skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Raymond Chen has got you covered. These three are my favorite technical articles on Windows 3.1:

- If Windows 3.11 required a 32-bit processor, why was it called a 16-bit operating system? [0]

- What did Windows 3.1 do when you hit Ctrl+Alt+Del? [1]

- How did Windows 3.1’s virtual machine manager get the information to show in the text-mode Alt+Tab switcher? [2]

[0] https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20100517-00/?p=14...

[1] https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20140912-00/?p=44...

[2] https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20211129-00/?p=10...

I keep coming back for those three articles.
I am pretty sure China and Russia have similar laws. Its just if a Chinese company tried putting a canary on their annual report they would find someone explain the difference between "letter" and "spirit" very clearly.

The administrations of china and the USA are different of course, but not so different. The big difference is in the institutions and norms.
The original news article from [Wistron exits Apple India business after tripping over scale, work culture](https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/technology/wistron...) from The Economic Times (referenced in the article) seems like a better submission.
Hey! Author from the paper here! This is not a dumb question at all. There are already pretty good processes for treating lead poisoning, such as chelating agents. These nanomaterials, while not terrible for the body, are probably not the best things to ingest to treat Pb poisoning.
I let it write the boring stuff. Needed a python class to take an example dict, and generate a class that creates all the properties that map to the keys in said dict (I have a constraint preventing me from using something like json_dataclass or similar). While it's churning that out, I can focus on other things.

Also found its great for regex, I'm pretty good with writing these, but recently came across a pretty complex one in our codebase that wasnt commented. Pasted into GPT4 and asked it to explain it, it broke down each bit in detail, and in the end even generated an example string that would match it.
It is entirely possible to work in tech for a company that does not make any profit for years but still receive big pay checks. I used to work for a company that is at a loss, but we have the "potential" to turn around and i still get paid quite well. How does that work?
There are many wealthy/high income people in India, Brazil and South Africa. Proportionally fewer, but still many.
> I'm not sure introversion vs extraversion is relevant. Firstly, i'm not sure they're even real things; they show up in a lot of snake oil psychology (Jung, Myers-Briggs)

Calling Jung snake-oil psych is a bit of a hot take!

Outside of that, Introversion/Extroversion is part of the Big 5 personality traits which I understand to be widely accepted and (unlike a lot of psych) replicated multiple times.

In any case, at the end of a day of pairing I find myself exhausted and have basically no desire to communicate with anyone for the rest of the day. Maybe that's something I'd get used to eventually, though I'm doubtful.
i feel like with gpt it's go time for the humanities. they finally have a real p-zombie. capitalism is jumping the shark. there's now an ai schelling point for political and judicial decisions.
I'm not sure this is as strong an effect as the research[1] suggests. Is it not possible that, when in choosing which of two liked papers with conflicting schedules to watch, researchers are demonstrating which is the better paper?

[1]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2209.01175.pdf
> idea that there are "two sides" is a contrived fallacy

Policy-wise, and even in respect of Americans' views, agree. In terms of politics, it's as real as it's contrived. The messaging, debate and legislation is done in a two-sided way, particularly in Florida, where national attention has paramagnetised even school boards.

> absolute, unfettered free speech for adults and that every parent has an absolute right to decide what their own children are exposed to

This is fair. There are logistical issues with letting parents go à la carte on public education. But that's solvable.

I don't see banning books from libraries statewide helping parents "decide what their own children are exposed to." The brush is too broad, and it's one group of parents making decisions for others' kids. (And to preëmpt accusations of hypocrisy, I think it's equally ridiculous when "progressive" elements strike classics for all because somebody might get offended.)
Yes, they would.

Not my problem how you implement it. That's Facebook's problem. My rate is $600 an hour and I'll guarantee I can come up with a GDPR compliant solution within a year or you don't have to pay. That's far less expensive than the fines, isn't it?
Nonsensically cynical black and white take.

Mexico worked with the US on NAFTA because they trust US to buy cars and pay them. Not because they they think we will nuke them or blow them up with a death star.
Isn't that their point? Or how do you do that tax at an individual level vs a governmental one?
I fully support the sentiment here, and took a lot of the content from Deep Work to heart when I first read it and was trying to figure out how to be a more productive professional SWE, but a lot of this information is common knowledge within SWE culture for those who care about it, and I still haven't found an organization or team that actually puts these into practice.

