skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> This worked 1% of the time. Because of the cooperative multitasking in win 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98 and Me the usual way out of this was reset or power off.

Only Win 3.1 used cooperative multitasking (and only when running on a 286). All others used preemptive multitasking.
I don't think many of the commenters here assume that at all. It is abundantly clear that working in-office is not threatened - it would be like have been worrying that men would be disenfranchised by women's suffrage. Assuming that in-office work did somehow disappear entirely, then there would also always be the option for WeWork or similar.

This is not a zero-sum game. It is possible for everyone to get what they want.
Lua Zephyr Module
This repository provides an example of how the Lua language can be integrated in a project using the Zephyr embedded operating system. Also, this repository is structured as a Zephyr module in order to facilitate the integration.
I think most cookware purchases are just what happened to be in the store at the time. Brands aren't considered much. Even for things like large appliances and cars this applies for a lot of people - and they're not necessarily wrong either.
For GADTs heavy programs, it depends a lot on how much work the exhaustiveness check for pattern matching is doing behind the scene: With GADTs, one can encode a Turing machine in the type system. In that pathological case, analyzing that a pattern match is exhaustive might require to check if the encoded Turing machine stops in n steps. Consequently, it is perfectly possible to write programs where the compiler spends 99% of its time on analyzing pattern matching. But it is also possible to write GADTs heavy programs that don't require such expensive analyses.

I have no first-hand experience with Swift but the previous discussion at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12108876 and the description of the problematic algorithm seems to indicate that numerical or mathematical code can run quite easily into the issue.

However, I must add that type inference algorithms being exponential in the source code size is nothing new: OCaml and Haskell inference are also exponential in the source code size. But that is because the size of types can be exponential in the source code size. Moreover, type inference complexity in OCaml and Haskell is linear in the size of types. And since in practice, no one ever uses exponentially growing types, type inference stays well behaved.

The specific issue with Swift is really more that even for simple result types, the inference may still have to do an exponential amount of guess work.
I do this, sometimes. And it's fine.
I think if we want to use language we should know what we are talking about. I understand his point to be: people have differing opinions of what asynchronous communication (back in the day it was called asynchronous I/O) means, so let's not use the word at all. Instead just describe what you are doing which more words, which are needed anyway and drop the word asynchronous.

I think it is a good idea to give this topic some attention, but I think it is defeatist to conclude that the word is doomed to be useless.

I don't think the communication protocol between two processes, services, whatever has have the property of being synchronous or asynchronous.

It is more about how each side of the communication handles it internally. Synchronous means I shoot off the message, wait until it is processed and I got a response (in case there is supposed to be a response), doing nothing else in the meantime and only after everything is done continue with the next thing I need to do. Asynchronous means I continue doing any type of work in the meantime while the message is sent and processed. That usually means anything that doesn't depend on the response.

Note that my communication partner will usually not care/notice if I am doing anything else in the meantime. I am saying usually because he might notice if I continue sending the same communication partner additional messages before I got a response.

Now the reason why we talk about synchronous and asynchronous communication when communicating between people is that some like to invoke a false equivalence. In the person-to-person communication it is fair to say a phone call, meeting, etc. are methods of synchronous communication and email asynchronous communication. This is more a social thing and has to do with the expectation of time for the response. When I speak on the phone, the receiver has to listen, process and understand exactly at the time I am speaking, i.e. synchronously. That need arises from my social expectation that the person is able to respond in some form seconds later (as opposed to hours or days for something like email). It should be clear here that the terms are used in a different sense as also mentioned in the talk, this is about context, which is also clear in the twitter responses he got. We sometimes have arguments when to prefer one over the other in person-to-person cummincation, and then sometimes this false equivalence with sync/async I/O is invoked.
I do this as well. It's disturbingly rare.
They said the paper is still working in progress and will improve it.

https://twitter.com/AiEleuther/status/1660811180901019648
No such book actually exists. There's a french book that covers basic/common procedures and a reader's digest book but those are about it; and they definitely are not beginner oriented.
Especially not on live ... it never happens man. It's urban legend.
Yesterday Meta, now Google! I like it

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-65669839
> Similarly, consider a series like A Song of Ice and Fire. A human reader is still consciously aware of (and waiting for) the answers to questions raised in the very first book.

