skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I had mostly seniors with lots of AP experience too.

AP Macro+Micro can work a lot better, because there's a few weeks of overlapping material. So it's the difference between fitting 45 hours of instructional material into 50 hours vs. fitting 80-85 into 100.

The tight fit annoyed me, as did the strictly graded nature of the course.

Two areas of particular annoyance:

- I had a cohort of students who had entirely been through AP Calc, but fitting into the explanations expected for HS meant making somewhat bogus algebra based explanations (the slope of this line is double the other one, just because!!). A student who gave a calc-based explanation on the test would probably not get the points (frankly, a lot of the readers would not understand it).

- About a third of the students had founded a "Game Theory" club on their own and were off in the weeds exploring game theory. I'd have loved to have taken a couple extra classes on the topic since they were already so interested and engaged, but I had no margin. I was forced to give the very simple 2 person payoff matrix form and leave the topic there. Again, I spent more time encouraging my students to not think too fancy.
How do you differentiate between a developer and an engineer?
Pretty interface, although I remain unconvinced of how I'd actually use it. If I'm just prototyping for myself, LLM providers offer a decent history, and I rarely need to share notebook-style explorations of LLMs with my team. For production use cases at logicloop.com/ai we just add our prompts into code.

What's the use case you're envisioning people using AI notebooks for?
>For a lot of workers, especially knowledge workers and pro services, the value proposition doesn’t make sense.

yeah, there's no needs for unions in tech. The most ambitious are spending 2-3 years at a job, switching jobs, and getting 20%+ pay raises as well as negotiating stock benefits and all the like. A union would do nothing for that kind of worker that they can't do in a matter of weeks by walking.
A site to share LLMs APIs via Tor
In light of upcoming regulations on artificial intelligence (AI), I created neuroengine.ai, a website that shares large language models (LLMs) in the form of chatbots and APIs. The site is accessible through Tor hidden services, allowing users to access state-of-the-art uncensored AIs anonymously. Currently, there are two 65 billion parameter class LLMs and a couple smaller fine-tuned AI models available for free with no API limits, and no registration required.
If you think that test scores are that important, maybe. They're not reliable indicators
Texting with your peers (people at roughly the same reading level as you) won't teach you much compared to reading increasingly challenging books written by adults who actually know what they're doing with words.
Mastering the Art of Trigger Event Based Selling (Detailed Guide)
> many of the same tonal effects,

The toners don't replace the silver so much as alter or supplement it. I used selenium back in the 80s and the (fiber paper) prints so treated have held up almost perfectly. The tonal difference it very subtle. Mounting them on archival board or storing them in neutral buffered paper boxes is essential for maximum longevity.
I don't think he's "suggesting" anything. He's noting that two phenomena are resistant to story-telling.
Ask HN: Why do people pay for Netflix when they can watch Tubi for free?
And why isn't Tubi more well known?
> Using additional contracts to subvert the free software licenses. You get to see the software, but you can't share it further.

This wouldn't be the first time. The very origin of the DD-WRT router distro was a hard fork of SveaSoft's "if you share this, we cut off your access to updates" license.

https://www.wi-fiplanet.com/the-dd-wrt-controversy/
I've used kodak selenium toner, this stuff: https://www.ag-photolab.co.uk/product/kodak-rapid-selenium-t...

I've also used tetenal for sepia style prints, their sulphide toner. Not a metal toner, but produces interesting and long lasting prints, this stuff: https://tetenal.com/en/homepage/consumer-shop/black-white-ch...

Tetenal make great C41 and E6 chemistry too if this is your thing.
Humans spent thousands of years in a pre-truth world believing all sorts of crazy things, and many of those societies produced great things and had people living normal lives. It's only been the last 100 years or so that people's perception of reality has been anywhere close to accurate. And even then, most people believe plenty of things that are false. So basically people and civilization are going to muddle along as they always have. Deepfakes, etc. will make some things worse, they'll probable have some unrecognized upsides too. John Boyd used to say "People, ideas, machines. In that order." It was true about jets and its still true about modern technology.
Today in "Free Speech Absolutist"
I meant coverage, not impression. I think KnR is a great book.
This is a hilariously naive take.

