skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The way it is implemented on recent Apple devices is that the maximum brightness your display hardware is actually capable of is much higher than the color #FFFFFF at the maximum brightness available in settings. In other words, there's quite a lot of headroom that is only ever used for HDR content. This results in quite a strange sight of something (a QR code in this case) being much brighter than all of its surrounding UI.
Why is everyone suddenly neurodivergent?
This is timely. I am stuck on simple authentication for my small apps.
Everyone tells me - "Don't roll your own auth EVER!!!!", and then tells me about some easy-to-use Auth as a service.

Ok, great. Well if I'm buying my auth I at the very least need some kind of 2FA, MFA or something. I don't care about anything other than user/pass and MFA. But every service wants to charge you well over $100/mth for any kind of MFA. Why can't they just forward the transactional SMS/Email charges on? Or better yet just give the authenticator app options.

I feel like user/pass + MFA isn't asking for the world and not including any kind of MFA to me feels like potentially worse security than "rolling my own" simple bcrypt + regular old sessions and then can add on MFA too using well defined standards and libraries.

Now I do like these open-source options but again, they seem faaaar too complex for what I want. I could definitely implement simple session and hashing auth much quicker than setting up any of these. Which I completely understand as this is complicated enterprise identity systems here. I don't need that though!

Anyway rant over. Anyone else have this experience or am I alone?
> Most complicated or broken software is not designed to be overly complex or dysfunctional.

I beg to differ. This might have once been true, but no longer. Now developers demand a massive arsenal of dependencies before they are even willing to start on any project.

You say you need a web page and a few events? No problem. I will just sprinkle in some React, Redux, Grunt, GraphQL, PM2, and a plethora of plugins for each with a cascading list of dependencies for all those plugins. We absolutely cannot do less, because the risk of writing original code is too costly and we value retaining employment (blaming someone nameless outside the company).
I don't get it. Why would they do that, and then "declare Mars unsafe for humans"? It's like saying "you can't finish a Marathon if you start by shooting yourself in the foot". Well, duh?
Firefox users: This won't render in HDR in FF. Open it in Safari if you want to see it.
I tend to put the logger in the context as it becomes request-scoped when you bind the request ID to it in middleware. Zerolog has a useful method to get the logger from the context, which is really handy.
Check out neural tangent kernels and neural odes
Managing memory coherency is probably the single hardest part to design in any given CPU. Why add even more hard things (especially if they can interact and add even more complexity on top)?

Get rid of what complexity you can then deal with the rest that you must have.
This (relatively new) idea that by marking some things as "human rights", things that have a substantial cost to create, that they can then be stolen without regard to any rules tends to not end well for anyone in society.

I honestly hate the idea of proclaiming things like food, health care, housing, education, etc. as "human rights", because they are very, very different from what has been historically thought of as human rights (things like freedom of speech, freedom of movement, freedom of association, etc.). Primarily, of course, is that these newer "rights" are really goods and services that you would like everyone to have access to. And that may be fine (I personally tend to agree), but I would still argue that they are not anything at all like the rights people should have just for existing. I can certainly believe there should be "guaranteed social services", but these aren't "human rights".

The main difference, of course, is that somebody has to expend their own personal time and energy to acquire these goods. Houses don't just sprout up out of nowhere, and they certainly don't maintain themselves. It's fine to argue that society should do much more to provide housing options to all citizens, but that's very different from saying "I should be able to move into any house where people aren't currently living because I can break the lock."
I think all proofs are just "convincing arguments." Computation would make that seem meaningless, but computers don't operate based on truth, they are repetition machines, just like you and I. But I've been reading an Introductory Topology book recently (Munkres) and the entire first chapter is explicating at a relatively high level of detail all the things you describe and moreso. But its necessary, in some sense. A lot of the set theoretical rules were employed in topology to create more generalized forms of analysis. You have to learn them because otherwise its very difficult to understand the language that's being used. But as I've argued elsewhere, if we are aware that its all based on interpretation, then I think we need to be a bit anarchistic and let students have the freedom to break those rules without knowing it, if they might produce thereby fascinating proofs and arguments. If you give people a schematic for interpretation, they're just going to follow it, and they might have difficulty deviating from it at all. The spark of human creativity comes when people are forced to, as they say, re-derive certain theorems, and while doing so they might accidentally discover some new implication of the logic that was unseen before, and produce something entirely new.
Just chc4 is fine, otherwise @sickeningsprawl@infosec.exchange (and Twitter, though I haven't used that in several months).
> So you are criticising RISC-V not compared to its actual x86 and Arm competition -- where overflow checking is also not free and is seldom used

How do people do overflow checking on x86 and ARM in practice? For languages which implement it, such as Rust or Ada?

