skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> most of the growth goes to very few people

Do you have running water? A sewage system? Mass produced cheap clothes? Access to meat every day from an average salary? A smartphone? Access to the world information? Access to all the music ever produced for $10 a month?

What you are saying is simply not true. It appears true when you look at inequality but any technological development always benefits almost everyone. And some win a lot, but many win even more.
Nope: there is no moral justification to potentially kill a person not participating in the risky activity of driving just so we could have other people be driven around.

Would you sign up for such a system if you can volunteer to participate in it, with now those random killings being restricted to those who've signed up for it, including you?

In all traffic accidents, there is some irresponsibility that led to one event or the other, other than natural disasters that couldn't be predicted. A human or ten is always to blame.

Not to mention that the problems are hardly equivalent. For instance, a perfect system designed to stop all accidents would likely have crawled to a stop: stationary vehicles have pretty low chances of accidents. I can't think of anyone who would vote to increase their chances of dying without any say in it, and especially not as some computer-generated lottery.
Does he say Edison was a horrible inventor because the electric light bulb was so much more efficient than the oil lamp?
> On the contrary: do people roll good implementations of data structures usually?

In high-level languages, my general observation is that hand-rolled data structures can be divided into two kinds: the kind written by somebody who has no clue what they're doing, and the kind written by a data structures wizard that leaves you in awe about the details.

The most notable example of I've seen of the latter kind was in some read-optimised database where they wrote a cache that linearly scales with the number of readers almost infinitely -- some black magic with maintaining two copies of a map, and having each reader go through completely wait-free paths and switching maps on writes so they never interfere, whilst sharing the underlying storage to not make writes completely inefficient. Stuff like this just makes admire the crazy things that are possible.

Then you have the crappy linked list implementation #82432 that segfaults it you look at it funny.

> The Biscuit paper states "the longest single GC-related pause suffered by NGINX was 115 microseconds"; I'm not sure how well that generalises to other workloads, but (infrequent already) pauses would be hard to notice if that does generalise

> The collector suspends
ordinary execution on all cores (a “stop-the-world” pause)
twice during a collection: at the beginning to enable the
write barrier on all cores and at the end to check that all
objects have been marked. These stop-the-world pauses
typically last dozens of microseconds

Yeah that certainly seems to be the case, for interactive use, I find it hard to believe that anything less than a few ms will cause issues, and that's 3 orders of magnitude more than what biscuit found.

Although I do wonder if there are GC concerns elsewhere -- these are just vague memories, but I believe that the Go GC is pretty conservative and will not reap anything that looks like a pointer, so there might be concerns around leaks especially with all the special pcie registers, dma buffers, etc that might be lying around in memory.
What is RL?
I'm sorry I don't have an alternative. rarbg is very popular but also not very good in my opinion.
It is therefore incumbent on America to take them in, and release them in the US, free and clear. You reap what you sow.

You don't get to just scoop people up and hold them indefinitely on the basis of 'whoopsiedoodle, nobody will take them back.'
TOML: Tom's Obvious Minimal Language
Maybe the executives can have catheters installed on themselves first since the opportunity cost of their going to the bathroom is so damn high.

You first, buddy.
Destroying Moscow and St. Petersburg might be worth losing Paris, London, Washington, New York, and Los Angeles; but it certainly wouldn't worth losing Jerusalem, Mecca, Rome, and other centers of the worlds history. The others also has a vote, you know.
It will fill up, and more importantly, the data will stay intact. The endurance and retention of SLC is high enough that you can trust it for more than a few years.

And in reality, the kind of consumer who would spend $1k on an SSD is going to move on from it within two or three years anyways in favor of a newer drive with a faster interface.