Some of them, some of the time. This is best comparable with ChatGPT having those books in its training dataset.

The context window is more like short-term memory. GPT-4 can fit[0] ~1.5 chapters of Game of Thrones; GPT-4-32k almost six. Making space for prompt, questions and replies, say one chapter for GPT-4, and five chapters for GPT-4-32k.

Can you imagine having a whole chapter in your working memory at once? Being simultaneously aware of every word, every space, every comma, every turn of phrase, every character and every plot line mentioned in it - and then being able to take it all into account when answering questions? Humans can do it for a paragraph, a stanza, maybe half a page. Not a whole chapter in a novel. Definitely not five. Not simultaneously at every level.

I feel in this sense, LLMs already surpassed our low-level capacity - though the comparison is a bit flawed, since our short-term memory also keeps tracks of sights, sounds, smells, time, etc. and emotions. My point here isn't really to compare who has more space for short-term recall - it's to point out that answering questions about immediately read text is another narrow, focused task which machines can now do better than us.

----

[0] - 298000 words in the book (via [1]), over 72 chapters (via [2]), gives us 4139 words per chapter. Multiplying by 4/3, we get 5519 tokens per chapter. GPT-4-8k can fit 1.45x that; GPT-4-32k can fit 5.8x that.

[1] - https://blog.fostergrant.co.uk/2017/08/03/word-counts-popula...

[2] - https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Chapters_Table_of_cont...
It could be the way you're interpreting, but I suspect what she means is that she didn't go through and verify the exact measurements and timings in the recipe. There are simply too many variables involved in (non-baking) recipes to produce an exactly reproducible result - your ingredients might be different sizes, your "medium" heat is probably not their medium heat, differences in produce might affect the amount of salt/sugar you need to add, etc. Also, when scaling a recipe up or down, you won't actually want to scale things linearly - it generally takes much longer to cook a large portion than it does a small one, or it feels silly to use 1/8th of an onion, etc. Most of these can be solved through measuring by weight, but that's annoying unless you're baking.

So the recipe is really just some rough proportions that have probably never been cooked exactly; you are expected to make adjustments. That's why I find video recipes super helpful - you can see how each step is supposed to look, so if the timings in the recipe are wrong you can still adjust on the fly. And tasting as you go is always a good idea too.
Forgot to make it public. Fixed now!
If you don't choose a specific DE (which is the default setting), it installs GNOME.
Kagi is not showing ads.

Ads are (often) a distraction. Mostly my brain just ignores them, but occasionally they trick me to some sidetrack and I forget for a while what I was doing.
I think they would need to list the advantages over Go on their homepage.

They can assume that most people visiting that page are already familiar with Go. So simply having "compatible with Go" as a feature isn't really a feature for this audience, I mean Go is already compatible with Go.
> They also assume I have an infinite amount of cutting boards and knifes

A professional kitchen doesn't either. They wipe things down with sanitizer as they go. i.e. a damp rag from a bucket of water/steramine solution.
Doesn't matter.

The baseline is anything written in C and C++, which don't have bignum or decimal types and so more or less always parse JSON numbers to either int64 or double, at best.
It is a fair criticism though. Immutable distros are pretty new in the landscape of desktop linux distros so googling issues for them won't give you a lot of answers. And a side-effect of what they are means a lot of the time the answer to "how to do X to the system" is "you don't". They're reliant on having a solid base system image because changing it isn't very user friendly.

I say this as a Fedora Silverblue user, I personally think the tradeoff is worth it for me.
A parser is something you write once and then it's done, so it shouldn't be the deciding factor. And parsing indentation-based languages is not that hard, just replace indents and dedents with a special token.

