skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Someone who is running a leaderboard server is doing so on their computer and not yours.

And yet they're enforcing little rules and policies on my machine. I'll let them have that freedom the day they give me SSH root access to their servers.

> That is not what remote attestation is about. Remote attestation lets the "corporation" ensure that a client using their servers is running the software that the corporation intends to have connect to the server.

Their "intent" doesn't matter. Their servers should accept accept any connection from any software that talks their network protocol. We should be able to run whatever software we want to interact with remote servers, including third party apps, not just the "intended" app. This is what adversarial interoperability is all about.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/adversarial-interopera...

The network is the perfect boundary for this. If that results in some bot being able to cheat at games, doesn't matter. Small price to pay for freedom. The truth is people should not even be playing with untrusted internet randoms anyway. They should be playing with trusted friends who they know will play fairly.

> Allowing for modifications to remove "surveillance" also will allow mods that add backdoors for people to steal your credentials and make actions on your behalf.

No problem.

> This is complicated because bad actors can install malicious software if there is a way to change anything or bad actors can social engineer people into installing the malicious software.

No, it's extremely simple. I don't trade freedom for security, because that trade gets me neither. To make that trade you'd have to trust these trillion dollar corporations will act in your best interests and that's just idiotic. I hope I don't have to list the numerous ways that corporate surveillance capitalism harms people. What good is protection against "malicious software" when their apps are essentially spyware anyway?

If I have to risk dealing with malicious software in order to have control, so be it.
an array of modern SSDs can get to a similar bandwidth to RAM, albeit with significantly worse latency still. It's not that hard to push the bottleneck elsewhere in a lot of workloads. High performance fileservers, for example, need pretty beefy CPUs to keep up.
So the article that the article mentions [0] has the bureaucracy as a problem - risk minimisation is the main organisational criteria, so any change is overwhelmed with bureaucratic processes to ensure it doesn't cause risk (my paraphrase). Is this true in your experience? How much bureaucracy is "remarkable little"?

[0] https://medium.com/@pravse/the-maze-is-in-the-mouse-980c57cf...
In rust the type system enforces you check the error. In go, it doesn't. (Because rust error types are enums/sums and go error types are structs/products). This seems like a huge difference.

> In many cases it's arguably worse because now 1 token is potentially representing two very different types I want to deal with.

Yes, that's what an enum/sum type is? That's the whole point.
docs/man pages should still be made, and people who are assholes should be banned.
China's ByteDance Has Gobbled Up $1B of Nvidia GPUs for AI This Year
I think it's tiring when an industry that has no physical things to break, adopts a saying that flippantly implies that other industries are slow simply because they're not irresponsible enough. I've had quite enough broken things, thank you very much.
What will happen to the UPS? A lot of discharge cycles?
Why would you move large amounts of marijuana from legal state to legal state by plane though?
if you write a line of code that can fail, then you should deal with the possibility of that line failing there, directly, in-line

_how_ you deal with that failure is a separate question

but it's critical that every fallible expression explicitly and visibly demonstrates the possibility of failure

this is in no way an "error handling mess" -- on the contrary, it is basically the only way to produce robust and reliable software at scale
This is the best and wholesomest thing on the internet today. Thank you!
Who pays for all these servers?
In college, a popular showoff trick was to set an empty beer can on the floor. Then balance on it with one foot. If your balance was good and well centered, the can would not collapse. Then, for extra credit, slowly reach down and just tap the side of the can with a finger tip. The can would instantly crush to a disk. Extra karma points for crushing it into a perfect circle, rather than an oval.

It would collapse so fast it was nigh imperceptible.
Yesterday I recorded a video called "Introduction to Fediverse Reddit alternatives: Lemmy, /kbin" in which I explain the Threadiverse a bit and show how it works in practice: https://tube.jeena.net/w/1PPQUhpzxiESV6xuKjeQav
In theory yes, since its fundamentally just a Dockerfile, any provider that supports docker is possible. I know HF Spaces have a "docker" sdk option[1], but I personally haven't used them myself.

[1] https://huggingface.co/docs/hub/spaces-sdks-docker-first-dem...
Past outcomes created by a known actor's engagement with similar projects may be predictive of their objectives with regards to this instance of engagement.
We moved away from wrapping them recently for performance reasons.
You could join some other instance, and then subscribe to communities on both beehaw/lemmy.world as well as any other ones that spark your interest right? Kinda like email. Or, if so inclined, host your own? I think most of them take a blocklist approach instead of an allowlist approach
Anyone got an idea what's a good instance for home automation?
They do not require making downloads available. Source must be provided on request.
> No, but arguably civilization consists of mechanisms to manage human fallibility

Exactly. Civilization is, arguably, one big exercise in reducing variance in individuals, as low variance and high predictability is what lets us work together and trust each other, instead of seeing each other as threats and hiding from each other (or trying to preemptively attack). The more something or someone is unpredictable, the more we see it or them as a threat.