We, as humans, are well beyond being mentally ready for the internet and social media alone. Most of the key communication of the 20th Century was based on a tradition of duty and service in reporting and, generally, leadership. The Natzis of the 40s died not because the idea was 'wrong' (which it was) but because bad leadership and greed caused extinction. Before Poland, Europe was plenty happy letting Hitler be. Why was Hitler successful? Because he told people what they wanted to hear. You are better. We are better. We deserve more. It's their fault we are like this.

Self bias is the critical failure of the human mind. Tell someone that they deserve more and that they are better than others and they will believe you.

In a world where politicians and companies (same thing really) can use AI to collect your online persona and then fill your day with advertising designed just for you, telling you that you are right and it is 'them' who are wrong will work on nearly everyone. It already does. People watch news channels and follow influencers that make their feeds echo chambers, it drives extremism. How does a society tell you that you are wrong, that the other person is right?

Humanity and humankind made Hitler. Humanity and human kind will make tools that succeed at their goals to make others do what they want. We are already in freefall, this is a rocket booster on our back.
For some reason I had in my head that they had 12 engineers... wow, 2000 people, of which I assume at least multiple dozen are engineers? That really makes their product look much worse than it already did in my mind...
Reminds me of an old joke, retold to fit many ethnicities.

Three men take advantage of a break in a diplomatic council to visit the bathroom. After they are done relieving themselves, the Japanese man fair blasts his hands with water, soaping and rinsing several times. He explains, "In my country, we hold ourselves to high hygenic standards. I try to remain as clean as possible." The Iranian man soaps and rinses quickly, using a minimal amount. He says, "In my country, we are taught to conserve our resources. We must not waste the blessing we have been given." The American does not even look at the line of faucets, casually saying over his shoulder as he leaves the room, "My dad taught me not to piss on my hands."
That's why you wash your dog's paws.
Ask HN: Global Constants / Config Stores
What are some best practice recommendations for managing the constants? So far, I've heard

- .env file + enter env variables to deployment platforms
- Using a config store like Fastly's
- Using a KV Store

How would you do it?
> If anyone has any suggestions (not QNAP or Synology) for something that can do a good job of ZFS and 2-6 VMs, I'd love to hear them.

I'm using FreeBSD and its native hypervisor called bhyve. It's due to overall OS preference, not features Linux lacks regarding ZFS.
Client should be its own table, transaction is its own table (with foreign-key to clientID). You can ask ChatGPT to help you out.
While I don't fully disagree with you, I think the author would disagree. This line of argument is also repeated in recent C++ standards papers around "safety," that is, this argument is explicitly saying "memory safety != safety, and safety is more important, and therefore focus on memory safety is bad for safety."

I have two responses to this that aren't "back on script."

> it is not hard to imagine

(from your quote)

Sure, we can imagine this language, but it does not exist. Yes in theory maybe if we all did what the author said, C could be that language, but it is simply not today. When people say "C" they mean the C that actually exists, not an alternative implementation that would technically conform to the standard. Pushes have been made in this direction a number of times, from a number of different people, yet the market has spoken.

Second,

> Consider unchecked array accesses. Nowhere does C define that array accesses are unchecked. It just happens that implementations don’t check them. This is an implementation norm, not a fact of the language.

This is just factually incorrect. Let's examine both C89: https://www.open-std.org/JTC1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf and C99: https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf

> J.2 Undefined behavior

> An array subscript is out of range, even if an object is apparently accessible with the given subscript (as in the lvalue expression a[1][7] given the declaration int a[4][5]) (6.5.6).

It is literally defined as undefined behavior. While sure, that does mean a particular compiler could implement and document semantics for this, it's by definition not portable, because it is stated as such by the standard.
The problem with these kind of posts is that they also ignore the existence of globes. No one should be surprised by the "size" of any country because globes already exist which are a pretty close to true representation.
The banging noise is already treated as non-random but that doesn't make it easy to locate, and they are presumably unable to locate themselves so won't be able to transmit any location details even if you gave them a few words worth of bandwidth, the best they might convey is how deep they are currently are "We are only a few meters above the wreck". for example
> [...] but it is much harder, as you have to calculate the intervals between notes in real time [...]

