skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
_But_ I also see some car ads with weirdly/implausibly low interest rates. My understanding was that in these cases the base price is artificially higher to subsidize below-market financing rates -- and in those cases even if you don't need the financing, you may be better off taking it. But the point ends up being that these are not independent phenomena; MSRP prices are set with financing in mind.

E.g. https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/advice/interest-free-car...
>Maybe we will go back to that kind of situation where the median will be considered squarely in 'the masses' class and nowhere near 'rich'.

We're already there. American society has stratified into three groups over the last 20 years. There's the 99th percentile elite who have hoarded over half of all overall wealth, the 90th percentile bourgeois (tech workers, lawyers, doctors, etc.) that are able to maintain a modicum of security and prosperity through real wage growth, and then the masses below who are desperately working themselves to death for near starvation wages to service the above two classes, with zero chance of economic mobility.
>So you think it's okay that someone might just crash a fucking airplane on top of your head because of fucking likes?

What's the point of this question when you know I'm not ok with it. There is no point, so don't ask it when you know the answer.

>Crashing a fucking airplane without controlling a large potential crash side is tremendously dangerous.

Except he controlled the crash site successfully. So what's the point. I think there's gross negligence but "hypothetical unintentional manslaughter" is going to far.
TL;DR : Cheaters like others who cheat, don't beat yourself up if you aren't accepted.
Then Ohanian went on to become a crypto bro and tried to force crypto monetization down reddit.

Great visionary here
How can we tell if that's not the average user and they are in a bubble, or that is the average user and it's us in a bubble?
I'm pretty sure that both MS and Google default to the time of whoever set up the meeting.
Ok, I've taken another crack at it!
Yeah, best to just not have developed it, or to wait until a more equitable country like Norway develops it. Then it will be fair.
Any investment that includes stock can go down in value. That doesn't make it a scam.
> This may not be the worst thing honestly, from an environmental perspective.

From a purely carbon perspective, new cars are always cleaner than old cars. This is simply due to less wear and tear, and technology improvements.
> Twitter was pretty awfully run even before he bought it.

What metrics are you looking at? Pre-Musk Twitter didn't seem that badly run - it was profitable outside of a one-time court judgment.
What Is a Schumann Resonance and Why Am I Being Offered a 7.83HZ Oscillator?
Personally, my experience remains almost entirely unchanged, so I’ve never really understood what the whole “Twitter is dead” stuff was about.

I am salty about the Twitter API though
> Musk pushed for them to move from Unix to Windows and Levchin disagreed with that move.

Because Musk's push came from no objective reason beyond he "didn't know it". The Board said "you're the CEO, you don't need to know all the technologies".
I think this is a poor comparison because microservices exist to help code mirror the org chart while chiplets exist for physical engineering reasons.

Microservices are supposed to improve testability, reduce complexity, etc: it is an organizational choice. Chiplets add complexity: silicon interposer, tougher packaging, NUMA, etc: it's an engineering choice with a tradeoff for better yield, chips reaching maximum reticle size, etc
People will a silver spoon their entire life usually don’t end up well. It’s why wealth typically leaves a family after only three generations.
> If he picked a time where there was no one and a spot to crash the plane where it wouldn't have started a fire (he probably didn't want to kill anyone), wouldn't it have been a less harmful act?

No, because it was/is not possible for him to have made that conclusion from the air prior to jumping out of his aircraft - no matter the level of google maps or even in-person planning.

After he left the aircraft, he had no control over where it crashed, and had no way of knowing it wouldn't land on some hiker, hunter, animal, whatever... or cause a fire.

We cannot have a system were the public is afraid airplanes might just drop out of the sky suddenly. The rules are there for very good reasons, and this guy broke darn near all of them.

And what for? Youtube clicks? No, that's not acceptable.