I fear we've already lost this battle and the non-knowledge-worker to knowledge-worker ratio has gotten too high for tech companies/workers to get the cat back in the bag. If anybody has successfully changed a dev team's processes to make changes in the right direction, I'd love to hear how that happened for you. Many people I work with complain about too many meetings and interruptions and yet the expectations which contribute to these problems continue. My org recently adopted having a "no meeting day" every week and without this I don't think I'd ever get anything done.
> Their firmware strategy seems to be going for implementing every feature under the sun, so I'd be a bit concerned about the robustness of some of the edge cases, but no problems yet.

in what way ? If it is just "let's expose every feature of linux kernel underneath and add some" I wouldn't be worried. I think (not sure) RouterOS reimplemented a lot of networking for whatever reason instead of just using Linux facilities, and that bug would suggest that, as otherwise it would also show up in vanilla linux (I guess it could be in userspace tool not in kernel?)

> On a tangentially related note I recently found another manufacturer that is very similar to MikroTik: Teltonika.

How's CLI?

The one thing that makes me steer away from Mikrotik is its CLI. It is different enough from anything else networking and different from linux commands that I have zero intuition for it. So I just use plain linux

My go-to was PCEngines APU2 but AMD no longer supports/produces CPU it uses so it is near-discontinued
It's true in the same sense as the efficient market hypothesis or saying that the truth will prevail. It just tells you nothing about the timing of it.

Which is why it is especially important to have different expectations regarding newer science with little data and testing. But that's still where all the active research is going to happen.
Hey! Author from the paper here! Nanomaterial coatings are applied to the sponges (and could be applied to other membranes, filters, or adsorbents as well) to tailor their surfaces for the adsorption of particular metal ions. These nanomaterials physisorb metal ions with high capacity and specificity due to high surface area and abundant surface sites for adsorption (and desorption for regeneration under acidic conditions).
Any development trajectory that doesn't look very suspiciously like a logistics curve is a good starter. (Pretty much all LLMs I've seen show an exponential increase in resources for a less-than linear increase in capability lately)

And if we want to make a plan, how about we don't ask the fox to guard the hen house?
As others said, most publishers do not have the high moral ground here. This is Valve's/Netflix's "piracy is a service problem" ethos taken to the opposite extreme.
Ha, you're right. I should've used 30,000,000. The answer it gave regarding how to do "ties to even" was still correct though: "Evenness" is decided by the least significant bit of the mantissa, not be the "evenness" of the decimal representation.
Reluctant Metropolis looks interesting, thanks. I'd also recommend Mike Davis' City of Quartz.
If anything, it sounds like the start of a "Meta? I don't even know her" joke.
After 15 years they are not planning on exiting India, just the iPhone aspect.

"Wistron entered India in 2008 with a repair facility servicing PCs, laptops, servers and other devices it manufactured. In 2017, it started making iPhones for Apple and now makes the iPhone 14, iPhone 13, iPhone 12 and the iPhone SE. The company will continue with its repair facility."

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/technology/wistron...
If I’m understanding correctly, the technique basically injects malicious instructions in the content that is stored and retrieved?

Sounds like an easy fix, if it’s possible to detect direct prompt injection attacks then the same techniques can be applied to the data staged for retrieval.
The builder in this case is a good example of what the article mentions. One way to deal with it in this case is to lower the barrier to entry for construction - every landowner should be able to build more a small apartment building on their property, leading to profits shared more broadly among those who own land, and more housing units available for sale and/or rent for people who don't currently own land.
Finland "warned that the proposal could conflict with the Finnish constitution" and Germany "has staunchly opposed the proposal", so I don't think there's going to be an EU law banning end-to-end encryption. So if Spain were to act alone, I can't imagine banning WhatsApp (which uses end-to-end encryption) would go over well with their constituents. It's on 98% of their smartphones and (at least in 2015) they used it more than any other EU country [1]. WhatsApp (like Signal) said it would leave the UK rather than weaken encryption if end-to-end encryption was banned there. [2] I'm sure the same would be true for Spain.

1. https://english.elpais.com/elpais/2015/02/16/inenglish/14240...

2. https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/10/23633601/uk-online-safety...

Maybe WhatsApp is lying, but it would put them in a predicament for the following situation: a user from outside of Spain chatting with someone inside of Spain. Assuming they comply with Spanish law, they could,

1. Say nothing and show no warning message. Would generate negative press and distrust in the platform.

2. Show a warning message when a user tries to message someone in Spain. Some would commend the transparency, but the press and public may still be upset that they acquiesced to the Spanish governments' demands.

3. Create an entirely different version of the app for Spanish users. This wouldn't generate much negative press outside of Spain, but Spanish users absolutely would be upset that they can't contact people outside Spain with the app.

This is not an edge case scenario: 15% of people in Spain are foreign-born (likely contacting family and friends from their home country) and 2.7 million Spaniards live abroad (likely contacting family and friends inside of Spain.)

