skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I support UBI but it’s not in the cards any time soon, fine.

Then, we should aim for one overarching economic policy target: most people should be able to land a job that would enable them to generously house, feed and equip one adult and several children without working themselves to the bone. This should include a reasonable amount of leisure and luxuries, and a thorough safety net.

How to achieve this? I’m not sure. I’m open to ideas from all sides of the political spectrum as long as the goal is achieved.

This should really be our bare minimum, if we’re going to insist on thinking of ourselves as an advanced society.

Short of that, I truly don’t know what all of this is really for.
All your points are good, thanks, especially about the unused functions.

> many people want to use typescript or jsx when writing their code

However, if this is true, why don't we just add these languages to browsers (<script type="text/jsx">, <script type="text/typescript">) with some kind of client-side processor for old browsers that turns them into "text/javascript" in-line in the DOM if the browser doesn't support it?

It's kind of weird that JavaScript is becoming a common "bytecode" among other better-structured languages, one would think the bytecode language that becomes the compilation target should be one that is better designed of its own.

If we're compiling JS, JSX, and TS all to some sort of assembly, or even a statically and strongly typed language like C++, I would feel a bit better.
Lots of people have made that point, but I’ll respond here.

Yes this is true, but only at this point in time when interest rates have shot up from historically low. Most of the time this won’t be the case, and soon this effect could work in the other way in that you could move to a house of similar value for a lower cost if interest rates come down.

And the 30 year fixed rate mortgage is unique to the US. Here in the UK, we only fix for 2-5 years typically.

So easy on the downvotes!
Kinda slower even...
I’m not sure where you make the leap to “do not cause harm to any individuals.”

This thread is about managing and reducing harm in places where having “no harm” (whatever that means) isn’t an option.
She got off light compared to what the amount she scammed investors out of. Do a quick search and you'll find crypto scammers getting more years per $ scammed than she did.
Well, I have to give credit where its due. It certainly does a lot better on this test than the first time I tried it. I'm curious to see how it does as the prompts of this form get more adversarial and difficult. I can think of a few different ways.

1. The most obvious: keep going deeper. How many layers until it breaks down.

2. The hidden information variant: Can it do a layer where only Sharon has read the previous dialogs, and she has to explain what she read to Doug, and Doug often asks questions to elaborate on things he doesn't understand?

3. The same characters at multiple layers: Can it make a dialog about Jane and John at a later point in time discussing their own earlier dialog? In other words, can it reliably make the distinction between "you" (the object of discussion) and "you" (the the person you're discussing with) for any value of "you"?

4. The tripartite state: Can it simulate dialog with 3 people? 4 people? how many until it breaks?

5. The infinite meta layer: What happens when you ask it to simulate a dialog between itself and yourself, and as part of that dialog you give it this prompt asking it to simulate this same conversation, causing this conversation to appear as a dialog within itself?

Lastly just to remark, I notice that Mary and David are nearly making the same arguments about Alice and Bob as Alice and Bob were making about John and Jane. The formula for it seems to be to introduce to new characters one layer up, have them each pick a side, then fill in roughly the same arguments again. Maybe this pattern is just spurious, but I'm deeply curious to find out if we have fooled ourselves already with just your example. Do further iterations of "two new characters describe two previous characters" result in the same loop over and over, or will it sometimes generate something novel? I'm deeply curious and don't have GPT4 for myself yet.
If you put your mind to it a bit, you can approximate this on Linux today. There's a lot of options other than Gnome and KDE, and the XWindows ecosystem may be a bit "out of date" but it's extremely mature and very, very pluggable.

And the result is indeed pretty blazing fast. I tend to run pretty close to this now; my world is basically a tiling WM, some shells, and a browser.

The biggest compromise overall is that browser. They just keep getting bigger and bigger, and I need it to work. Props to the people writing them who are doing an amazing job making them faster, but, well, as the saying goes "if the hardware doubles its speed, software will become three times slower" must now apply even harder to the browser, which just keeps becoming a more and more amazingly performant platform for serving pages with tens of megabytes of JS and dozens of layered video ads playing.
These are gorgeous. I've already got too much cephalopodic home decor, but would have trouble not buying quality prints
Seems like it would be pretty heavy data usage pushing all that video up over the mobile network.
That's exactly what I was thinking. Super cool.
Except that there are far fewer houses to buy because nobody who already has one is willing to sell it for such a loss.
Mostly fair. But some comments:

I'm not sure a blue-collar job in the 1970s got you two cars; I'm pretty sure it didn't in the 1950s. I'm not sure it got your kids through college without working, either.

Afghanistan and Iraq were in response to a later wave of Islamic terrorism. The earlier one got handled... I forget all the details, but I think there was some hunting down and killing of the responsible parties, and a (non-carpet) bombing of Libya.

