skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>If inclusivity is complete blindness towards religion in front of the law, then you get France style secularism which BJP pushes.

If I could give you points for humor, I would.
The tech industry seems to have a very severe, very deep, very wide disconnect with common men about what exactly computers and the software that run on them are.

Ask a techie and they'll probably say it's something to be maintained and updated, to be replaced on a given lifecycle because new things demand it, that it's an achievement of technology or something. A computer to the tech industry is the end to a means.

Ask a common man and they'll probably say it's a tool to get stuff done. That 'puter in the corner working happily for the past 50 years? It's great, gets the work done and puts food on the table at night like any other tool (also 50 years old) on their 50 years old workbench. A computer to common men is a means to an end.

I hope some day the tech industry comes to terms with this disconnect. The users would absolutely be better off for it.
Thanks for your question. Curiosity is first step towards knowledge. I wish I was eloquent enough to put decades of history in few words. Best I can do is point you towards this book https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/57313237-sanghi-who-neve.... Note, anything even remotely exposing the issue will be immediately tagged as nationalist, BJP, RSS, Modi etc. The book only is about personal experience of one media person, and doesnt dig deeper into what brought media into this state. It can be starting point and you can follow the references further.
Terms wars. I'm glad we don't have to say 'GNU Linux' anymore.
What have you done for me?

I already send much more than 25% of my annual expenses for the privilege of using the US's platform. I don't even use most of the features but I can't seem to opt out of paying this commission. What gives?
Why insect are so erratic around artificial lights
Imitation -> emulation -> duplication -> revolution is a very common pattern in nature, society, and business. Aka “fake it til you make it”.

Think of business / artistic / cultural leaders nurturing protégés despite not totally understanding why they’re successful.

Of course those protégés have agency and drive, so maybe not a perfect analogy. But I’m going to stand by the point intuitively even if a better example escapes me.
My university had a hard rule on if your code didn’t compile you got a 0. So yes, but like I said they do have office hours, ACM help, etc.
>And all the discussion I can find online say breaking a contract doesn't fall under the definition of "illegal".

IIUC, breaking a contract is a civil tort[0]:

A tort is an act or omission that gives rise to injury or harm to another and
amounts to a civil wrong for which courts impose liability. In the context of
torts, "injury" describes the invasion of any legal right, whereas "harm"
describes a loss or detriment in fact that an individual suffers.1

And torts (again, IIUC) are not the breaking of a legal code, and as such cannot be illegal, as they break no laws.

Something illegal is dealt with in a criminal court (yes, there are administrative courts in various places that handle minor infractions, but those are governed under the relevant legal code and are adjudicated as such.

Civil torts are not contained within any legal code, and as such cannot be illegal. That said, there are some harms that may also rise to the level of criminality (e.g., fraud), which may also have a civil tort associated with them.

But breach of contract by itself is just breaking the rules[1] agreed upon by the parties to a contract.

[0] https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/tort

[1] https://kids.britannica.com/kids/article/rules-and-laws/6286...
> Are you OK with the developers of LLMs capturing the most value of every incremental piece of content created by humans in perpetuity?

If it helps humanity as a whole, sure. Artificial gate-keeping based on economic factors such as people being able to keep their $80k jobs is not justifiable to me to stop technological progress; one could have said the exact same thing centuries ago with the advent of any number of inventions.
Can an AI build a fighter jet?
For all the dangerous qualities of classic POSIX/SysV locks, they're in service of one key characteristic[1]: only a single process can hold a lock, which means you can easily identify and communicate with the lock-holding process, such as by querying for and sending a signal to the PID (ignoring NFS, which came along later). With BSD descriptor locks, multiple processes can and often invariably do hold the lock, by holding dup'd references to the same open file table entry.

[1] Maybe this could have been achieved with better semantics, but my guess is the semantics follow from a very straight-forward implementation given the classic 3-level Unix file model of per-process descriptor tables, global open file table, and global open inode table, where you just hang the lock index off of the global open inode table, without any back referencing to the higher-level tables, notwithstanding recording of the lock owner PID. SysV mandatory locking perhaps also figured into this design and the semantics.
> Some people's priorities are no surgery unless absolutely necessary.

which is a good general rule to go by - surgery is not without dangers.

The doctor's role, imho, is to firstly explain all of the available options (pros, cons, etc).

Once the patient understands all of the options, the doctor can recommend one of them, and explain why the option is good. The patient needs to evaluate the other options as well, and think about whether the doctor's recommendation is sound, and what assumptions they might've made (may be unknowingly).

