skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
They're trying to expand towards some privacy-focused offering. I enjoy having Firefox Relay to hide my real email address when subscribing on a website. I hope they'll keep increading their paid services to become sustainable.
> Remember that every vehicle must also be insured.

The vehicles in the OP aren't in the same vehicle class as cars. For example, you aren't required to get insurance or have a license to ride a bike. These are basically just e-bikes with a passenger seat (or alternatively, electric mopeds), which may or may not require insurance based on your jurisdiction (usually maximum speed is the determining factor).
> But that isn't because of the technology, it's because all the devs writing shitty MPAs are now writing shitty SPAs. If this becomes popular, they will start writing shitty MPAs again.

I think the root cause of this is lack of will/desire to spend time on the finer details, either on the part of management who wants it out the door the second it's technically functional or on the part of devs who completely lose interest the second that there's no "fun" work left.
Articles like these are always good for the humor, at the very least. There's a reason hamburger menus are in use everywhere, and it's not because we haven't read your blog post.
I think it is articles like this one which are misleading. The Turing Machine was never “built” because it is just a class of machines, i.e. particular machines are of the Turing Machine class, Turing-complete. Because the class of machine has an infinitely long “tape”, then finite machines can be created “under” it, or in that domain. Turing literally devised a method to create machines with a specific name, a number, and compute that number. Each and every one of your computers could be formalized to have a specific number, even if extremely large. Therefore, each of your computers are Turing Machines, unless of course you can show that you can run a program that the class of Turing Machines cannot.

Edit: I think the surest example of this is in the term “binary”. When you compile a C program, you get an executable binary. Literally, you have a file of ones and zeroes. Well, that’s just an extremely large number in binary, exactly the same as the binary string “100001” being “33” in decimal.
Monoliths are not dinosaurs
Why are you shocked? Starbucks employees have formed unions and tipping is still allowed.

Wanting tipping is a signal that pay is not high enough - you see it here, with the reactions. A deeper look might reveal they could be paid more. Just like Starbucks employees.
FWIW Gmail on Android supports other mail providers too.
The Republican Party has done a far better job of weaponizing the debt issue. That’s all.
What's funny is the people who were mad about it were tea importers, not tea drinkers. British policy on tea in the US [EDIT, er, the American colonies, that is] lowered prices, a lot, which ruined the profit margins of importers/smugglers.
I didn't make any such comment and don't see that quote in the parent comments. That's the trouble with you LLMs: the hallucinations ;)
Pretty cool. I'd love to see it sorted by year of release, since the change in style over time, as new fads and technologies emerge, is a pretty interesting story to track.
> Or did they jump-start crowd-sourced open source LLM assistant work that will end up giving people ChatGPT for free on their phones

Given the computer power required behind ChatGPT isn't that unlikely at this point? Aren't they one of the few games in town with both the software and required hardware?
> massively positive ROI

This feels like a stretch considering the massive investments they've received.

Massive investments = massive growth expectations
Apples and oranges. Ruby is very, very expressive compared to Go. Go's legibility comes from the simplicity of its syntax, Ruby's legibility comes from its expressive syntax.
> Your comment essentially says - this is not a high quality submission because readers might not actually read it

I'd argue that on average, most readers won't have a good enough understanding, or read the paper far enough, to understand that the reality is closer to "it's not a breakthrough" rather than "Transformers with Unlimited Length Input".

So, I wholeheartedly welcome this type of hype-breaking leading comment.
But when googling, I, the human, am often already acting as an "agent that you trust to solve those problems for you" for some higher-level question-asker.

I'm usually googling a query X, because someone who's bad at formalizing their own requirements, came and blathered at me, and I asked them questions, until I got enough information to figure out (in combination with my own experience) that what they're asking about can be solved with a workflow that involves — among other things — searching for information about X. (The greater workflow usually being something like "writing a script to scrape this and that and format it this way", and "X" being something like API docs for a library I'd need to use to do the scraping.) Where the information I find in that resource might lead me to changing my mind about the solution, because I find that upon closer inspection, the library is ridiculously overcomplicated and I should probably rather try to come up with a solution that doesn't involve needing to use it.