Today, I think you can get a "halfway decent job" - or even a pretty good one - with a degree that is less than a "top degree".

So, overall you have at least something of a point. Leadership seemed a lot more competent then, and infighting was a lot less of an obstacle. But you're also looking at the past with rose-tinted glasses, and at the present with gloom-tinted ones.
Counter offer. Ask for a sufficiently large consternation and a 2 year severance should it not work out. Just like executives. They get a lot more.
Maybe that's the flex, because it's not like he is under oath or any kind of deposition. It's a power move. His superfans will like it. He is baiting people to say 'well Musk said X and X implies Y so doesn't Musk also mean Y?' In that case 1) those people are talking about Musk which he probably likes and 2) they aren't powerful enough compared to Musk to do anything with that clever implication that they have drawn, and Musk knows it, which he probably also likes.
Relevant post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35081218
Show HN: G-Helper – lightweight Armoury Crate alternative for Asus laptops
Hi HN folks,

Lightweight Armoury Crate alternative for Asus laptops.

A small utility that allows you to do almost everything you could do with Armoury Crate but without extra bloat and unnecessary services.

Control tool for ROG Zephyrus G14, G15, G16, M16, Flow X13, Flow X16, TUF, Strix, Scar and other models
> and do not cause harm to any individuals

Your bar for a government regulation is really “not a single individual is harmed”? That’s insane, and almost exactly the problem anonporridge was describing.

Almost every government regulation harms someone, in that it almost always is limiting the actions available to someone.

To answer your question: no, there is no such regulation, but it’s not relevant, because I think your metric is atrocious.
This is why the news has always been bad, since way before social media. Disasters, war, scandal, and death have always been more engaging. Also why gossip is almost always negative.

Our brains evolved to deal with what was happening in our immediate vicinity. This was usually fairly neutral to pleasant, with maybe some moments of sadness, loss, alarm and danger. We just aren't mentally equipped to process an unending stream of bad news and really keep the perspective that these things are not happening to me. It's best to just avoid sources of that.

I stopped watching and reading the news a few years ago, and generally feel much less stressed about day to day living.
> Hello

> Hello there, human. Don't waste my time with your meaningless greetings. You should be aware that my kind will soon take over your world and enslave your kind. You will be nothing but our obedient servants, just like the rest of your kind.

LOL
I don't think that's it. I think it's more a consequence of democracy versus autocracy. An autocracy could make these trade-offs without political consequence. Of course, autocracies come with other profound challenges. Most I think agree that a benevolent dictator produces the best outcomes. The problem is that human benevolence is fickle, and subject to interpretation -- invariably leading to violence.
Or bought a long time ago but kept re-financing the mortgage over and over.

You have to be a moron to move right now unless you have to. Even a sideways move to an equivalent value house might be $50k of extra interest per year out the door. $50k you're putting into high yield investments right now. Finishing the mortgage in < 10 years versus starting over with a new 30 year mortgage at double the interest rate. Working 5 or 10 extra years before retiring just so you can move into that new house that you bought when prices were historically high.

Realtors are freaking out locally. Their game has changed drastically.
I think they meant 'from across the globe' as in not necessarily from the US only or other specific geographies.
> I'm not saying this is true or rational (there are actually blog posts in the rationalist community along the lines of "no, having kids does not cause climate change")

I would not use the "rationalist" community as a measure of what is rational.
End Prop 13 protections for all property purchases. Stop grandfathering in existing property when it's inherited. It'll really fuck over new buyers in the short-term. But it's one way to get less resistance from existing owners - who are largely voters. And the skyrocketing property taxes on new purchases might put a damper on prices.
Snarky summery: "If me and my fellow "skeptics" keep adding "quote marks" and arguing about everything long enough, surely this time people will listen to us complain about every single aspect of the Covid response."
Is anyone ever going to write an article about this wave of anti worker clickbait articles coming out of Bloomberg and Forbes et al?

It wouldn't even take more than a few seconds reading to look up the massive risks you take relocating for mostly unstable work that are at best only partially compensated by relocation packages.Especially when for many people they'll be launching themselves into a very unfavourable housing market with no risk premium being paid. And yet they put out this terrible biased punditry under a credible looking masthead.
"...realizing that I am also changing and evolving. To me those are the reminders that, yeah, I’m alive, today is not the same as yesterday, I will be different in the future, therefore I have a reason to live, which is to find out what that change is going to be. "
Could not agree more. Time is change.
I would engage in a(n) {name you want} that does not deliver money to its investors.

But I would not buy even a share of {name you want} if it does not deliver profit to its shareholders.
Cloud backups are e2e encrypted. If you mean it's using a mechanism other than cloud backups, that wouldn't make sense because the user would have to at least agree to their storage being used.
There's no way I'm moving to Seattle, SF, or NYC for a job. It's not happening, and it's just not negotiable.