> (honestly had he not destroyed the evidence and made the plea that he constructed the crash in a way that was designed not to harm anyone, and it ended up not harming anyone, I suspect he might've gotten a lower sentence)

No, because the regulator is not going to see it as innocent. This is a highly trained aviator - as are all aviators, and he certainly knew how dangerous this could have been. He had no clearances with ATC/FAA to have other aircraft avoid the area, or emergency services on ready in case something went wrong.

We allow acrobatics, stunts, and yes even crashes on purpose (movies or whatever) under tightly controlled circumstances where everyone knows what is going on. That was not the case here... this guy just decided to do it all on his own.

Aviation is a highly professional community - even at the amateur level - and for very good reasons.
Microsoft freezes salaries to navigate economic uncertainty
So fun much scrolling past all the blue check morons at the top of all the replies to any popular post. No changes at all.
Ok, let's put Bare Bones in the title above. Thanks!

Edit: that didn't work.
Crazy, what did you invest it in?
Possibly this is AI as it is understood by the technologically unsophisticated, but a still a harbinger.
I don't get why people argue like this. It's so obviously disingenuous. Owning a share of an emerald mine doesn't make your family super rich and it's obviously, demonstrably, not where Musk's wealth comes from.

Musk's wealth is well documented. It comes from founding and selling a series of companies - not an emerald mine. Repeating the emerald mine meme is just a way to declare yourself a dishonest participant in the conversation - or perhaps you genuinely think you can fool people with obvious lies?
I think that's a little hyperbolic, but the Japanese are way behind. There was a decent analysis (as always) in the Economist recently.

https://www.economist.com/asia/2023/04/16/how-japan-is-losin...
Unfair to single them out. Submarines sink regularly, often due to human error. Grounding, collisions, even arson. Periscope hatches left open, oxygen ports closed.

Ever drive off and leave your trunk lid open? Forget a kid at the mall? Not call your Mom on Mothers' Day? Then you understand how easy it is for human error to occur.
How? The market has generally risen since then
The same can be said about all the ______ driving their status symbol Teslas.
I am not returning either the vox populi polls were simply intolerable.
The data is compressed with GDeflate, not deflate. The single stream is designed to use the parallelism of a GPU. It is described here:

https://github.com/microsoft/DirectStorage/blob/main/GDeflat...

The GPU decompression benchmark I linked earlier allows you to specify a single file that it will compress with GDeflate (and zlib for comparison). The numbers presented in the docs that come with the benchmark and presented elsewhere are consistent with my own runs using a source file that is highly compressible.

Part of the trick of achieving this speedup is to read the data fast enough. I don't know of any NVMe drive that can reach full speed with a queue depth of 1. While running the benchmark in a windows VM with a GPU passed through, on the linux host I observed that the average read size was about 512k and the queue depth was sometimes over 30.
This position ("I don't use the website, therefore it's not important") is puzzling. There is objective data, after all, SimilarWeb estimations, for example:

https://www.similarweb.com/top-websites/ (worldwide)

1. google.com 83.9B visits (~ user sessions, per Apr)

2. youtube.com 32.7B visits

3. facebook.com 16.8B visits

4. twitter.com 6.4B visits

5. instagram.com 6.3B visits
Curious if you've queried ChatGPT on topics that are not new to you and been impressed with its conveyance of relevant information?

I think there's value here, but I also think people are way overestimating the quality of the "knowledge" they think they're receiving from it on novel topics.
The Roads to Zettascale and Quantum Computing Are Long and Winding
I think that will turn out to be a great move for Twitter.

I don't get the negativity expressed by top comments.

Yeah things were hectic at the beginning, but Twitter nowadays is a much better product than it was a year ago for me. Find a good niche for yourself and it's a gold mine for socializing online with a bit of curating.
They are not smart investments because you have no control over where the money is pointed in the plan.

So if you call your advisor, and say "i want my 529 to only focus on X" they tell you that you have no control over the index and the plan will be the most conservative 50-year-old actuary data which has no fucking clue where the market is heading and then berate you for when their 529 index loses value...

