as a planetary mission probably funds their positions and a lot of continued research (even if the research is based on data already taken). Reclassifying the mission probably means the scientists need to look for new sources of funding. So I get that they’re not happy, but it sounds like a rational decision on NASA’s part.
White House says tech giants have ‘moral’ duty on potential AI dangers
Thank you. We are nowhere close to the Pareto-efficient frontier for risk reduction. We could be safer, while sacrificing much less prosperity for that safety, if things were structured better.

(The optimal number of plane crashes is not zero, as the saying goes, and it’s probably more than we have now.)
My understanding is that NYC

* has smaller time requirements for sunlight; the planning requirements state that an area should have 4-6 hours of sunlight a day, whereas SF looks at if it gets any worse over any time period

* NYC only protects specific kinds of park uses for sunlight, so like sunlight is not material for a basketball court, for example.
Consideration doesn't have to be money. Facebook doesn't charge you money and nevertheless has enforceable contracts.
Reminds me of the idea of marginal advantage:

> one cannot, and should not, try to “win big.” In a competitive setting, the strong player knows that his best opponents are unlikely to make many exploitable mistakes. As a result, the strong player knows that he must be content to play with just the slightest edge, an edge which is the equivalent to the marginal advantage

By Sean "day[9]" Plott, Starcraft progamer and commentator (2007):

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=645...

Past:

Game theory article from a professional Starcraft player/caster. - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2960973 - Sept 2011 (82 comments)
Email is federated no? Can't really email you if gmail bans you or goes under, or your domain is taken down somehow. But maybe with a decentralized email it's possible to email pubkeys directly.
> Even Rust started as a "amateur" language until it was picked up by Rust

?!?
one thing i miss from the "olden" days is the fun we used to have coming up with unassisted anagram discoveries and sharing them with each other. i think my personal favourite was antipyretic/pertinacity
I’m trying to imagine a store that has aisles without other aisles you’d block if you abandon your cart to go down the aisle. Or shopping aisles that aren’t wide enough to support cart action.

A more reasonable realization is if you live near a grocery store you can buy your OWN shopping cart and never have to bother bagging.
Funny I had never heard about PorcFest until just now and drove by Roger's Campground less than an hour ago.
This is good advice. I don't understand how venmo floats, and it has been a long while so...