> (separation of powers, bicameralism, "democracy", bureaucracy, regulations, etc).

And on the more individual scale: culture, social customs and public school system are all forces that shape humans from the youngest age, reducing variance in thoughts and behaviors. Exams of all kind, including psychological ones, prevent high-variance individuals from being able to do large amount of harm to others. The higher the danger, the higher the bar.

There are tests you need to pass to be able to own and drive a car. There are tests you may need to pass to own a firearm. There are more tests still before you'll be allowed to fly an aircraft. Those tests are not there just to ensure your skills - they also filter high-variance individuals, people who cannot be safely given responsibility to operate dangerous tools.

Further still, the society has mechanisms to eliminate high-variance outliers. Lighter cases may get some kind of medical or spiritual treatment, and (with gates in place to keep them away from guns and planes) it works out OK. More difficult cases eventually get locked up in prisons or mental hospitals. While there are lot of specific things to discuss about the prison and mental care systems, their general, high-level function is simple: they keep both predictably dangerous and high-variance (i.e. unpredictably dangerous) people stashed safely away, where they can't disrupt or harm others at scale.

> We might not fully understand why, but we've found methods that sorta kinda "work".

Yes, we've found many such methods at every level - individual, familial, tribal, national - and we stack them all on top of each other. This creates the conditions that let us live in larger groups, with less conflicts, as well as to safely use increasingly powerful (i.e. potentially destructive) technologies.
For now my own solution has been to spin up my own Mastodon, PeerTube and Lemmy instance, and because I'm such a small one person instance I don't bother anyone and therefor nobody defederated me yet.
Well, if you're either a victim or you own the company and make more victims I still think there's a problem.
Things You Should Never Do

https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-should-...

An oldie but a goodie
In what sense aren't they monads? They have a bind method ("and_then") and a return method (Which is just the variant for constructing the success case, i.e. "Ok" or "Some"). It's more idiomatic to use "map", but that's just a degenerate case of bind.

> There's some tricks that have to be done to make them work in a eager evaluation context...

Monads have nothing to do with laziness, though. In Haskell, IO actions are used with laziness and to work around purity, and IO actions form a monad. But that's just one instance of monad.
No compiler can force you to handle an error.

Rust might force you to access a value. Big. Fucking. Deal.
When writing a game in JS, it’s very important to minimize garbage collection - too much will cause periodic stuttering and freezes. To avoid GC you want to minimize runtime allocations and mostly allocate upfront and reuse that memory.

One way is to use object pooling, but doing so in JS can be brittle because you have to remember to manually call `Pool.release(obj)`, `obj.free()` or whatever method you’ve chosen to return an object to the pool.

If a developer forgets to do this, you could exhaust the object pool, or if it’s growable, cause a memory leak! In a game’s update loop that could happen very quickly.

With this new feature, you could grab a short-lived object from the pool and automatically return it to the pool at the end of the method or loop.

Example - imagine this is inside an update method called 60 times per second:

for (const enemy of enemies) {
using pos = Pool.getVec3();

// do stuff with pos

enemy.setPosition(pos);
} // pos is returned to pool automatically

You asked about try/catch/finally. The downsides for this use-case are:

* Big performance hit when you use it in a hot loop like this - the disposal could be happening ~10,000 times per second.

* Harder to remember to fill all your loops with try…finally, ugly to have double braces anytime you’re using a pooled object.

* It’s an abuse of syntax if you’re not actually catching any error.
It will bring about more efficient use of water.

All the technology needed is already available thanks to the Israelis.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_Israel
They are replacing the ISP's FTTP CPE (Media Converter + router/firewall in a closed source black box) with their own solution.
I keep getting the impression that none of the journalists getting excited about "AI" and military situations have any real concept of how a old-fashioned minefield works. Nor the sorts of lethal booby-traps which clever soldiers could rig along a thinly-held defensive line. Nor torpedoes. Nor free-floating sea mines. Nor quite a few other military technologies...which were widely available a ~century ago.
In rust it is not possible to use incorrectly, and in go it is, sure. But whether it is possible or not is only one dimension. Does it matter that it’s possible to misuse errors in Go if it virtually never happens?