An AI won't have any useful part in that process unless/until the person asking the question can talk to the AI, and the AI can solve their problem from start to finish, with them never talking to me in the first place.

Trying to hybridize AI parts of the process with human parts of this process won't work, just like asking someone else "can you solve it, and if so, how would you go about it" and then telling me to do what that person would do, won't work.

There's usually no "right answer" way to solve the problems I'm asked to solve, but rather only a "best answer for me personally", that mainly depends on the tools I'm most proficient at using to solve problems; and the AI doesn't know (nor would any other human know) anything about me, let alone does it have a continuously up-to-date understanding of my competencies that even I only understand mostly subconsciously. So it can't apply my (evolving!) proficiencies in these skills as constraints when deciding how (or if!) a given problem can be solved by me.
they just coded a step functions monolith...
It would be a mistake to rule out Meta in the AI race, all because of the current LLM chatbot hype, the same reason why almost no-one bought its stock when it was send to less than $90. Now it is up over 110%.

You wouldn't get a flurry of open source LLMs everywhere had it not been for LLaMa by Meta.
Sad. I pirate 100% of my books. After i read them i purchase the physical copy. I buy more books when i can try them first! Its also enjoyable to have it open on your computer for when you have a moment.
Crypto miners are computers.
> I don't think I support any changes

> that would help much here.

You don't support changes that would help improve copyright policy?
I don't really use ChatGPT but regardless, it seems strange to evaluate the merits of a JS library based upon ChatGPT's prowess with it. Your time would be far better spent, I think, by reviewing the docs yourself and building a basic site.
I could set up pihole on my local laptop. And on my wife's laptop. And on my kids' phones. And on my work laptop. And...

Or I could just set it up on one tiny server (doesn't have to be a pi, but I happen to have one that isn't doing anything else), point my gateway at it for DNS, and give my whole family + any VPN connections filtering for free.
To push this point a little further: in Rust when there's not a clean way to prevent memory unsafety (or when you haven't requested to), it aborts the process. Out of array indexing, stack overflows, etc.
He's big on printouts for emergency backup.

OSC was, too, I think, after he lost a bunch of writing.

The refrigerator is an interesting location. It almost brings to mind the symbolism of the act/location itself, in the "why not just a cool fire safe, I mean look at your bulging wallet" sense. The guy had stainless steel interior doors custom designed for his home library.

So, using a fridge seems kinda irrational in various ways. Maybe unless you're a big _Crystal Skull_ fan.

I wonder what other authors have done along these lines. Do they save only the current manuscript, some subset of papers representing achievements, or whole pallets, etc. I mean, certainly a pallet is practically nothing, if it provides peace of mind, backs up lots of good stuff, and takes up less floor space than the golf cart?

I printed out my life timeline with major events and things once, just to have something of a history around in case of a fire, or fire and my screaming death. It felt absolutely ridiculous to print it out and store it, and I really hoped nobody found the document while cleaning out the fire-proof thingy.

But while packing it away, I got to wondering about a reasonable upper bound of storage for people who write a lot of good stuff, published or not.
10,000 trips in electric vehicles.

Self-driving EV’s in all major cities would be a big win for the climate and the air quality.
You can. You just sell it to another company that wants to start from OpenAI/ChatGPT instead of starting from scratch.
What are you talking about? $META's strategy that has only been in play for 18 months?

Or are you talking about the grifter-laden crypto/NFT-adjacent "metaverses"?

Or are you talking about the ridiculously successful Second Life, Roblox, or MMORPGs like World of Warcraft?
7-Eleven-Bluetooth-Smart-Cup-Jailbreak
What if they threatened your family? Your kids? What if you had to move to another state or another country? Could you ever have normal friends again? Move around the world without a bodyguard and bulletproof windows?