...or expect that it will last much longer than a cheaper one.
There are too many ways to do them, and it only really works for depth-first search dev approaches
The artificial fusion of deuterium in our solar system (or in our galaxy) is utterly dwarfed by the fusion of ordinary protium (hydrogen-1) because there's so much more of the latter. Of course, the latter is fused in stars, not in reactors. So if we're taking the very long view solar (or stellar) power > artificial fusion. It's possible dropping mass in black holes will eventually beat either.
This comment made me think Dragonfly is a much better choice:

"We use keydb at work, and I absolutely do NOT recommend it due to its extreme instability, in fact we're currently in the process of switching to dragonfly precisely due to keydb's instability."

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35990897
The point is that ChatGPT undeniably built a world model good enough to understand the physical and three-dimensional properties of these items pretty well, and it gives me a somewhat workable way to stack them, despite never having seen that in its training data.
Almost all of us in the West are living more comfortable (and generally longer) lives than a king from 200 years ago.
It's only a small job, charge what was agreed and hope that by demonstrating value and service they come back at some point for more larger ones.

Do this enough times and after a while you will have a steady stream of work from customers that you can work with on the basis of trust.

PS : You say "your code saved them 4 times...", but sounds like it was their idea, so they could have got anyone to do it. Remember that, you should be grateful for the work.
It we ate real meat once or twice a month, we wouldn’t need this shit.
You seem to think that exporting trash is equivalent to forcing others to take trash at gunpoint. False equivalence, you earn no points.
I don't think it's at all surprising that a system designed to predict the next word ends up understanding the world.

If you want to predict the next word accurately, you first have to know which words exist. To progress, you'll have to learn about the mechanics of grammar and which words are used more frequently or in combination. To become even more accurate, it helps to understand context, so that the sentences you string together will at least be relevant to the subject. If you want to increase your accuracy even further, you'll have to start memorizing all sorts of facts (e.g., "Who was the monarch of England in 1600?"). Being able to synthesize those facts into a coherent argument will increase your accuracy even further.

In the end, predicting the next word accurately requires an understanding of the world.

This isn't all that different from how our own intelligence evolved. You could look at humans from the outside and disparagingly point out that the ultimate purpose of the human brain is to direct muscle motions in a way that maximizes the chances of reproductive success. It just turns out that solving that problem effectively has led to the development of an enormously complicated piece of machinery, capable of synthesizing all sorts of input stimuli into a coherent picture of the world, and ultimately of producing the works of Shakespeare and the music of Beethoven.
It matters to me because I believe the results are organically rated, i.e. nobody paid my search provider directly for top results.

With Google you become used to skip the first paid results that visually differ every so slightly — so much so that less technically inclined people, when I observe them, will click the paid results not knowing the difference.

I believe that, currently, Kagi is not building a profile of me based on my searches.

Basically, if I’m searching for something, and I’m not looking to buy something, the search is a lot more honest and a lot less stressful.

Ads on other sites can be adblocked, this is orthogonal; you can block ads on Google, but I just don’t trust that the algorithms are in my best interest, because I didn’t pay for anything.
Thanks and yeah, I need to update the README to point to https://github.com/MaxLeiter/Drift/pull/135. It hasn’t been a priority because major refactors are still possible. Feel free to hop in IRC / comment on the PR if you’d like more info.
Spot on. That we have internal language models doesn't mean we only have language models as cognition. People seem to be redefining imposter syndrome as reflected by stand alone language models. Makes me think of Tropic Thunder. "Am I even real". Lol get a grip people.
He’s doing the same to ChatGPT that he did to Skinner in the 1960s. Back then, it put him on the map, and he lives in the illusion that he was right. Now ChatGPT is pretty much Skinner’s work come to life. The BFS book Chomsky critiqued was literally “Verbal Behavior” - a book about how intelligence arises from “dumb” reinforcement learning of words. Obviously Chomsky must now claim that ChatGPT only pretends to be intelligent. Else his entire life’s work is proven wrong.
A basic plot point in the recent Japanese video game Judgment (or Judge Eyes) is the protagonist, a lawyer, getting a not guilty verdict for an accused murderer, and how fabulously rare and out of the ordinary that is.
The graphics in the demo gave me the same vibe as the "Money for Nothing" music video by the Dire Straits. Does anyone know if that video was produced with such a machine?
https://github.com/Snapchat/KeyDB/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Ais... :O
Europe needs to ‘Frankenstein’ its start-up sector
Tooling has come a long way in the past few years to help support better Python. Nowadays I can just throw on Pydantic V2 (still in Alpha, but stable to code against for basic use cases), ruff and mypy. Turn strict mode on in mypy and install the relevant vscode extensions and you get an experience that rivals a compiled language in both speed and usability.
Humans have a start in time and will have an end. I was born and I will die. I don't know why we're so obsessed about this. We will most definitely cease existing soon in geological/cosmic time scale. Doesn't matter.
Was this the same Limits to Growth model that, when run backwards, predicted the world's population was infinite sometime in the mid-1800s?