I just don’t find the point about what is possible interesting. The other trade offs around readability, ergonomics, and so on seem more impactful.
Emergent Ventures Grant | Fellowship | Remote | micro-grant

WHO: We want to jumpstart high-reward ideas—moonshots in many cases—that advance prosperity, opportunity, liberty, and well-being. We welcome the unusual and the unorthodox. We encourage applications from all ages and all parts of the world.
Apply: https://mercatuscenter.formstack.com/forms/emergent_ventures
See also perhaps "Point Nemo":

> The oceanic pole of inaccessibility, also known as Point Nemo, is located at roughly 48°52.6′S 123°23.6′W[19] and is the place in the ocean that is farthest from land. It represents the solution to the "longest swim" problem.[20] This problem poses that there is one place in an ocean on earth where, if a person fell overboard while on a ship at sea, they would be at a point that is the longest distance to any land in any direction.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_of_inaccessibility#Oceani...

* https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/nemo.html

Not even many ships go by it, as there aren't really (m)any shipping lanes in those parts. More likely to be sailing ships, especially those involved with racing (who don't go through the Panama Canal):

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAOMtCzLKWE

The closest other humans would probably be those in orbit on the ISS about 320-420 km up.
Think of all the advertising dollars and big-ticket enterprise users they're missing out on!
Hi, I wrote this post, and I just wanted to say thanks for the kind words - this research was a lot of fun to do and I'm glad it has an audience.

The "best" resources I know of are the ones I cited in that post, though do bear in mind it's a few years old. That said, I did want to make sure you didn't miss this companion piece: https://eli.sohl.com/2020/06/05/dht-size-estimation.html which is applicable to detecting (and - conjecturally - responding to) Sybil attacks.
I'm interested in this when they come out with the 1kwh/kg batteries that are supposed to be in testing. Seems like a great option to convert a pickup truck given its ability to handle more weight and have more space in the engine bay,under the bed, etc. Removing the engine and accessories you could swap in a 250kwh battery at a similar weight. Swap the transmission for an electric motor, and it's pretty appealing.
Glad you pointed this out and covered it well. I used to use both companies' XMPP federation until they were ripped out.

Users should understand that neither company is a good faith actor in the fediverse, and that this kind of compatibility from social media companies is a tactic that most only see as relevant in the early part of their lifecycles as companies. Once they're dominant or it's time to monetize, that shit goes right out the window.

We just saw this play out with Twitter, and we're seeing it again with Reddit right this very moment. As an individual user, enjoy the 'openness' while you can if you want, but free online communities should be strategic about what relationships they form with tech and social media companies.
To be clear: I agree with every recommendation in this article. I just find that writing POSIX-compliant shell is rarely needed. I've clarified my comment.
The Rust code you have isn't idiomatic. It's gar more likely to see:

let greeting_file = File::open("hello.txt")?l

vs

file, err := os.Open("hello.txt")
if err != nil {
return fmt.errorf("faild to open hello; %w, err)
}

However, I would argue the distinction isn't just cosmetic. The compiler prevents me from not checking the error and blowing up the application with a nil pointer exception.

The TFA even capes this pattern:

type Result[T any] struct {
Value T
Error error
}

and I wonder if we will start to see it more now that generics are in Go.
If you live in Australia, it’s hard to disagree with the numbers.

The average Australian in 1984 could buy a home that cost 3.3 times their annual income. In 2023, it's 10 times what the average person earns in a year.
Global-reach social networks have been good for very narrow niche interest discussion. If I have a question about Civilization 4 or roguelike game development, it's nice that I can post somewhere that's likely to be seen by a large fraction of the world's devotees of those subjects. When Reddit burns down that won't be true anymore.
Changing the entire architecture of PG to suit the 0.1% of edge cases seems like a poor trade off.

Are there a much larger percentage of users that really need this?
There is no order or ruling to sell anything - only a statement[0]. This headline and article is entirely incorrect.

dang, please correct as you see fit: "Antitrust: Commission sends Statement of Objections to Google over abusive practices in online advertising technology"

[0] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_...
> DIY is an option but also way more expensive.

This has recently become far cheaper over the past few years. You can now get quite powerful fanless computers that come with 4-6x 2.5GBe ports, and they typically have a slot on the board that you can put whatever Wifi card you want in.

Yes, they are still more expensive at around $200-300 for the computer (even without memory, storage, or wifi card), but considering a few years ago you'd need to spend nearly twice that for a similar system (and usually with only 1GBe), it's becoming a much more attractive offer to start a home-lab with.

Serve The Home has some excellent videos on these mini-computers that I highly recommend:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rtRwKlJTgU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58nVTNYrJ3E
Isn't this entire point about SEO negated by judicious use of Link rel=canonical? Or just excluding foreign content via robots.txt?

I don't see why this is described as such an insurmountable fundamental flaw.
You're right! I totally missed that. I've updated my comment.
Whoever is hosting the subreddit. This model would be particularly useful for content creators and organizations who need a space for their community.
Mermaid Sequence Diagram of How I Deal with Career Anxiety
Ask it a politically incorrect question (or should I say woke ?).