In a brace-based language, if your braces are wrong, your logic is wrong. How is that better? At least a mistake in indentation is much easier for a human to spot.
In other words, you couldn't.
Never been tested once:

Bacon-Wrapped Mozzarella Sticks

Ingredients:

- 12 slices of bacon
- 12 mozzarella sticks
- 1/2 cup all-purpose flour
- 2 eggs, beaten
- 1 cup breadcrumbs
- 1/2 teaspoon garlic powder
- 1/2 teaspoon paprika
- Vegetable oil, for frying
- Marinara sauce, for serving

Instructions:

Preheat your oven to 400°F (200°C). Line a baking sheet with parchment paper.

Wrap each mozzarella stick with a slice of bacon, starting from one end and wrapping it tightly. Place the bacon-wrapped mozzarella sticks on the prepared baking sheet.

Bake the bacon-wrapped mozzarella sticks in the preheated oven for about 12-15 minutes, or until the bacon is crispy and the cheese is melted. Remove from the oven and set aside.

In three separate shallow bowls, set up a breading station. Place flour in the first bowl, beaten eggs in the second bowl, and breadcrumbs mixed with garlic powder and paprika in the third bowl.

Heat vegetable oil in a deep skillet or pot over medium heat until it reaches 350°F (180°C).

Take each bacon-wrapped mozzarella stick and dredge it in flour, then dip it into the beaten eggs, and finally coat it with the breadcrumb mixture, pressing gently to adhere. Repeat this process for each mozzarella stick.

Carefully place the coated mozzarella sticks into the hot oil, a few at a time, and fry for about 2-3 minutes, or until golden brown and crispy. Use a slotted spoon to transfer the fried mozzarella sticks to a paper towel-lined plate to drain excess oil.

Serve the bacon-wrapped mozzarella sticks warm with marinara sauce for dipping. Enjoy!

These bacon-wrapped mozzarella sticks make for a delicious appetizer or snack that combines the gooeyness of melted mozzarella with the savory crunch of bacon.

Looking forward to the Stable Diffusion based Illustration.
Delia Smith’s Complete Cookery Course is an absolute classic and I can also recommend Essentials of Classic Italian Cooking by Marcella Hazan
How is a reddit link relevant?

FWIW I may not have large enough directories but on the ones I just tested I didn't had this bug. I am not negating such a bug may have existed but a link to the actual gnome bug tracker would be more relevant, it may have already been fixed for all I know.

Also, are you implying that KDE or any other DE do not suffer any bug?

Last but not least, you are not forced to use Nautilus in Gnome. If Nautilus is not your preferred file manager you can perfectly live with a Gnome desktop while using Thunar (from XFCE), Nemo (from Cinnamon), PCManFM or even Dolphin if you don't mind the toolkit difference. I am personnaly using Gnome for most of my laptops but use Kitty as default terminal emulator instead of Gnome Terminal.
In this case, one should start with implementing -Xmx switch, then gradually adding the rest.
I've aggressively silenced technology over the last few years and wrote about it. I just turn off anything that calls for my attention without justification.

https://nicolasbouliane.com/blog/silence

It's hard to notice the improvement, a bit like a headache that slowly subsides. But it works. I don't get sidetracked as much. Technology feels less... noisy.
I feel that the time quoted to cook the recipes is always based on an experienced chef, which is likely often not the case for things like Hello Fresh.

An experienced chef will have be far more efficient at chopping/food preparation - I'm reasonable fast at chopping but still probably end up focusing over details an experienced chef would know aren't going to matter for the final recipe.

Also they're probably better at managing the parallel threads of execution most recipes need, hence they always talk about boiling water for pasta far more early then I ever end up needing it.
> every token embedding interacts with every other token embedding before it

> it takes a fraction of every other token embedding and adds it to itself.

> every token embedding mixing information from other embeddings into itself

Noting the use of the word every. Phrased this way, calling it "attention" hardly makes sense, as attention is typically focused on something specific at any given time - not always on the entire thing.
Yes, US side, NATO side and Ukraine side, war crimes that US has committed are also very bad.