Large sums of money don't give you security in your current lifestyle. They completely and totally change your existence in permanent and often negative ways.
OpenAi is peaking though. We’ll see how not having a problem to solve and a technology that’s easily reproduced plays out in the long run.
This is a cool use case. Have you looked into the legal implications of this at all?
This is comparing Gflops which is a size normalized measurement. With N=M=K=1024, I get 127.5 Gflops on my laptop (intel i7-1185G7)
It’s time to stop penalizing us then. Fix the damn tax code
Sometimes it feels it’s already becoming like that.

There always is a mob of some kind trying to censor something.

I won’t make examples for obvious reasons.
> When pixels aren't scarce, [𐄒] is a menu but strictly worse.

The character in the square brackets is "AEGEAN NUMBER THIRTY", U+010112. It doesn't display in my browser (Chrome on Windows). Oddly, it does display in my xterm, though that's likely to depend on which fonts you're using. (It's three horizontal lines.)

I presume most hamburger menus use an image.
> felt they had to switch to Angular about the same time and they never regained their footing in the Angular age

And in this case what actually happened is exactly what we had expected would happen: tons of badly-written Angular apps than need to be maintained for foreseeable future because at this point nobody wants to rewrite them so they become Frankensteins nobody wants to deal with.
Sometimes I’ll revisit code I’ve written and think “wow, so dumb, I could’ve just done xyz” only to implement my obviously far-superior method and recall that I’ve already learned this lesson and there was a good reason I hadn’t done xyz the first time.
No, my pedantry is not misplaced. Let me again repeat: we know the correlate is confounded. This isn't a hypothetical. It is a known fact established from many different methods triangulating the same result: the naive SCZ/marijuana correlation is confounded, and quite substantially so. Their entire analysis is predicated on an assumption which is substantially false. And I agree they know what they're doing, which is why it makes me so angry to read their paper and I am criticizing them personally and not simply raising a technical point: they know they are peddling bullshit, and at best, they want to believe, and at worst, they are cynically manufacturing scary media-friendly results they know will be cited more than the results they should have published, 'the SCZ/marijuana relationship was attenuated by over half when we ran the standard within-family analysis on the population register like we should have, yet again demonstrating how confounded it is and how hard it will be to infer any causality, sad to say for those looking for a quick hit of scary controversy and reason to ban marijuana'.

The authors themselves cover up and ignore the many past results demonstrating confounding, fail to do better when they so easily could have, and then have the sheer unmitigated chutzpah, the incredible gal, to just say "assuming causality" right in the abstract to immediately start advertising huge inflammatory claims like "one-fifth of cases of schizophrenia among young males might be prevented by averting CUD." (again, from the abstract, and repeated throughout). Yes, and 'assuming the moon is made of cheese', we could save a ton on moon base supplies and might avert one-fifth of moon base costs by mining the cheese... But I don't advise going to the media about your exciting new research about how NASA could trim its budgets.

I don't blame the people reporting on this for getting it wrong, when the authors spin it so hard that a CD would explode.
I pay 50 cents per sock. At the rate they get lost this is more economical in my experience. At three dollars a sock you need to get 6x the uses to break even and even those are considered cheap socks by some.
Or the complaints about getting paychecks for $5 after working a week even though all that means is that their tips were so high that the entire base wage went towards tax withholding. Service industry workers lie and they lie a lot. Their tune would change very quickly if there was federal legislation outlawing tipping in lieu of higher minimum wage.
I wouldn't put smartwatches and smartphones in the same category. I have a smartwatch but my day-to-day life wouldn't change in a material way if I didn't.
so quiet here...
To put this into perspective US manufacturing used 4.69e12[3] Kwh where crypto mining used 0.05e12 Kwh.