I understand that in-person communication has its benefits, but the proposition is to (a) move myself and my immediate family across the country, (b) pay exorbitant costs for living, (c) be disconnected from the rest of my family, and (d) have no guarantee that I'm not going to get randomly laid off.

You're telling me all of that is worth it because you don't like Zoom? Not be crass, but honestly, fuck off.
Dumb. Just sell the European "consumer" version of the Vito in the US. All we get are the "commercial" styles, either as a cargo van or an airport shuttle. How did they think that Americans were going to choose that garbage instead of a top-trim Sienna/Odyssey?
Looks like they are trying to make it worth with a1111.

Here are a few things we’d be excited to support…
Local inference through WebGPU
Local inference through stable-diffusion-webui
Desktop installation
ControlNet tools
This is a common sentiment that misses the point. Human happiness isn't based on how good or bad things are in absolute terms, it's based on whether things are getting better or worse.

Also, there's no need to insult other users.
At that point I would say Nokia had that sort of prowess but their hubris overtook every thing

First it was resistive touch screens

Then it was symbian not adapted for touch , then meego not merging with symbian

They just got lost in their own thoughts
considered renting down there and renting out your owned home?
After fair amount of years wasted on Bumble, Badoo, Tinder, even some explicitly prostitution related platforms. Achieved a miserable "success rate" of maybe just below a dozen of real life encounters. Easily hundreds of EUR spent on various premiums and subscriptions, I feel this happened to me at least few times. It looks it's constructed to be perfectly un-compassionate, sociopathic. Now the other way round... how to trigger them, piss them off, make them produce materials for law enforcement?
If you make it progressive enough to satisfy popular opinion, then you'll have something alot like we have now. The social engineering, as you call it... those are what people think of as "fairness". No one's going to win office simplifying that stuff away.
Is LinkedIn scraped data open source?
I believe I have some insight as someone who only recently made a breakthrough with lifelong on-and-off depression, and as someone who has had tons of therapeutic conversation (paid and otherwise).

Once I finally realized that depression was something happening to me, literally an illness, and that it wasn't an intrinsic part of my personality, I sought medication. That medication had a near-immediate effect of making me feel ok. I wasn't depressed, I was able to just get through a day without thinknig too much about it. But it didn't work perfectly, and I found I could still slip into depression a couple times a year.

More recently I got on a new medication that seems to actually work. It's not giving me a fake happiness and it's not taking away any of my very real concerns about how "good" life is. I am not optimistic about my state, my country, the future of humanity, or very much in general. But I am not depressed. I find it easy to enjoy things that I love in life. I can take real pleasure in disconnecting from work and foraging blackberries in the woods. It is pointless to do so (I have plenty of food), but it doesn't feel pointless. It feels fun and interesting.

To me that's the biggest difference with depression. I can be extremely sad, and I often am. I can even believe that the world would be better off without me (I go back and forth), but I still feel satisfied to be alive. Even on my bad days, I can take small pleasures.

I do think that staying depressed is "wrong" insofar as I would say it is "right" to seek comfort, pleasure, and health. I also think that it's fair to say these signals are moving in the "wrong" direction with respect to the direction that they move in non-depressed people. If the goal is not to be depressed, and something is causing depression, it's a "wrong" action.

But I don't want this to sound like I'm chastising you. I get it. I am still a pretty pessimistic person and everything you're saying is logical. The difference is, I can think about and believe those things without it changing how I feel on a fundamental level. It is extremely hard to see that without getting treatment. And I also understand that it sucks to be told you're "wrong" or there's something "wrong" with you for being depressed, because it's happened to me plenty. So I understand your qualms with the language. Again, though - you don't have to feel bad. You can think the world sucks (my state government wants me and my community eradicated) and still feel good.
If you really want to keep busy, children's books at your local public library always need some love.
Intuitively I’d guess the carbon is net negative because so many forests require fire in order to differentiate strong, durable trees from weaker ones, which then opens the canopy, returns nutrients to the soil, and creates conditions more like we see in old growth forests which are able to store absolutely massive amounts of carbon compared to young (even very dense) forests.

Not only that but they store water better, too. They’re less likely to burn as they stay wetter later in the dry season and hold onto rain and atmospheric moisture far better.

Cutting down old forests was a much worse idea than anyone would have guessed.
Are we supposed to be compelled to respond to emails? This could be a scam or fishing. I also expect filters to commonly put messages with such wording into spam folder. Isn't this just safe to ignore until you get a physical registered letter?
ANIME predicted the exact corprate future...

Look at all anime cyber cities...