I know 32-bit x86 has the INTO instruction, which raises interrupt 4 if the overflow flag (OF) is set – but it was removed in x86-64, which gives me the impression that even languages which did do checked arithmetic weren't using it.

> but against some imaginary ideal CPU that doesn't exist

I'm not the person you are responding to, but to try to read their argument charitably (to "steelman" it) – if a person thinks checked arithmetic is an important feature, RISC-V's decision not to include it could be seen as a missed opportunity.

> or no one uses because it's so slow.

Is it inherently slow? Or is it just the chicken-egg problem of hardware designers feel no motivation to make it fast because software doesn't use it, meanwhile software doesn't use it because the hardware doesn't make it fast enough?
That's odd, though, right? Why would they constantly cap the brightness of my screen, which I could really do with in bright light, just in case I watch some HDR content at some point?
"At this phase we have to talk both to the business and to developers."

How can I send my wife a grocery list, with a twiml bin, and not register a business use-case and provide a US EIN for A2P 10DLC (along with example messages and opt-out mechanisms) ?

Haha - just kidding.

I know I can't do that.

... and as long as we have you here, what, pray tell, will Twilio do with the pages and pages of use-cases and howtos for home automation, personal alerts, person to person messaging, self-reminders, email forwards - like this, for instance:

https://www.twilio.com/blog/build-adhd-lifehack-tools-python...

Will you just remove all of those ?

Because they are impossible.

There are no hobbyist uses of Twilio after July.
Promotion driven features are definitely not entirely a myth IMO, but on the other hand, anecdotally I saw quite a few people get promoted at Google for doing make-things-work-better work. The trick was figuring out which were the important things to maintain and make small improvements to, rather than just which were the things that seemed fun to tinker with, but weren't as impactful.
I know most industries want to hire people from the same industry, but based on my experience, finance seems to be the most closed minded (or least flexible in terms of at least entertaining initial phone screening)
You've mistaken covariance for causality here.

Racism and accelerated catastrophic biodiversity loss patterns have been generated by the same processes geographically.
He runs Jellyfin straight up from the downloads page [1]. I'm not entirely sure if it runs on Rosetta but he hasn't had any issues with multiple streams. For storage you have a couple options but enabling file sharing on macos + a large drive of your choice is your best bet.

[1] https://jellyfin.org/downloads/macos
Or you could adopt for a nominal fee and help a dog in need.
> Am I supposed to context-switch over to another task, losing all of my current built-up state about the current problem and making it take twice as long just because you think your task is more important?

Correct, yes. Your current problem is at a state of being done, beyond any code review feedback you may receive. Expecting people to immediately cancel everything they're doing and review your code is not only absurd but also leads to poor quality code reviews. Because rather than actually think about the code and spend time on it, you want them to approve it as fast as possible so you are unblocked as soon as possible.

> Async reviews slow the whole team down, because juggling more tasks in your head means that you can't retain the high-context information about all of them as easily and you lose a lot of time to context-switching.

The reviewer has to context switch and juggle multiple tasks. They have to understand what your code does, why it does it and why it was necessary in the first place. They have to open the ticket, read what it's about, read any conversations and then figure out any potential concerns.

> In the synchronous review model, only one team member has to do a context switch (and a much lighter one than a full context switch to work on another task).

If you have one person review your code then I question that your code review process even matters. For extensive reworks, redesigns etc you are going to pull in more individuals and there is going to be more time taken.

> In addition, synchronous reviews over a voice/video chat just take significantly less time in general, because being able to ask "Why did you do it this way?" and have an immediate discussion about the trade-offs is strictly superior to having to have that same discussion back and forth over days of async responses.

They take far more time in my experience. I've had review turnaround be a few hours to a day in an async context for major reviews. They review the code, we hop on a call when convenient and go over the issues in 15m and we're done. If it's nothing major or understandable over text, then comments are good enough.
Internationally, probably best known (unfortunately) for eating a baby.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dingo_ate_my_baby
Thanks! I did not even realize there were so many! I imagine it's a popular format due to how well it can go for comparatively little budget and planning.

I'll have to track those down. Two hours per episode for Portugal's sounds _wild_, I'm interested to see how that goes.
There is something called yielded cost. The actual same part that yields to a higher bin costs more due to lower yield. So it’s very unusual to sell it for less. You see the same thing in TV monitors. The best displays, representing the best of the distribution sell for way more. What does happen is that you can get parts at the edge of the spec that are almost as good but whether you get one of those is purely random.
But this only tells me that some monitors can show more colors than others. If you made a monitor that can show more colors, does it matter what you call it? SDR or HDR, it can still show more colors than other monitors.
I think the “Ask your developer” resonates with only a small segment of the market (a fairly passionate segment).