Even though considering "whataboutism", Russians as a nation are universally hated among their neighbors, they invaded, killed and displaced and are currently occupying lands in Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, Kazakhstan etc. etc.

And that would be main difference, while US bombs tyrannic regiments and topples dictatorships, Russia invades and is trying to annex their neighbors. It has economy roughly of a Spain and is basically a shithole thug regiment that needs to be dissolved and fast.
Even during peak-covid I could still communicate with my friends and family members using uncensored means of communication.
Make a huge batch of them and freeze the rest.
I took a linear algebra class in high school and we used two textbooks for the class. One gave a simple and soft presentation which we used most of the time. The other one was much more rigorous, referred to in hushed and fearful tones simply as "Strang". When I got to university, I realized with fear and excitement that the guy teaching the linear algebra class is the same guy who wrote the textbook we were all afraid of in high school. His lectures are excellent. Just as clear and rigorous as the book, but not at all scary. Just like Strang himself.
> complexity makes a ton of money. Not for you, of course. Don’t be silly. It makes money for the cloud vendors, the evangelists, the influencers, and the whole industry that has spun up around these things.

I don't like how this paints devs as blind followers without any opinion or agenda of their own. From my perspective many devs at big and mid-sized companies have a very clear financial incentive to adopt the latest trends.

The way an IC increases their income is usually either by being promoted or by job-hopping to another job with better pay. Getting promoted past a certain point is all about impressing your boss (or promotion committee in certain companies) and "developed a new architecture based on latest insights" is just inherently more impressive than "kept the decade old monolith online for another year". Similarly for job-hopping, hiring managers empirically seem more interested in people with modern tech stacks on their CV than in people who seemingly haven't learned anything in the last 15 years. Thus, devs have a strong incentive to learn and adopt new tech stacks and doing so during work time is clearly the most efficient way to do that.

The jumps in pay between various levels (junior/senior/lead/principal/etc) can be incredibly significant. It would be silly to expect software developers (who are typically intelligent and highly analytical) not to realize that the incentives are very clearly stacked towards following the latest trends. Now I do think that this is a very suboptimal outcome for the company, but if they since they are the ones setting the incentive structure in the first place it is difficult to feel too sorry for them.
Actually, my grandma can do it in ~20 minutes and her onion soup using one onion will still taste better than mine which uses four onions. Apparently the trick is to use enough oil for the amount of flour that you use. A lot of the golden color comes from that.
Perhaps he was just being nice. People say a lot of things to get what they want.
Ratio by Michael Ruhlman as well.
I use an adblock so I don't see any ads on google.
I don't see how the US recovers from the destruction in the government and among the people the past few years. It feels absolutely hopeless.
It usually is. Reddit in particular banned a whole swathe of women-focused communities, and users who commented in them, where women were advocating for their rights regarding female-only spaces.

Outside of social media, there is a significant amount of institutional censorship on this topic, favoring male privilege over women's rights.
Thank you for your kind words! I will be sure reach out when we are hiring.
12 minutes for rice. Don't lift the lid. Only lesson I ever needed.
> Surely that can’t be true (...) every modern recipe has pictures to show what the result should look like

You may be looking at glue used as milk, motor oil as sauce or mashed potatoes pretending to be ice cream [1].

(And don't call me Shirley)

[1] https://petapixel.com/2018/11/30/tricks-food-photographers-u...
America's Test Kitchen actually does suggest adding water to reduce the amount of time needed for caramelization--and not an equivalent amount of water, but much more than the amount of oil you'd use.

The idea is that adding water, raising it to a boil, and covering the pan reduces the amount of time needed to raise the temperature of the onions to the caramelization point, more than offsetting the amount of time needed to remove the water itself. That plus adding some baking soda near the end reduces the overall time considerably.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ovqhzil3wJw
Speaking as somebody who was there when Tech Solidarity came through town after the Trump election, I saw you give a presentation that focused more on collecting Democratic party donations and fighting Trump than on any actual labor organization.