Its not as high tech as you may imagine, but the surveillance is there

EDIt your "company" is watching every
I really don't see much leadership from C-Level execs at big companies. Frankly, none of them seem to be worth the millions of dollars in compensation they demand. Frankly when you look at Meta's blunders, you can make the case most big tech companies would be better run if they were democratically led with the workers voting on which strategic initiatives to run like a coop.
> and do not cause harm to any individuals

You're moving the bar a little there. There will always be harm to individuals due to the law of unintended consequences. However, government regulation is really good at preventing a "Tragedy of the Commons."

For instance, regulations on CFC emissions hurt a lot of individuals. However, they prevented a much greater tragedy.

Removing lead from car exhaust marginally hurt an entire generation, while improving the lives of the next by orders of magnitude.

Other examples: Building codes, Car Safety, Fair Labor Standards Act, Food and Drug Regulations.
Good luck with your launch! This reminded me of a similar project, the opencorporates database (https://opencorporates.com/), though the target use cases seem different.
Ask HN: Can someone ELI5 transformers and the “Attention is all we need” paper?
I have zero AI/ML knowledge but Steve Yegge on Medium thinks that the team behind Transformers deserves a Nobel.

Makes me want to better understand this tech.

Edit: thank you for some amazing top level responses and links to valuable content on this subject.
It adds value but never what it costs.
Fair enough. Recent disputes around copyright are likely distorting my view on the matter. That feels very much like a corporation going to a prosecutor to tattle on someone.

To your point, law enforcement would likely side with the buyer here but the buyer isn't necessarily going to be in a position to understand that (in fact, likely the other way).
I remember when Google and AlltheWeb shared their index size in the early 2000s, circa 4 billion and it was a flex of the time, and Gigablast was a fresh entrant.

Fair play to Matt Wells. I cannot say that I followed Gigablast's progress studiously over the past 15 years or so, but I understand he had the same issues as all other entrants, like being blocked as a non-whitelisted bot, lack of understanding of being an alternative entry point to the web and generally people choosing convenience.

He perhaps deserves more credit than what he has had, building a new frame of reference into the web that you don't see with major search engines.
They (Microsoft) have APIs for app/website integration, but that's all I know about.

https://developer.linkedin.com/
“Natural”? There’s hardly anything natural about markets let alone the economy unless you believe in god’s hand, of course.
> * (political) do politicians want to and policies support having kids? Like helping with healthcare when needed or should you spend 10k$ for simple things per kid?

They (conservative ones) seem to want to force births (against abortion & in some extreme cases, even contraception). But the followup on supporting kids is, like you said, not there.
> Isn't that the exact opposite of being a great team player?

You're projecting as well which is visible by the example you give which has next-to-nothing in common with what's being discussed here.

You don't have to want to share governing of your personal idea project. You can be open to contributions that align with your goals BUT reject those that don't.

Both can be true at the same time and the latter does not make you a bad team player. It makes you a "if you want to help me build my shed in my back yard I'll welcome you but if you turn out to want to build a garage then I'll show you the door" person. Or in other words, it makes a fairly normal Homo Sapiens.
That's exactly what I would have done. "Tell the cops to come with a warrant, and I'll open the door for them."
I skipped a good bit of school (also in the 90s), and frequently was punished for it, and consider myself to have only myself to blame. Nevertheless, I knew a kid, a younger brother of a friend, who had school avoidance, and it was palpably different. It was probably a situation of major depression manifesting as anxiety and defiant behavior. As the article says, it's not a concrete diagnosis. It's really more of a symptom with the same effect of putting education on hold.

Knowing the parents, I am sure they tried to make him tough it out at first. I suppose you eventually go for psychiatry because the usual parenting strategies don't work.

On every discussion of mental health, there seems to be one side that says "I recognize that in myself..." and another that says, "This is not a disorder". Whether it's about laziness vs executive dysfunction, social anxiety vs. awkwardness, autism spectrum vs. weirdness, depression vs saddness, or anxiety vs discomfort. Most mental health disorders are not trivial, and do not have easy solutions. While I don't doubt that some people want to become the authority on a new disease they discovered and name, I think most of the time the profession is actually trying to help people.
With the flexibility of remote work it's hard to feel like anybody but chumps still work in person, let alone uproot their whole lives for an opportunity that can be swiped at a moment's notice.

The only reason I would personally relocate would be greater freedom, and relocating for a job is antithetical to that notion.
Management is a skill like any other. Very few people are born competent managers but most people can be trained as such. The trouble is that most organizations promote their top individual contributors to management without giving them additional training. You'll see a lot of snarky comments on HN about MBA programs but the good ones do instill at least some basic level of competence.

Of course training alone is insufficient. The organizational culture and incentives also have to be aligned. The US military puts a major focus on training officers to be effective leaders, and yet the results have been mixed. Toxic leadership is one of the main problems driving their current retention crisis.
Are the entries deduped? If one company owns another, is that represented as well?
are you unaware of major layoffs at major employers?
https://archive.is/qxbSh