I was ready to pay that investment banker's family a personal visit with skills that I have accumulated over a number of decades.
You've got it exactly backwards. They're not about common sense; they're about chat.

LLMs act in insensible ways all the time. They contradict themselves. They hallucinate. If you ask an LLM to follow a simple but long logic puzzle and show you its work, it will often make extremely obvious errors and fail to notice even when you ask it to review its work.

What LLMs can do is coherently string together language. That requires sophisticated linguistic understanding, and LLMs are pretty impressive for it. But merely understanding language is not intelligence, or even common sense. I suspect we're approaching the limits of what we can get out of statistical language generation.

Actual AGI would require a logical model of the world, not a probabilistic model of language. Looking at non-human animals, we can see problem-solving evolved long before language did. Language is a second-order phenomenon we use to express first-order problem-solving conclusions about the world, and I'm skeptical that we'll ever manage to accurately recreate first-order problem-solving by training models on the second-order linguistic artefacts of problem-solving. It's actually very easy to create superficially-realistic second-order problem-solving artefacts which, when examined with first-order problem solving capabilities, don't stand up to scrutiny—i.e. contradictions, hallucinations, and faulty reasoning. I suspect that, when computers do learn to problem-solve, it will have been by training to solve problems.

There's also no way we'll get the kind of growth you're predicting from self-play. When it comes to a simple competition like a board game, it's easy to optimize for more skilled play. But there's no objective way to win a conversation. Maybe we'll get some gains out of training these systems against each other, but it's just not a clearly viable use case.
It is good at inferring the correct people into a story. But the story many times leaves something to be desired.

Other times though I did have a lot of fun having it spit out SCP stories. As those can many times have a ton of template like logic to them. Due to the nature of SCP being written in a tone of a formal report. Plus well over 2000 different examples.

Also some of that could be due to lack of training data. Like a TV show might be 4 seasons long and a particular character may have had 3 or 4 lines total. It would be like asking it to write a story about Boba Fett given the original 2 movies where he showed up and had maybe 1 or two lines. There just is not enough to extrapolate anything. But you ask it to write something about Harry Potter and it probably could get the style close enough as there is more training data.

My biggest grip is sometimes it just gets stuck in a loop. Once you are in one, the thing just will dump out the same hallucinations over and over.
That won't lower costs, only increase profits
Mods answering questions is a form of transparency. I get that you might not believe us, but you could just as easily disbelieve any other form of transparency.

In my experience, the bulk of the community is willing to believe that we tell the truth about HN moderation, if only because it would be stupid and reckless not to. Literally the only value HN has to YC is the good will of the community. To jeopardize that for a little more moderation convenience, or whatever, would be a colossally dumb trade.

Believe it or not, our actual goal is never to do anything that isn't defensible to the community, such that if (heaven forbid) the entire HN dataset were ever published, there would be nothing inconsistent with what we've told the community over the years.

Why then, you or someone may ask, not just publish all the data? Two reasons: (1) we need to protect users; and (2) it would make it impossible to run the site.
Footnote 7's "crypto pushers rebranding as AI influencers" is something I've noticed, not as much in specific names, as the overall tone of the sales pitch.
And Elon himself:

https://twitter.com/parismarx/status/1611861409733967872?lan...

> This is going to sound slightly crazy, but my father had a share in an Emerald mine in Zambia.

The call is coming from inside the house, Elmo.
So your argument is to read other people's opinions? That's still not an argument. Bro.
I noticed that too, but I wasn't sure (still am not) whether that was really an issue or not since Fedora updates kernels aggressively even during the lifecycle, so most of the time the upgrade will get the same or similar version of the kernel with it. Do you think it's a big enough problem worth adding the additional work/complexity?
You can adjust for inflation when wages follow it. I wonder for what proportion of the populaton it's the case.
Thank you! I'm pretty sure I've tried this setting and it didn't work but I tested it now and it works as expected.
good lord. i'm so glad my toyota doesn't have any of those features. shout out to the lean method.
https://archive.is/Dw3nV
This month on The ReadME Podcast: Balancing openness and control
AWS CodePipeline for AWS Fargate – The Chicken and Egg Problem
I'd add that I never programmed for the 68K but the 8088/8086 segment register model was a real pain for low-level programming. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_memory_segmentation) They were also little endian which is arguably less intuitive when you're twiddling bytes at a low level.
Please explain your "fairy tale" descriptor, I don't understand what your are trying to say here.
The comment you're replying to is the BQN code that adds a Fibonacci number to each letter of the "APL" string.