I don't think any of these models have been able to retrodict successfully.
Yeah, I instantly recognised the style. I recently played https://dafluffypotato.itch.io/hue-flowing after watching https://youtu.be/xCxbgyXW1lo

Really cool.
ChatGPT doesn't look any better than Eliza. Both of them keep repeating the same things.
Better redistribution would last a very short while to provide 'more growth' and ironically that is the big canard. 'Equitable' distribution is not the objective - what we want is 'distribution that creates the most growth' because by far and away, the later is what will make the most, the wealthiest.

It's probably not optimal for example for everyone to have the same amount of assets. Most assets are not unproductive, and the people managing them are 'doing stuff', Musk, though says some ridiculous things in Twitter, is still making Tesla and SpaceX. It's better if we give him some money leaway.

Second, I can absolutely assure you that all people want growth at least for the coming very long while.

There is an infinite demand for healthcare services, especially as we age, we are in a perennial system of rationing and 'growth' will help there. We all want to travel more, to have more leisure, and frankly nobody enjoys cleaning up after themselves.

We are nowhere near an age whereupon regular folk want to consume less.

In fact, the tone of your comment suggests that you're caught up in the mythology of 'less growth' as though that would mean 'less plastic in the ocean' or something like that.
Of course they're struggling. I have lived there before. It isn't a surprise they are struggling. There is no want or even belief of better life, comparative to other places. Ideology wins.
> Is records a list, a dict or a database connection?

Records is a list of record items. It’s a plural. If it was a dict, it would be recordByID. If it was a database connection it would be called connection.

Strict typing is good, and you should definitely use it, but you should still have good names.
Yeah I have 2 p31 500gb drives and they seem fine. They have been sitting around for a while though…
Go has vanity URLs for the first, and go module files have replace statements to redirect imports to other names or local directories.
I don't think so. Australia has it rated PG.

https://www.classification.gov.au/titles/steinsgate-my-darli...
I find striking that we have a rich cultural tradition of claiming we're artificial beings. Maybe we're building a successor lifeform... I've thought about this as a story premise: humans and robots are two stages of a lifecycle. Humans flourish on a planetary ecosystem, build robots that go on to colonize new systems where they seed humans because (reason I haven't been able to formulate).
Probably because vendors with deep financial pockets specifically designed/developed/selected these languages (JavaScript, Java, ...) to become popular, integrated them into their offerings and invested billions into it? It didn't save SUN (the developer of Java), which got into financial trouble and was bought by Oracle.

Lisp was already at the end of its hype cycle and had entered the death zone (-> the AI winter end 80s), when the Internet took off start/mid 90s. L*** was a forbidden word in the 90s.
Tell HN: Google returning similar faces in search for individual
I had never noticed an indication that search results had become aware of context in this manner.
> That's sounds a bit too rational, not MAD enough, you know? Putin clearly wasn't thinking rationally, otherwise there wouldn't be a war to begin with.