Even more interesting is the comparison to the US dollar which ostensibly is backed by all US Energy consumption less maybe residential consumption which was 2.86e13[2] kwh less residential at ~21% = 2.28e13. Now let's compare the USD energy consumption to bitcoin which was 1.29e11[1] kwh in 2021 which would make Bitcoin ~200x more efficient than the USD in terms of energy required to secure.

[1]: Bitcoin Energy usage 2021 - https://rmi.org/cryptocurrencys-energy-consumption-problem/#....

[2]: US energy usage 2021 - https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/

[3]: US Manufacturing energy usage 2021 - https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/use-of-energy/industry.p....
All the computers? Aren't smart TVs actually dumb home theater PCs these days? Don't cars have several computers in them these days? Watches and smartphones?

I thought the stat about how crypto is using nearly as much power as lighting more meaningful and surprising.
Sounds like it's time to stop hyperventilating over the biggest nuclear non-disaster in American history and build more reactors.

Fun fact: in 1962, the Atomic Energy Commission projected there would be almost ten times as much available energy in 2060 as there was at the time. Today, I understand we consume just about two times as much. Anyone think we'll get across that finish line thirty years from now with the status quo?
They can release it as cranial implant for all that matters, doesn't mean it's going to be a success.
Well, the Footer Sitemap maybe was not that good idea, but why not consider the Header Sitemap instead? HackerNews menu looks good to me.

If the Sitemap structure is too large to be in the Header, maybe it's a good marker to think about reducing the amount of information on your website in general.

Also, I like to have sidebar menus on the left or right of the page for quick navigation, and when I see the webpage on my home widescreen desktop monitor, or maybe even notebook. But I don't like clicking Hamburger buttons each time to expand them. So, personally, I'm fine to always have such menus stay expanded on Desktops, and to be completely absent on mobiles. If I use the mobile device, I'm acknowledged that it's functions are limited by design.
It does take a lot of resources to protect a cryptocurrency from attack by corporations and nation states. Typically the resources have to be significant enough that those entities don't find it a worthy trade to perform the attack. That's what proof of work does. It performs the same role as a standing army except it does it non-violently. And that's amazing. Well worth it.
Ah!

(That expands to {⍵[⍋⍵]}¨words to sort each word, then use that on the left of Key ⌸ with words on the right, and Key feeds the count and indices into the custom function which is ⊢∘⊂ that takes the indicies with right-tack ⊢ and throws away the count, and encloses them with ⊂. That gives nested arrays of words which sort the same, including invididual words that sort like nothing else. Then (⊢⊢⍤/⍨1<≢¨) added to the left is counting the words in each nesting and filtering out the single ones, and I think ⊢⍤/ is a bodge to use compress in a train without it being misread as reduce when both use the same symbol / ?)
> In my OSS and blogging activities, I am mostly focused on the same concepts: Ruby intuitions and lucid code...the main question is always “how the language leads us to express this in the clearest way possible.”

Unfortunately this article itself needs some editing. I stuck through to the end, but it was not enjoyably lucid.

> I honestly tried to perform it alongside the reader: since the early drafts of the article, my expectations were that I’d come up with some coherent idea about a possible Ruby typing syntax. My attempt resulted in a deeper understanding of the level of design complexity making it hardly achievable.

Plus one for trying it out, I guess. The temptation is there, because Ruby is so flexible. "It works so well for DSLs, maybe it can be expanded to include typing!" The trouble is, the added syntax rules to support typing will never stay in the sweet spot between "enough in the foreground to assist coding" and "enough in the background to not distract from the coding flow." You either live without it, as in Ruby, or learn to mentally parse over it, as in other languages with the Func(String s, Int i) syntax.