You're python code is spelled just "APL"+1 in BQN.

Array languages implicitly so a "foreach" when there is a scalar operand
> I've been thinking about some approaches to parallelize decompression of a single stream, it's not easy

You saw this, right?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35915285
You might be rich if you funded the 529 plan with proceeds from your emerald mine. Outside of that scenario, your kids' 529 plan doesn't really have anything to do with this.
VC fee structure %2 and %20. %2 of $4.5 billion is $90,000,000. Nice work if you can scam it or get it rather.
Quoting Ford “I will build a motor car for the great multitude. It will be so low in price that no man will be unable to own one.”. You are looking at it from a take of more people fighting over how big their slice of the pie will be. Instead of splitting up one pie, Ford wanted to make more pies and drive down the price from the efficiencies/economy of scale of making so many pies that everyone got their own. And it worked.
> This is 44bn of musks backing investors finally waking up to the fact that the willy-wonka they trusted to shepherd a communications platform was in fact just a billionaire heir to an emerald mine

In his investors’ defense, Elon had a singular track record prior to Twitter. And his proposal to turn Twitter into X, aka US—based WeChat, was not a terrible one. It was an expensive investment, but there was a plausible positive outcome.

His complete and total bungling of it all would have been difficult to predict in advance based only on what was known then. He is seemingly oblivious to the unintended consequences and second order effects of both his actual decisions, and their rash and heavy-handed manner. It’s odd, and not surprising they forced a professional CEO on him.
Three obviously - one would provide no redundancy, and having two with different readings would be bad as well since it would be unclear which provides a correct value
A quick trip on the Googles:

2023 Nissan Versa - $17,366
2023 Kia Rio - $18,371
2023 Mitsubishi Mirage - $17,140

Just sayin....
Well, 529s are a good way to avoid capital gains taxes on investments dedicated for education. In your case, they wanted to be extra sure that you would avoid capital gains taxes, so they lost money.
From a systemic point of view, you have to look at carbon impact of production (and end of life). Being a bit more efficient doesn't necessary net out well.
To the left, she's failed the purity test already by following a handful of 'evildoers' on Twitter.

To the right, the WEF connection is concerning, and her commitment to free speech is in question.

But perhaps she just wants to make money from both sides of the political divide?
SpaceX is a subsidy to the government now saving NASA hundreds of millions on launches.
Twitter can give you access to the beta version of 'The Narrative'. It's a little messy and there are trolls, but you can kind of see how stories and media are shaped. It's like a peak into the process instead of seeing the finished product. I would say it's generally 12-24h ahead of the news.
This comment is Google's first hit for "curléd girl".

I don't know what that is, but it made me laugh!
Another blow against the "cars = freedom" mantra we have so wrongly pursued for 50+ years. Now that prices are up and highway maintenance costs are continuing to increase you have no alternative but to open your wallet for the automakers and state departments of roads and highways bureaucrats because guess what, they've legislated your density and your sidewalks and bike lanes away and stopped you from taking the train.
Top replies to tweets are from blue-checks (nowadays, generally the worst posters) so to see any good interactions you either have to scroll pretty far or have used a blocklist. Twitter Blue is now completely tarnished - even if you just want to pay $8/month for the ability to edit posts or include longer videos in your tweets and don't care about "verified" status you're going to be lumped in with a really odd group of people and mocked for your blue check (i.e. he turned a consumer choice into an unpopular political statement). I'm not personally a heavy user anymore (moved to mastodon when they killed Tweetbot's API access), but either there's a lot of downtime or I've been really unlucky when I have returned as I've encountered a lot of issues with accessing the app - being completely locked out for a couple of days once. Also he unbanned a bunch of really pretty shitty people, who have picked up where they left off in directing their substantial following to abuse whoever they feel wronged them (usually someone in the LGBTQ+ community).