Option 3 is likely out of the picture, but of options 1 and 2, while neither would result in the death of WhatsApp, some users may indeed leave the platform due to it. In order to be worse than losing the entire country of Spain, 2.35% of WhatsApp users would have to leave the app. That seems unlikely, but even still WhatsApp might not feel it's worth the risk, and in any case they'd probably prefer to not have to spend development hours building systems to comply with the law. Easier to just cut them off.
It's not even new. I've been doing this professionally for 15 years, and the "web development isn't real development" was a common attitude at least since I started. If anything, it was worse.
In human learning at least, you need a good teacher that can give you a self consistent and correct basis and then you build on that. If you learn randomly your understanding will be "blurry" and then you have to spend time to unlearn the bad lessons. I have personal experience with this. I definitely like the message of this result, if it is true.
There is a lot of demand to control the narrative on political articles. Some political groups [1][2] have mobs of Wikipedia editors trying to influence what you read. I'd be surprised if they didn't have a few moderator roles otherwise a lot of their work would be reverted.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t52LB2fYhoY

[2] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/aug/18/wikipedia-edit...
Imagine the git blame results on the commit that introduced this defect.
Well yes, if you're not using encryption and it's a one off thing, the judge will probably find you not guilty.

The OP seemed to suggest that when you ban encryption, random people will randomly get in trouble, therefore banning encryption is a bad idea.
But judges have common sense and law enforcement has limited resources (prioritization) therefore random people will probably not randomly get in trouble. Therefore strong encryption ban is very realistic and very easy to sell to the population, and not like the OP claimed something that will backfire. This is why his comment is naive. He likes encryption and doesn't want for it to be banned therefore he deludes himself with some alternative reality where doing something he doesn't like backfires and is reversed.

Strong encryption ban will not backfire.
Les Moëres' radio tower (2019)
I do not mean in terms of pervasiveness - I mean in terms of them innately making up a piece of the underlying structures of human consciousness.

And to the extent that those beliefs are actually archetypal, they are not fundamentally judaeo-christian but predate and have been co-opted by those religions.
Sorry, I meant indexeddb not localStorage, but yeah a cleanup would clear it as well. Mere supports data export/import though, and data loss hasn’t been much of an issue yet in practice.

The goal is to be able to back up and restore encrypted blobs to external storage (s3, Dropbox, etc) to mitigate this and enable sync across devices, but this isn’t implemented yet.
But it has broken tests in the similarity tests.
But in terms of causation, "greed" isn't a great answer, nor curing it great a policy solution.
Publishers need about a 250 page book minimum. That's actually a lot of words and you can end up doing a lot of padding to hit that target for many topics.
What kind of memory efficiency gains did you see as a result of the effort?
"Language" for Chomsky is an abstraction that is intentionally designed to exclude anything statistical. His most likely response to this would be that neither the neural network nor the brain data collected reflects anything that could be called language.
> For example, saw an absolutely mind-blowing example where someone taught ChatGPT an entirely new made up language, and ChatGPT was able to guess at, for example, the appropriate declensions for different words. Would love to see Chomsky's reaction to that one.

Chomsky talks about the NYC opinion piece and "Impossible Languages" here:
https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/noam-chomsky-on-chatgpt
I am actually increasingly concerned about the potential for price discrimination to become endemic, widespread, and very impactful. I actually am beginning to think we should be looking into legislating against it.
Sounds like you’re assuming the blast radius would always be limited to the stock market?
When I opened it someone requested visuals of Biden and Putin kissing.

Slippery slope I say this.
If you shut down an ec2 instance you only pay for the volume not the compute. Just shut it down and start it up the next day.
Maybe he just read the book for the first time recently?

I have a habit of reading some books, getting really into them, and then relating everything I see to it.
Didn't read through the whole thing yet, but this seems to be the key idea:

"With LLM-integrated applications, adversaries
could control the LLM, without direct access, by indirectly
injecting it with prompts placed within sources retrieved at
inference time."
Traditionally this is how markets worked. Every purchase was individually negotiated. It's only in recent times that uniform "consumer" pricing was even invented.

> ...no matter which arbitrary metric is being used as justification for squeezing every last possible penny out of you.

This is how free markets are supposed to work. The seller seeks to maximize the price and the buyer seeks to minimize it. Lazy buyers who don't bother checking the competition can expect to pay more.

The problem occurs when there is limited competition. In that situation I'm in favor of regulation (as well as to protect certain classes of people such as race, gender etc). But I don't think that's a problem in this case - or at least, that's not what you're arguing?
> I think it's overly reductive to say that the only purpose a company has is to make money.

Yes, but also no. It's a simplification that is amazingly accurate, it does help to think of different companies as thinking about money on shorter or longer timespans.

As someone working in big tech, I have to say that for certain features I would much rather ship the right 10,000 lines in 6 months than 100,000 lines of the kind of wrong thing. The cost of being even a little wrong at the scale my company operates at is eye-watering.