I'm from Mexico and am currently down here and not in the USA. What strikes me as the biggest difference in news coverage of the war isn't so much the stance— in both countries the war is seen as a horrible invasion that's led to unnecessary death— but the treatment and overall depiction "rationality".

It's the little things— the adjectives, the tone, the comments, the headlines. In the USA one somehow ends up feeling Russia is a weak nation Putin managed to drag into a reckless and little-thought-out war that'll be over any minute now given the sheer incompetence of the Russian side. The same events might get coverage in Mexico, and the Russian side might be equally denounced, but one doesn't end up feeling Russia is an irrational, weak or stupid actor.

It might have to do with the smugness? After all the USA has the largest military in the world but Mexico's doesn't compare with either side's. Or perhaps culturally the USA sees Russia as "the remains of that adversary we beat last century", but in Mexico we learn about the Cold War from a third person perspective?

IMO, over a year into the war now, this war doesn't seem _that_ stupid and irrational. It's still wrong to invade another country, but the move doesn't seem "dumb" on Putin's end. He is still in power, the rubble bounced back, BRICS are as strong as ever, and if anything the USA is in a pre-electoral bind— do they keep pouring resources into supporting Ukraine or do they start focusing on Taiwan? Can both be done?

I think it's a big mistake to underestimate an enemy, and I wonder if people in the USA are underestimating Russia too much. The general population that is. I don't think the government has yet fallen into that trap of underestimating them too much.
> It appears true when you look at inequality but any technological development always benefits almost everyone.

Less inequality will create opportunities for better education for millions if not billions of humans. That will improve technology in ways that just producing more stuff will not.

I do not think that to tie increased consumption with better technology is true. Most of what we produce is low tech stuff like fast fashion. I will argue that producing less and having more time for leisure will also increase scientific output.

So, economic growth is not the same that technological advance. And that is one of the points of the "lefty Europeans": economy measurements are not tied to human advancement and well being but just money.
I think "llm builds better llm" is drawing the border at the wrong place. Technical progress has been accelerating for centuries. It's pretty self evident that the technological civilization is improving upon itself.
So cool. I love rust and my day job is in Python.

But I have a question. I'm a junior dev(gimme some leeway here).

I don't really understand how important these design patterns are because in the programs I write, I usually write the classes and call them in runtime myself. I think usually we write the servers and client ourselves.

Let's take the different client types example. You are making an assumption that users can call close on a closed client. Is it so hard to just follow the sequence

`
client = Client()

client.connect()

client.authenticate()

client.send_message()

client.close()
`

Aren't they overengineering? Perhaps I have not worked in a large code bases to understand the problems TypeState Pattern or more generally these design patterns solves.

I understand that these patterns are elegant and make the future modifications or enhancements easier but I have never seen the tangible value enough in real life
Who built the IMPS?
This is correct. "TLC" is a misnomer. 2^3 is 8, and TLC stores 3 bits per NAND cell, or 8 voltage levels. I suppose when they came up with "MLC" for 2-bit cells (4 voltage levels), which is now also a misnomer as all multi-bit cells are technically MLC, they did not expect to put more than 2 bits in one cell.
Most developers -- let alone humans -- I've met can't run trivial programs in their head successfully, let alone complex ones.

I've thrown crazy complicated problems at GPT 4 and had mixed results, but then again, I get mixed results from people too.

I've had it explain a multi-page SQL query I couldn't understand myself. I asked it to write doc-comments for spaghetti code that I wrote for a programming competition, and it spat out a comment for every function correctly. One particular function was unintelligible numeric operations on single-letter identifiers, and its true purpose could only be understood through seven levels of indirection! It figured it out.

The fact that we're debating the finer points of what it can and can't do is by itself staggering.