It's still largely usable as a service, but it has absolutely gotten worse and to describe it as "sabotage" is definitely not a stretch.
Presumably even less in countries with socialized medicine where the government buys in bulk.
You're suggesting that Elon Musk has family wealth because his father funded his living expenses in college.

@deelowe points out that they're also saving to fund their child's expenses in college.

Therefore, you're either suggesting that @deelowe has family wealth or you're arguing in bad faith.
IIRC, it was also frequently used for arcade games, and office printers, too.
If that's the case, in Europe we've been compounding growth for many centuries before the US even existed, we must be far ahead of you.
Discouraging car use through high prices could be a great thing. But cities have been designed to favor car convenience so much, at the expense of everything else (walking, cycling, mass transit), that people are essentially forced to buy a car in order to work, shop, and survive. We discuss these things on Reddit/FuckCars.
Agreed - this idea that one gets "quickly" promoted, if it all; or even that management wants you to perform "at a higher level" (that is, to be sticking your nose in their beeswax) -- is at odds with widely observable reality.
I'm speaking out of ignorance here, since I have no idea what role a microchip plays in modern vehicles, but obviously it's geared towards software components.

Assuming that's true, then this whole chip shortage would have been a great time for someone to bring a software-less, low-tech vehicle to the market. I've personally been wanting that as our last vehicle completely shit the bed when the digital transmission encountered an error. Plus I hate touch screens in cars.
I think the analogy doesn't work here.

In my understanding, LLMs already hit a big wall. We can't increase the size of models mainly because it's too expensive, but also doing so may not be as effective as before. We've also run out of data. The free lunch is likely already over, for now. It's unlikely that we'll see huge improvements in the direction we've seen during recent years.

Instead, what I see is that the first letter 'L' is getting smaller. People are working on (relatively) smaller specialized models. But it means these models are unlikely outperform larger LLMs (in the direction mentioned above).
I'm trying this for the first time. Today's puzzle is asking me to link "radio" and "ocean". I put "waves", which is obviously the best answer :-) and it scored only a 19% match. It's now asking for /more/ linking words?!

Uhmmmm... no.
I image it like ML teams in tech - the PhDs are building the models and the non-PhD are exposing the model, jockeying the data, etc.
I think the answer is pretty obvious: the skills are wildly different, and Musk obviously didn't even understand what he's supposed to be doing at Twitter.

Tesla is relatively simple: you've got to make cool cars. They have to work and people have to want to buy them.

SpaceX is relatively simple: you've got to make rockets. They have to work, and be cheaper than the competition.

With Twitter it seems he doesn't understand that there's nothing to build really. The software's already there. Twitter's main job is purely social, trying to please a whole bunch of governments and advertising agencies, as well as understanding why people post there and how to make them post more. There's no straightforward technical test to it, it's a delicate social balancing problem, and one awfully ill-suited to Musk's typical "move fast and break things" approach.
Motorola seemed to like their separate MMU chips. I don't remember the exact models but some of their (largely unsuccessful RISC) 88K processors had one too.
He's trying to turn it into the Fox News of social media, a hardcore or uses being bombarded with my pillow ads. Seeing how profitable Fox is he seems to want to follow that path.
Do they actually exist on dealer lots now? For a while there, big cars and pickups were the only ones available. And dealerships were marking up electric cars so high that manufacturers got mad and started threatening them. https://www.motor1.com/news/569524/hyundai-genesis-avoid-dea...
People don't buy EVs in the US to be economical. That's not a thing yet. It's something for relatively rich people to do as a status symbol or for luxury, since most EVs are fairly luxurious.