Edit: Ouch, I see we are all answering the wrong question ! As for your question - I don't think it's feasible - anything "AI" (this doesn't exist actually) can do, humans can do it - if not they will just use said AI to do it.
The point isn't that it forces you to access the error. The point is that it prevents you from accessing an invalid return value.
I know I’m probably being naive about this, but is it stupid to ask if there’s a way to make multi process work better on Linux - rather than “fixing” PG?

I feel like the thread vs process thing is one of those pendulums/fads that comes and goes. I’d hate to see PG go down a rabbit hole only to discover the OS could be modified to make things go better.

(I understand not all PG instances run on Linux, just using it as an example)
>We do not normally hallucinate.

Oh yes we do lol. Many experiments show our perception of reality and of cognition is entirely divorced from the reality of what's really going on.

Your brain is making stuff up all the time. Sense data you perceive is partly fabricated. Your memories are partly fabricated. Your decision rationales are post hoc rationalizations more often than not. That is, you don't genuinely know why you make certain decisions or what preferences actually inform them. You just think you do. You can't recreate previous mental states. You are not usually aware. But it is happening.

LLMs are just undoubtedly worse right now.
Andromeda Cluster | Grant | Remote | Compute (10 exaflops*)

Available for experiments, training runs, and inference.
No minimum duration and superb pricing. Big enough to train llama 65B in ~10 days.
For use by startup investments of Nat Friedman and Daniel Gross.
Apply: https://andromedacluster.com/
> This could even help with the decentralization aspect, because ideally the content and accounts would be replicated. So if one instance goes down, its content is still on connected instances, and possibily "ghost accounts" from that instance which let users there continue to post

So Usenet?
> Of course there’s nothing inherent to it that makes it locked down.

So we finally agree. It's a perfectly fine computer, but Apple went and turned it into an iPhone App Executor.

> That doesn’t mean locking it down is bad or wrong.

It absolutely does. Apple owns the machine, not you. Apple has all the keys, not you. You will never be able to do anything with your device that Apple doesn't approve of. You've traded away your freedom for convenience.
> open access "allows for manipulation of systems on a vehicle, including safety-critical functions such as steering, acceleration, or braking."

I assume this is just FUD, but if true it raises another question: why are braking, acceleration, and steering manipulable in real-time through network-facing software?
Problem with Commonwealth countries are

* while salaries are higher than eg most of Europe, they're still nowhere near the US - US salaries are often at least double (or more, a lot more)

* their cost of living and taxes are high

* they're backwards and insular (maybe you think the US is too, but the US has 350 million people, Australia has like 25, lol, so insular takes on a whole new meaning there)

* they're not as diverse as the US (sure, London is diverse, but still, the diversity of the US smokes them all, so many different cities here with so many different demographics, climates etc etc)

I'm saying that as a Scandi who's lived in UK, Canada, Australia and now US. Of course the US has a lot of problems too, but as a destination for skilled immigrants, the others don't even compare IMO.
For chat-like services I am hosting my own Matrix server with all the bridges to WhatsApp, Signal, Discourse, Slack, Telegram, etc. the UX is not perfect yet but it works well enough that I to 95% don't open the original apps/websites anymore.
As compute power continues to improve, so does simulation.

Yeah, I would expect modern software able to do the job for all but extreme cases. Basically, custom Amp mods.
> If the actual risk are close to BASE jumping then you’ve failed.

The myriad BASE jumping businesses would probably like a word. Risk tolerance varies.
Ask HN: How do you about buying a home solar system?
It seems like it's impossible to find any information about home solar. The major players (SunPower, Panasonic) don't even list prices on their websites, and they won't talk to you unless you request an installation quote and tell them inappropriate personal details (like current utility bill amounts).

How does someone who isn't an electrician start getting an idea of what equipment they need and how much it would cost?

I don't want to run my cabin off a series of Jackery panels and batteries but that's what I'll do if I have to.
you don't want exception-style "convenience", that's the whole point

you want to be able to read code and see a single control flow

? subverts that core requirement
You have to show it, and show that it is rendered safe, to the check in agent who takes your bag.
The history and future of workplace automation (2015)
If you look at steps 5 and 7 in this installation guide https://www.ikea.com/us/en/assembly_instructions/vidga-corne... you'll see that they have a way to tell you to use one screw vs another, but it's also true that Ikea's instructions aren't foolproof. This is just one example of how they really need to continue testing and improving their instructions because clear instructions are hard, and writing instructions without text is just making your job of communicating information that much harder.
Elon Musk could foot the estimated yearly wage theft for the entire United States for 4 years and still have 50B.
I think the point is that both have to stop caring for the land to be developed. A kind of two phase commit. Also helps in case one of them becomes defunct.