The “Lower your aquisition costs by 66%” resonates with the CFO, who will drive past the board every day until he remembers to tell someone in passing to “investigate this twilio thing”. From there the cogs of the org start turning and 6 months later out rolls a several million dollar order for Twilio.

To everyone’s surprise the bill is 20% higher a year after release, but by that point everyone responsible for it has already been promoted.
There's a distinction to be made here, order-0 entropy versus higher order entropy. Order here just means how long a chain of symbols that is considered, where order-0 means just count each symbol at a time, versus eg order-1 where you consider chains of two symbols. Like the other commenter says, JPEGXL can recompress JPEGs losslessly to be around 20% smaller by exploiting higher order patterns (eg via move-to-front, lz77-ish matches, and the MANIAC tree context modeling, versus JPEG's RLE (which is "sort of beyond order-0") combined with Huffman coding (which is order-0))
Alarm Fatigue
"Minitel: Welcome to the Internet" is a great book (in English) about Minitel and its history. It's part of the delicious Platform Studies collection of MIT Press: https://mitpressbookstore.mit.edu/book/9780262036221
>It is almost as if that is an acceptable price to pay, to some.

It is an acceptable price for some people. You just have to look at the sheer number of shootings. We have more mass shootings than calendar days in a year in the US. This is normal. This is how things should be.

>For what,exactly?

The right to keep whatever guns they want in whatever quantity. They value that more than actual humans. But given which crowd is noisier about their gun enthusiasm and fascist tendencies of dehumanizing everyone who isn't WASP, that shouldn't come as a surprise.
Ah, this kind of makes sense, but then why wouldn't they map the old 100% to the new maximum?

I can understand the increased granularity, if you're making monitors that go much brighter, then you get more light levels, but why define the old maximum to be less than the new maximum?
I’m no expert, but as I understand it, the clients have more flexibility to request things from the backend. I don’t know the app source code, but maybe it reduces complexity in app design?

Would love to hear other opinions.
Hey, just sharing my point of view. Appreciate hearing yours as well. Have a good Sunday!
Oh you're getting user consent, so that makes sense. But I don't really understand how the API would grant you a sublicense to host written works.
Why four legs?

Once the expense of four has been invested is there a better number, say six or eight, to have?

I can imagine all sorts of advantages and disadvantages. They choose four, is that because four is best? Or because a dog has four?
I had a coworker that I tried to help out, but he barely knew some common programming terms like what a type was, or how he had to declare something beforehand in order to use it. We never really found out why he didn't know these things because he was so softspoken and shut down at any attempt to understand why he was having trouble. I don't talk to him much anymore due to some team restructuring, but other coworkers still see the same so I don't know if he can be helped honestly.
Miraheze is not shutting down
I assume they are forcefully resetting MFA tokens for folks who did not read the full details of the hack and took appropriate action? One of the later iterations of the advisory regarding the hack stated token data was taken, requiring you to reset MFA.
That is what China is doing to US now . Decades from now , Chinese will joke about how they get chips and other secret tech from shell companies in us. They will also joke about how they secretly sell drugs to America to make them useless and make society unstable.
I replayed in another comment, seems like it is way better to buy minipupper that is also servos based, it does not make sense spending so much on servos based robot, arguably, it is better to spend 1300+ building bot with actual motors Lorcan[1] alike (there others with 6 motors, if recall correctly).

https://github.com/222464/Lorcan-Mini
I would word that differently. Different sources of sand are good for different things. River sand is very good for concrete, which cares almost entirely about shape and not chemistry. If your goal is silicon you're usually looking elsewhere.
If you `docker pull` an image, you already "host" it. It's a bunch of local files right on your machine.

Starting a few minutes? It looks like there must be some DNS problem somewhere. Or maybe it's the download build time? In any case, I'd measure the second startup time.

Java can be blazingly fast if done right. (And C++ can be stupidly slow if done wrong.)
I just run an HTPC/NAS hybrid device with Kodi.

Can't be bothered to mess around with transcoding and no need for streaming to multiple locations in the house so I don't need a transcoding-based solution like this.
How do they debug Jakt code? I mean other than dumping things to screen which is not very pleasant experience.
So I come from a background of Civil Engineering. We basically don't do ANYthing arbitrarily. There's a reason for basically every aspect of a design. Sometimes there are competing criteria that leave it to humans to decide, but honestly it's rare. Usually the constraints drive the design from concept down to minute details.

Within the constraints and criteria, there's codes and manuals that cover almost everything.

It's always seemed to me that software has really suffered from a lack of this approach.