We had two teams do a bit of what you describe over the course of six months, shipped a lot without building much alignment. We are going to live with the cost of those decisions for a minimum of 5 years.

The lower bound of the cost of working around their mistakes right now is equivalent to... 80 engineer years maybe? Because now we have customers who rely on some insane functionality they built that we are contractually obligated to support (and spiritually want to maintain good faith) and it will infect a bunch of other systems that will now have to integrate with their choices and take on that tech debt.
The invisible math that controls the world | Albert-László Barabási
A fan is only a part of the thermal system. I would assume that quoted 10.5W is purely the frore system. Not the entire dissipation of a product.

I'm still very skeptical of this product.
Thanks. Looking up “1-party” sent me down an interesting rabbit hole learning about the limited “0-party” rights of interception. For radio interception in NJ, it is legal (and only legal?) to intercept:

f. Any person to intercept any radio communication which is transmitted:

(1) by any station for the use of the general public, or that relates to ships, aircraft, vehicles, or persons in distress;

(2) by any governmental, law enforcement, civil defense, private land mobile, or public safety communication system, including police and fire, readily accessible to the general public;

(3) by a station operating on an authorized frequency within the bands allocated to the amateur, citizens band, or general mobile radio services; or

(4) by any marine or aeronautical communications system;

———

Which would imply that broadband RF recording using SDRs, even if it excludes the cell phone bands, is not OK!

For example, the MURS band seems to be illegal to intercept.
Why the decision to license as GPL?
If this is the case, what hardware is needed for real-time tts?
Taiwan excluded from WHO annual assembly following Chinese opposition
"If there really is a pool of 100,000’s of equally skilled people lining up to do the same job for much, much less, then that would make the board of every major corporation fools. "

Don't forget that a lot of board members sit on a lot of other boards or are executives somewhere. It's an insider club that protects themselves.
> This is why it is dangerous to think that the best scientific theories always prevail and that science is a meritocracy.

This is because people form trapped priors and so some scientific advances come "one funeral at a time", but it's equally dangerous to think that science won't or cannot form clear consensus on observable, factual matters or that if there isn't always meritocracy, then there must be none.

Science is the only reason we can even have this conversation right now, after all.
Coding with LLMs was easier after understanding their limitations.

1. They don't know what they are saying until they have said it.

2. Your inputs and its outputs help make the next message.

3. LLMs are not suited for information retrieval like databases and search engines.

LLMs excel at reasoning and predicting subsequent text based on given context. Their strength lies in their ability to generate relevant and cohesive responses.

To optimize results, outline clear rules, strategies, or ideas for the LLM to follow. This helps the model craft, revise, or build upon the established context.

Starting with a precise query and introducing rules or constraints incrementally can help steer the model's output in the desired direction.

Avoid zero-shot queries as these can lead to the model generating unexpected or unrelated responses.

Be cautious while seeking pre-calculated or non-derived answers. Some instruction-tuned models might output incorrect solutions, as they are trained to respond to certain queries without proper context or information.

also, this is my biggest gripe no fault of ours of course: don't seek pre-calculated or non-derived answers. I've seen some of the demonstration data that people are using to train instruction-tuned models and are being taught to respond by making up answers to solutions it shouldn't try to compute. Btw, the output is wrong.

{
"instruction": "What would be the output of the following JavaScript snippet?",
"input": "let area = 6 * 5;\nlet radius = area / 3.14;",
"output": "The output of the JavaScript snippet is the radius, which is 1.91."
},

https://github.com/sahil280114/codealpaca/commit/0d265112c70...
Does it? Does it really? Yes, we've seen huge improvements. We're still not close to human intelligence level. (No, test taking doesn't count). Worse, we've got pretty clear evidence that the training material increase for larger LLMs is basically reaching an upper bound.

What we'd need to see:

* A breakthrough that either decouples us from parameter count or allows parameter count increases with smaller training sets.

* Any evidence that it's doing anything more than asymptotically crawling towards human-comparable evidence.

The entire ZOMG SUPERAI faction suffers from the AI that somehow thinking more and faster is thinking better. It's not. There's no evidence pointing in that direction.

We currently have ~8B human-level intelligences. They haven't managed to produce anything above human level intelligence. Where's the indication that emulation of their mode of thinking at scale will result in something breaking the threshold?

If anything, machine intelligence is doing worse, because any slight increase in capacity is paid for in large amounts of "hallucination".
Because it was ripped apart fairly quickly.
I would say collaboration should be maximized inside the team, where latency is lowest and coherence is highest, and minimized outside it. This is the product-oriented organization philosophy, which aims to maximize communication efficiency. At the other end are functional organizations, which aim to maximize competency (specialization), and flexibility.