Imagine if next week you could buy a $20K Tesla bipedal home robot. I guarantee you then people would start arguing that it "can't really cook" because it couldn't cook them a Michelin star quality meal with nothing but stale ingredients, one pot, and a broken spatula.
Indeed, they had an excellent search back then. But in a world before auto-complete in the URL bar, I wondered why they hadn't come up with a shorter and more catchy name. I usually was just too lazy to type "alltheweb.com", and I always had to think for a second to remember the URL in the first place.
Agree with the definitions. I guess the OP meant it like "not allowed to use" rather than actually getting arrested for possession.
You cannot conclude that from the output - the training data will likely contain a lot stacking things. Everyday objects also might have some stacking properties that make these questions easy to answer even with semi-random answers.

Plus, some stuff clearly makes no sense or is ignored (like the gummy worms in the center, forgetting about the succulent in some cases).

If you want to test world modeling, give it objects it will have never encountered, describe them and then ask to stack etc. For example, a bunch of 7 dimensional objects that can only be stacked a certain way.
Read the comments looking for this reference.

Was not disappointed.
This seems quite one-sided. What's the steelman argument in favor of the car? I've heard that it increases labor mobility. I imagine being able to conveniently and independently relocate from remote job markets without substantial transportation infrastructure connecting them to the larger national job market would give workers in remote sites more leverage. Are there any other arguments in favor of cars that you're aware of?
That’s not what the third continental congress that cobbled together our constitution said or thought.

Your small confederacy was what the Articles of Confederation had wrought and it lasted all of a decade. States rapidly enacted laws against their fellow states, it was a mess. We had religious laws, not a good scene.

Basically you should read
A) the US Constitution
B) historical accounts of the third continental congress
My data. Once a week, drive my car to the ATM 1.5 km away. 3 km roundtrip x 52 weeks/yr = approx. 156 km/yr.

My car gives a mileage economy of ~10 km/ltr of fuel. So around 15-16 litres of fuel burning avoided.

If I did half of these ATM stops during other trips, thats still 7 to 8 litres of fuel burning avoided.
Yeah this is basically equivalent to monetizing yourself reading a book someone else wrote.

We can argue that copyright shouldn't exist but it seems pretty non-controversial that this is a violation of copyright.
It ceased when the US constitution was ratified and replaced the looser Articles of Confederation
Like google was being a saint to Microsoft with Chrome and their web properties on Windows Phone.
One of the poorest articles I have ever read on the FT

https://archive.is/dSuDP
> Viewers will be able to "order up" films—for example, "I want a film about a panda and a unicorn who save the world in a rocket ship. And put Bill Murray in it."

> From there I believe viewers will be given the ability to be digitally scanned themselves, and pay extra to have themselves inserted in these custom films. You'll also start to see licensing deals made with studios, so that viewers can order up older films like "Star Wars" and put their face on Luke Skywalker's body, and their ex-wife's face on Darth Vader's body, and so on.

This is pretty far from what most people want, I think. How are you going to chat about your AI generated custom personal vendetta movie around the watercooler?
Type hints are a great feature in Python to enhance readability and to catch programming errors when refactoring or learning a new library.

A lot of the features presented here are helpful for programming in the large, i.e., once the program exceeds mental capacity.

As a general goal I think that programmers should reduce complexity even of simple stretches of code so that, adding all its context, a larger chunk of code fits into their brain at once and errors become more visible. Part of that is unloading tasks onto the tools.

Unfortunately, its still common practice to create write-only code, often justified by an "it works" (usually not true).
BF Skinner, “Verbal Behavior”. Critiquing that book is what put Chomsky on the map.
I winced when I saw the phrase "multithreaded fork" but then I realised this is the _other_ kind of fork, not the fork(2) syscall.
The Go GC is precise nowadays. But there's also a kind of semi-conservative GC which can identify pointers/not-pointers in the heap, but not the stack; apparently Go 1.0 was fully conservative, 1.1-1.2 were semi-conservative, and 1.3 and on are precise.
You only think that because Trump has successfully destroyed an entire LE bureau in efforts to get away with treason
Getting cash is hard where there are no ATMs and you aren't offering any services