The patient is not, and should not be, a passive party to medical treatment.
Yes, or put a bit more elegantly, 'The cosmos is within us. We are made of star-stuff. We are a way for the universe to know itself.' — Carl Sagan
> continues to not go anywhere

Just like Bronze
Hmm.. I take that to mean it’s serving your needs directly now, and getting a pi to do those specific tasks would be more effort than it’s worth. But it’s a bridge too far, sir, to say a 200 LX is more capable than a Pi. ;) I bet one could create a replica 200 LX with a Pi zero with more features, but one could not replicate the Pi with a 200 LX. I know, I know, POC||GTFO, but I think it’s a good way to think about it.
IMO this is akin to how scientists developed thermodynamics to comprehend steam engines. Except now, AI could be on the forefront of forming conjectures and explanatory theories!
I certainly don’t blame professors for doing that - partial points are difficult. But you probably know students are asking for help from other students on how to get things to compile.
Oh? And what section of title 17 does that ostensible distinction implicate?
I know families in Tonga and Vietnam that have generators due to the instability of local power.

I think some countries do have more backups as they have more outages. They just have to be in the range where some can afford the backups.
Stallman puts it well

>> Why do people misunderstand it that way? Because that is the natural meaning of the words “open source.” But the concept for which the open source advocates sought another name was a variant of that of free software.

>> Since the obvious meaning for “open source” is not the meaning that its advocates intend, the result is that most people misunderstand the term.

> It’s about honesty and humility

Good faith arguments recognize this obvious meaning. I would not buy it if anyone claimed that any other definition was an obvious conclusion from the term "Open Source Software." But as you're talking about the modern world, I find that this kind of terminology and reaction is quite common. I'm not sure why, but it we see it in a lot of political sayings and these just lead to arguments. You're right, we need to have a little honest and humility and recognize that if you need a paragraph to explain a 2-5 word slogan that it isn't an obvious interpretation.

(I've advocated for abandoning some terms in favor of others and the pushback is not on proposed alternative terminology but rather someone giving me a lecture on the original phrasing and how I don't understand it. That's unproductive, as we see similar events in other comments below).
When the tipping point arrives, it will be sudden and unexpected. There's a way these things happen- first very slowly, then all at once.
I can also recommend Cortázar's "The Southern Thruway" (La autopista del Sur). I read it by accident, more or less, in a short story collection. Still have to read Labyrinths by Borges...
I really don't think we are seeing an increase in Nazis in 2023.
There is a lot of discussion about prices, weather etc. but the key here is that their family died out. Being 80 and 74 and the only ones running the farm..
>The reason for the oppression is, a large portion of every country actually wants to be oppressed.

Nobody wants to be oppressed. A large portion of the population often wants to be oppressors themselves. They are addicted to controlling others. This might be raising tax on X group, or criminalizing Y minority.

Many people don't like voluntary association and choice. They want compelled behavior that conforms to their expectation.

The only way to combat this is to establish a baseline respect for individual autonomy and choice as long as it doesn't harm other people.

Most people are hesitant to allow this because they don't like the choices that others make. Either that or they define harm as doing anything which they don't like.
I would need an example. I don’t understand “programmatic” in this context. If ChatGPT can summarize a text, the text was already “human readable,” right? And does summarizing with an LLM mean the same thing as what the OP described, ”writing mundane documents?”
At an incredibly practical level, bootstrapping a new ecosystem in closed beta that isn't linked to the fediverse has been really great at attracting posters from Twitter who find the original fediverse too stale and curmudgeonly.
Kind of a dumb, insecure, tribalist flex, but it's HN so it's what one expects here.
The statements are not contradictory, just confusingly worded. A lock is on a file, held by an open file description.

Also note that, "open file description" != "file descriptor". An open file description exists only in the kernel, and is created on open(2). A file descriptor is the userland-visible handle to this open file description. dup(2) creates a new handle (file descriptor) pointing to this same open file description. Therefore, dup(2), fork(2), etc., do not violate the mutex property of the lock, since they are duplicating the file descriptors (handles), not the open file descriptions (which actually hold the locks).

What's not clear from the man pages is what happens to a locked open file description which is passed to another process via a Unix domain socket. I suspect at that point, both "processes" "hold" the lock -- which in reality simply means they both have a file descriptor referring to the same single open file description which holds the lock, thus not violating the mutex property. Though this contradicts the extensive verbiage in flock(2) which refers to "processes" as being subject to the mutex property, I suspect that is a simplification, as later text in flock(2) indicates that open file descriptions are indeed the subject of the mutex property.
Oh it's definitely better than me at reasoning. I'm the one asking it to explain things to me, not the other way around.
> I believe we care about self-directed thought, or agency.

If you can't enjoy it, is it worth it? Do AI's experience joy?
Actually, this is not a bad idea, especially for Egypt. It could be done in increments and scientifically evaluated over a 5-10 year period. If it’s not working, then turn off the spigot and it will dry up. They should propose this to the Gates Foundation.
Maybe linux-distros has a poc or GTFO rule in place to keep the unchecked "I can get root on your box with this one weird trick but I won't tell you how" emails to a minimum. Just a guess though.
> So, again, why would more open access to baseline metabolic metrics be a bad thing?

not a bad thing if you considered it in isolation for a single individual. But for an entire society? The cost of doing so might be quite high, even if there's an economy of scale efficiency improvement for such large amount of testing/diagnostics.