For myself, I'm fine with the typing being in a separate .rbs file. Especially if my IDE supports it well.
To be fair, the only reason they exist in otherwise minimalist apps is because they need to be there for crawlability. A hamburger menu that isn't visible until someone clicks on it is an SEO problem that is (sadly) easily mitigated with a footer, which has bled into the problem of the big footer, wherein people hamfistedly use the footer to solve the entirety of their crosslinking strategies, which (at least for me, but maybe I'm the weirdo) makes it impossible to scroll to the bottom of the page to get to the meat of it without having to usually scroll almost all the way back up.
Show HN: ColdMessageGPT – GPT Based Personalized Message Writer
I had written a code contracts library for Ruby about 10 years ago [1]. I stopped working on it, mainly because it only provided runtime type checking, and I wanted static type checking. Nowadays my main language is typescript. I miss ruby, but can't give up the static typing that typescript provides. I really wish Ruby had a type system with the same level of support. VSCode has phenomenal TS support, and there's a community adding types to projects [2]. This is something I'd like for Ruby also.

> An integral part of this informality is relying on Matz’s taste and intuition for everything that affects the language’s core.

I think a more defined process would mean a better future for Ruby and Ruby developers.

- [1] https://github.com/egonschiele/contracts.ruby

- [2] https://github.com/DefinitelyTyped/DefinitelyTyped
It's actually very easy for rustc to raise a compiler error if you have recursion inside an async fn. It naturally falls out from the way async is implemented, because the resulting Future type would be infinitely sized.

An `async fn` essentially compiles to a state machine where each `.await` is a transition to another state, and local variables and the future being `.await`'d are data of that state. If a future were to `.await` itself, that state data would contain the future itself, which means the future would need to be larger than itself, which is impossible. Similarly corecursion would simultaneously require that `FooFuture` contain `BarFuture and `BarFuture` contain `FooFuture`, which would require both to be bigger than the other, which is again impossible.

The solution to the infinite size problem is to wrap the future in `Box<dyn Future>` before `.await`ing it, so that the state data is a fixed size (`Box<dyn Trait>` is always two pointers long, a data pointer and a vtable pointer). Since TFA was using the `#[async_trait]` macro which changes the function to return `Box<dyn Future>` (as the stable alternative to async-fn-in-traits / TAIT), it ended up suppressing the recursion error too.
I don't know about that, we've been trying to solve natural language as an interface to computing for like 30 years or more.

OpenAI is just the first case where this is so good it's viable and lo and behold it took off like fire.

That is a well defined established problem that anyone paying attention said there was money in.

I was trying to get seq2seq networks to take english and generate API calls all the way back in 2016.
I've worked in multiple systems written in python, ruby, and JS where an untyped dict|hash|object is passed from function to function. In each function, keys are read; keys are written; keys are deleted. Tracking params were actually called by each function was a nightmare.

If this "magic" dictionary was sourced from a schemeless api or database, it was impossible to figure out the schema of this dict without running the code in production.
If the “core problem” with something is that they’re mildly inconvenient for a tiny fraction of users that’s not really a compelling argument of there being a problem at all.
Source Allies | Software Development Consultancy | Hybrid or Remote
Ideal Candidate:
-At least 3-4 years of industry experience working with Java, C#, AWS, Azure
-Experience of extreme programming best practices: Pair Programming, Test Driven Development, Agile Methodologies
-The desire to work in multiple stacks/technologies as new projects come up.
-Ability to be self-directed
What We Offer:
-Competitive Salary and Benefits
-Health, Dental, Vision, Life, Disability, Maternity and Paternity Leave
-401K match with immediate vesting
-Security: We've never had a layoff
-Growth: When you're surrounded by talented developers, you have the resources to grow your skills.
https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/view/3581080661/
Why would anyone choose to create and use their own unreliable calculator instead of what came installed?
Just dropping my 2ç here. A lot of the debate i read on this article verges on the subject of piracy as in copyrights infringement. Let's not forget that these sites also carry an enormous amount of old, uncopyrighted, obscure, impossible to find texts that would otherwise be lost forever and that is a service that they pay for and ultimately benefits all of humanity.
I don't know about sorting by popularity, but there is an effort to archive it all spread across a bunch of torrents:

http://freeread.org/torrents/

https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/ed9byj/library...