You had people drive in hours from out of town (this was deep purple Texas, Houston), and you wasted their time rattling a can for a party that sucks. Worse, you never came back.

For anybody interested in real organizing today that isn't just finding handouts for the failed Democratic Machine, check out Communications Workers of America ( https://cwa-union.org/ ). They'll help you form a chapter and learn how to unionize your shop, even if it's small.
I had ATT at the time, and 3g was already rolled out. It had been since 2005, even.

I definitely agree with the last paragraph, the fact that it sold so well without 3g was a testament to its following.

I simply don't feel mentioning 3g in the article was worthwhile - it is not a reason for the iPhone's success.
my sister tests all her recipes, takes her ages! https://www.amazon.co.uk/What-Cook-How-Jane-Hornby/dp/071485...
sure thing :)

just that a vast majority of companies would go out of business
This is starting to sound like an episode of Posh Nosh :P

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzjR0yL4f0Y
Okay — but there’s no harm to the environment. You’re just not improving it.

The grandparent claimed this was a “fig leaf”: instead, you made an ideological post about how we need to not do even environmentally neutral things — that doesn’t make carbon neutral air travel a “fig leaf”.
You can see how much of a challenge it is to go into interesting game mechanics in 3d by looking at the development of Satisfactory.
The Food Lab covers that kind of thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Food_Lab
I talk about cooking and food a lot with my Czech teacher (not just because I like to cook, but if I'm low-energy it's such an easy topic) and I brought this idea up - something along the lines of "What do you think about all the recipes that say 'fry onions until caramelised - about 5-10 minutes'?". Her reply floored me - "ha! yeah, 10 minutes? They'd be burned by then!". I spent the next few minutes trying to explain exactly what I meant, thinking that I'd said something wrong or been misunderstood. Nope, no misunderstanding. She swore blind that onions caramelise at 5 minutes and burn after 10. I suspect she's cooking them on a volcano or something.
Meta hit with record $1.3B fine over data transfers
>Is there any telemetry

"No, we don't care about your data. Ours is better."

Ha ha
I love SimCity, never forget the first time I played it on an Amiga 500.

Then one day my friend lent me his 512KB ram upgrade and it was a different game :-)
So spain would have to make a certificate for EVERY website? How would it work, when you would visit a canadian or brasilian website?
"Creates a sound as loud as a car door closing" -> I assume this means at ground level? I can't imagine even the propulsion being that quiet let alone the sonic boom.
Realistically, you could not quote a passage from the chapter directly, and you don't really need to anyway.

Summarizing chapters with the very same LLM and including that as context may very well get you far.
Not really. I set my VPN endpoint to Sweden, disabled adblock and Google started showing me ads in Swedish. Also back when I still used my Google acc they showed me ads for things that I've already bought. Their adtech stuff is way dumber than you think it is.
I think the general direction you're describing is correct, but it might also be that occasionally someone at reddit looks at the front page of voat and thinks "let's not become that".
Google The Fuck, Man!
> Because the super rich only have so much time in their lives to spend in the stratosphere

It's also not a place you'd want to spend too much time considering you're outside of the radiation protection of a large part of the atmosphere.
It's not quite what OP suggested, Joshua Weissman's Unapologetic Cookbook does something similar. The first section is literally, "A Little Cooking Foundation" and the first subsection is "Staples From Scratch." It's not comprehensive, but it is cohesive - by the end, you're using recipes from the beginning.

He's also got a YouTube channel that's pretty fun to watch.

That said, be careful what you wish for. My partner and I joke that he's pretty over the top sometimes. For example, the first part of that book includes recipes for butter and Ranch dressing. I'm sure they'll taste amazing, but if you're trying to make dinner after work, it'll be late by the time you get to eat, vs. just using stuff off the supermarket shelf. Really depends on what you're trying to get out of a cookbook.
There's No Purple Light