The recommended regime of diet, exercise and such, are a solution for most people that doesn't require you to know your own metric (and the example of pregnancy is a non-sequitur because this isn't a normal state of affairs, and when pregnant people can easily choose to do such bloodwork to measure their metrics).
Microsoft seems suicidally determined to ruin the office experience for users especially Outlook with the fisher price toy design that is popular now.
Maybe they consider the exploit is in the wild when sending to a distro that large[0] with recipients that aren't provably trustworthy.

[0] https://oss-security.openwall.org/wiki/mailing-lists/distros
While we are only starting to integrate LLMs into our tool, it was originally started to help deal with the React issue you describe, i.e. having to make related updates across large numbers of files. We wanted to have a single source of truth from which we generate the majority of the implementation. We are working to simplify and reduce the problem for ChatGPT by combining it with our code gen tech, helping to deal with the issues around limited context, hallucinations, and losing focus. I think the current generation of LLMs have fundamental limitations that will make large code bases intractable to them. Hell, even we mere mortals have issues with this and while the machines can be better at some things, they will fail spectacularly in other tasks we find trivial.

https://github.com/hofstadter-io/hof
Well, idiomatic C++23 is an acceptable math notation too.
In countries this would be a problem in right now, satellite TV is often banned too.
Yes and this decision haunts distros like Ubuntu over and over again. There's no easy win though.
Most cultures didn't believe in a "progressive arrow of history". That's a fairly modern concept.
Wierdly the richest countries have the fewest self employed and small businesses and the poorest countries have the most self employed people and most small businesses.
Seems like there are many lower paying positions than that.

https://www.usajobs.gov/Search/Results?jt=Software%20Develop...
> They intended to demonstrate that you need a _reason_ to want to split

No, no, no. FFS no! Sure this is a good thing to do if you are trying to prove a hypothesis. But you you are trying to explore for truly novel and unexpected linkages p-hack to your heart's content, form hypothesis, and then do follow up studies to see whether there's really something there!

Ignoring possibilities is bad exploratory science. And, as a reader, it's quite annoying to read old studies only to find that the author's didn't bother splitting on the parameter you are currently interested in.

Split them all, if only in the supplementary data, and let future studies sort them out.
i won't eat the bugs, i won't live in the pod, and i won't ride the e-bike
Degrading is calling an achievement we hold people in high regard who accomplish stupid because a machine can do it.

Not sure you worded this as intended ?

Anyway if I read you correctly, this assumes you believe the idea of self and ego have anything to do with it.

Humans should treat ants, lab rats and each other with equal respect.

I don’t believe we should avoid self-degradation because we think we’re smart or special, but for completely opposite reasons. We are mostly lucky we have what we have because something bigger than us, call it God, nature whatever, has provided that existence. When we degrade one another, we degrade that magic. This is where we fuck up time and time again. I’m talking about the water you drink, the food you eat and the air your breathe, the inspiration for neural networks etc. We take that for granted.

I liken it to the idea that humans killed God, the idea of God and morals etc, so we could do terrible things to the world and living things. We just got rid of the idea someone is looking over our shoulder because it made wars and genocides easier to do. Killing God got rid of a whole lot of moral baggage.
Let's let John Cleese decide. Or maybe someone was looking for Abuse!
>iPhones are just toys that don't get real work done.

That speaks more to your failure than to iOS's. I've been getting meaningful work done on iOS for a decade.

It sure is popular for a certain sort of HN poster, presumably deeply insecure about their own choices, to drop in and do their best to shit on iOS whenever anyone says something positive about it. It's predictable as clockwork, but as useful as tits on a bull.
Just to nitpick your nitpick, much of Spain still speaks different dialects (if not different languages entirely). So speaking Catalan is a different thing than speaking Galician, which is very different than the Basque language. There's also Andalusian and the Canarian dialect, among others I probably don't know about.
You referring to this? https://theprint.in/pageturner/excerpt/the-left-massacre-of-...
Couldn't afford custom domain URL shorteners – open-sourced our S3 free approach
Bitly was expensive, so this is a fun little use case for redirect rules for subdomains. Was coming increasingly handy as we scale our nonprofit, so wanted to share and open sourced this!
“Sleep language” could enable communication during lucid dreams
Are you making my app searchable and downloadable on 1B devices? Because hell yeah I’ll take that deal. I paid Apple 30% on about $1M of revenue that would have been less than $10k without them. You think I feel abused?
You're mixing up executing JavaScript generally vs JavaScript with a JIT. Apple has specifically banned Just-in-Time (JIT) compilation, where JavaScript (or anything) is translated into machine code, marked for execution, and ran directly on the processor. There are real security reasons for forbidding this[0]. All modern browsers use JIT compilation for JS since this is crucial for good performance. But a JIT isn't a requirement for running JS, it just makes things faster.