Is it the best way to maximize innovation? No, but in some ways, you might be surprised how much placing heavy constraints on a project will drive innovation.
… and you’re comparing to what alternative? To take even more time out of the day to meet these people face to face? Zoom is more convenient by a mile.
Is higher granularity all HDR is, then? Other commenters mention that the HDR brightness max is more than what the SDR brightness max is defined as, which seems odd to me. It's as if you're crippling the display for SDR permanently.
I got exposed to programming neural networks in the early 90s. It solved certain problems incredibly fast like the traveling salesman problem. I was tinkering with 3D graphics and fractals and map pathfinding. Though it didn’t occur to me how much more power was there.

“Data” was so much smaller then. I had a minuscule hard drive if any, no internet, 8 bit graphics but nothing photo realistic, glimpses of windows and os2, and barely a mouse. In retrospect, it was like embedded programming.
Comparisons of code compiled for x86 or RISC-V show that (on average), the RISC-V code is significantly smaller.

Any code size increases are made up for elsewhere and they STILL get smaller code too.
I ended up on a random bus in Sapporo once and it was the only public transportation without English signage or announcements in multiple trips to Japan using multiple public transportation systems.
JSON (as defined by json.org), for example, does not specify that key/value pairs need to be unique. ECMA-404 explicitly calls this out as an implementation consideration. I know of one implementation that supports multiple entries with the same key.
I tried using it, but removed it after I encountered a bug that after exiting full screen on my secondary monitor it always moves the app to the primary monitor. This bug has been in a Windows app for a couple of years.
If you have a conference theme that nobody else is targeting just start off as virtual, it's free aside from organization time. You miss interactions but if you're having big speakers or a niche topic there's still value and more participation possible.
Now solve the rampant shoplifting + smash and grab. Clean up some public shitting and you’re on the way! Maybe open a 1,000 bed drug treatment center in the north bay.
probably because you are replying to a quote of a quote, but didn't read the quoted comment? spend more time reading and less time writing would be my suggestion to help with understanding the comments here.
> There is now published research demonstrating that small models (LLaMA 7B) surpass GPT-4’s performance when fine-tuned on specific tasks.

Got any examples? I don't understand how it can "hallucinate like crazy" for some but not for all
I am also curious about educated answers to this question, but I imagine taking a cue from millions of years of evolutionary pressure is a pretty solid bet.
> You felt your partner was coasting so you checked out. They felt that you checked out.

Yes that's basically what happened. I get that this is their perception, but find it funny how much self-awareness is lacking as to what they contributed. I'm still friends with them and still like them, but they are firmly in the camp of "nope" moving forward.

> Maybe they were doing more than you realised, or maybe they were just freeloading.

I'd love for it to be the case where they were doing more than I realized, but considering we're all engineers and I'm the only one working on designs and implementing code...and driving all the discussions...you get the idea.
We are upvoting just to spite you! B-D
I don't get what running/researching an LLM that is really bad at hallucinating is worth.
1-to-1 isn’t entirely true right now. sonicBOOM includes a feature called short forwards optimization which can turn certain branches into flag setting ops (and make the former branch shadow predicated). So one instruction always produces one uop, but not necessarily always the same one.
All this sounds great from the perspective of retail shrink wrap software. Today, the major use cases for Qt on the desktop are in-house corporate software.
And, no one cares about "uncanny valley". Only HN and online nerds care about that stuff. Average, non-technical, corporate users care about functions, not form. Hell, they are happy with a VBA app! Also, lots of in-car and in-seat (aeroplane) entertainment systems are built in Qt.

If you want a "Premium" native look and feel

Who is doing this in 2023? No one outside my examples above.
sRGB defines these colors: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRGB

Every (compliant) screen will produce that range, when given numbers between the minimum and maximum. It's nowhere near every color we can see (the dark gray area), but it is a decent manufacturing target and it covers a very practical area of our vision.

Screens could just produce their maximum range all the time... but then you'd get screwed up colors, with every display being different than the others (some redder, some greener, etc.). Hence standard color ranges, like sRGB, so bananas used for color scale always look the same shade of yellow. That triangle looks the same on my screen as it does on yours, assuming the manufacturer cared at all about consistency. (remember the stupidly red OLEDs when they were new? they looked awful, humans looked like oompah loompahs)

So screens are capable of more than they normally display, sometimes by a pretty large margin. Somehow you have to tell the screen to go beyond its normal range, to show yellower yellows for super-bananas - that's HDR.
Thank you! I had to scroll too far down to see this. There are many useful implementations. Copying code, copying a long number, etc.

Just make it clear what is going to happen when you click that button/icon.
I'm glad that it works for you. The experience shared by many others, however, and that includes many commenters on HN, is different and would suggest that it is, indeed, confusing.