You can run JavaScript without a JIT no problem, but there is a separate Apple ban on alternative browser engines. Ostensibly browsers are banned because without a JIT they'd very slow and lead to a bad user experience, though I'm doubtful this is the only reason. (You can try Safari with the JIT disabled by turning on Lockdown Mode)

But there's nothing forbidden about interpreting code, as long as you don't generate machine code and try to mark pages of memory for execution. Practically this means scripting languages and nothing that's compiled or interpreted with a JIT. For example: with iSH, available on the app store, you can get a full virtual Linux environment and write all the JavaScript (via Node) or Python code you want: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/ish-shell/id1436902243

[0] I wrote another comment recently re: Apple/JIT and mention some of the security reasoning behind this, though I'm no expert: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35695431
Since the whole point of the internet is, you know, people can request what they want and communicate with others, and they already HAVE people shoving ‘important stuff’ their way, what exactly do you think that adds to the picture?
That's exactly what they did when they allowed users to "Submit your completed apps to the App Store with App Store Connect" from Swift Playgrounds on iPads: https://apps.apple.com/app/id908519492
This is what follow up studies are for. To separate the wheat from the chaff. Don't separate before. See my rant below as to why I think pre-hoc decisions on analysis is a bad idea: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35883276

At the very least, I'd like to see people say in advance which parameters they are interested in. That sort of thing is fine and important to avoid un-backed p-hacking. But for researchers who come after, for their sake, if you are not publishing the entire data so that they can reanalyze it de novo, please do as much analysis as possible (and record as many parameters as possible), if only in the supplementary data.

Science can only build on previous science if the authors of that previous science allow it to happen.
Precisely, the model is just regurgitating and pattern matching using a large enough training set where the outputs happen to look factual or logical. Meaning that we're just anthropomorphizing these concepts onto statical models, so it's not much different than Jesus Toast.
I guess it will. Financial big data has various sources, twitter, yahoo, meta, papers, etc. These data helps for building a large language model, and may help investors for making decisions. It also will encounter challenges, such as processing picture/speech/video data
What's odd is even when downloading the full res image, the central colors are decidedly not all #000. There is a faint yet distinct radial gradient. It does not appear to be a compression artifact (format is png anyways).
To me it does not seem like it would arise in similar enough contexts to be confusing.

"Martian" meaning the planet would come up in application code, not in the kernel. Why would the kernel even have that concept?
Notable that the people who saw the first automatons argued whether they were alive.
I think there are two things you may be referring to. First, some drives support thin provisioning of namespaces, and can report the current amount of storage actually being used to back the namespace(s), relative to the maximum user-accessible capacity.

Second, in the SMART/drive health data, there's usually a counter tracking how many reserve/spare blocks remain usable as in not worn out and retired. That's a one-way counter; deleting data won't un-retire defective or worn-out blocks.

It's almost unheard-of for a drive to directly expose a realtime counter of how many blocks are currently unallocated, not being used to store data, and in the erased state making them available to accept new writes.
I think the fallacy comes from the idea that anything can make us happy.

“Happiness” describes a subjective and transitory emotion, not a state like temperature.

Nothing — whether material goods or experiences — has an inherent quality that “makes” anyone happy. Whatever happiness a person derives comes from within.

We can’t even agree on what we mean by “happiness” so arguing about what makes that happen seems pointless.
The lawyers for the defense have to say something. Usually at least one side is required to say something pretty morally wrong. That's not news.

Somehow, I don't think absent this news story, you would have thought SBF was being swept under the rug. It's one of the more high-profile trials.
I assume Roblox supports Windows 10 right now. It’s a relatively stable target of a platform, with various effective anti-cheating defenses. It’s not perfect in that regard, but certainly it ought to be enough for them, so I think it’s a safe bet to say they probably do target Windows 10 today.

Five years from now? I wouldn’t make that assumption, no. They might still support it, but I’m not at all certain of that.
If "permaculture" meant "hobby farm", then you'd be correct.

However, permaculture is centered around a radically different approach: maximally leveraging existing ecosystem features rather than trying to fight them, or trying to wipe the ecosystem clean and turn it into mere substrate for building something artificial.

A correctly implemented permaculture "farm" should require minimal or no artificial inputs at all, instead relying on a composition of self-sustaining closed loops (e.g. food waste goes into compost and a worm bin, where the compost is used to grow more vegetables while the worms are used to supplement chickens foraging in the garden and eating pests like slugs)