Not necessarily the intervals between any two notes, but the note of interest in relation to the tonic. But still may require the relative position to be mapped (offset) to a specific note.
influenced by the anti-nuclear Greens

You can blame TMI, Chernobyl & Fukushima for this, along with a lack of will from politicians who are actually in power.
The parent didn't make any suggestion that the models are wrong. "the math is simple" means that not only does the model work, it's also simple to calculate. That leaves the interpretation that seeking good narratives will sometimes be fruitless.
What's shady about it?
So advertising works/good adwords are important?
I would like to make that rule but could never look myself in the mirror after doing it. I have apartments with fresh maple floors from a forest that I got after running out of reclaimed maple floors from schools.
Go 1.21 Release Candidate
Wow! I'm really interested in the Boston event. I'm a little afraid I may not be experienced enough though. How master are we talking with these masterclasses?
I think this is marketing for the app 'Little Musician'
This article doesn't touch on the actual reasons why Mercator is still in widespread use:

* It was the first widespread projection because of its practical use for nautical navigation (where it is still the best projection available), so it was easy for map makers to sell for non-nautical uses, even after "better" projections became available. And inertia is a hard thing to overcome for something considered somewhat inconsequential.

* Mercator and its cousin Web Mercator are extremely simple and fast to calculate relative to other projections. Compare the formula for Web Mercator (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Mercator_projection#Formul...) to Equal Earth, an excellent compromise projection for general use (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Earth_projection#Formula...). Web Mercator is very easy to generate and serve tiled maps out of, Equal Earth and the like require somewhat non-trivial engineering to make serving those maps at scale to users in a web browser economical and quick.

* Preserving angles is legitimately important still for large scale (very zoomed in) road maps. Projections which preserve size can cause things like 90 degree road intersections to render at very strange angles which confuses drivers. Mercator and Web Mercator are therefore excellent choices of projection for local road navigation, which is by far the most common use of maps today for most people.

I strongly recommend folks interested in map projections to read this from Mapbox: https://www.mapbox.com/blog/adaptive-projections. Google Maps now has similar features, but both companies relied on Mercator for many years with good reasons before technology caught up and better solutions became available.
You know, it just hit me: either side can file a lawsuit over a contract. So "plaintiff" and "defense" are not deterministic in terms of who wrote the contract and who agreed to it. How can an AI that is trained only on court transcripts make any inferences on what is good for which party?
the article is saying we're not ready for an ai information world, not that it will end humanity. also, all the candidates you've listed are valid we're just not there yet. some things change gradually until they change suddenly.
In return, moderators need to re-agree to a set of terms that align their incentives towards being impartial and fair towards the users of those subs.

There is no objective standard of "impartial and fair", but is that even necessary for your proposal? Different people want different moderation standards, but that seems fine.
Well, the best Reddit app available (Apollo) is made by one guy. So maybe start there.
You sort of tipped around the main difference:
Real estate is illiquid and intransparent sure, but it is a non-fungible productive asset, you can get people to pay you rents because they need precisely your building. There are no comparable income streams for bitcoin (outside of Ponzi "yield farming") so it is illiquid without any of the benefits of traditional illiquid assets.
Guess that's how these deals work. Would you rather they shut it down?
Warp Drive and team collaboration for the terminal
Hey, Akbar here (Dev Advocate for Figma). We have the Friends of Figma discord that has dedicated channels for plugin developers - https://discord.gg/xzQhe2Vcvx. When you join - get the @Developers role in #interest-roles and @Developer Announcements in # general-roles if you want to talk plugin development!
Maybe, but Mozilla's product ADHD turns me off.
That would have been Motif and CDE, which Gtk is based on as idea.
The reason is to get (eventually, almost) 100% of the player base.
I'm sure someone actually working in ed-tech will correct me, or perhaps even laugh me out of the room, but I still believe in what I figured out around highschool: that edtech, particularly "educational games", have it all backwards.

Kids aren't stupid. If you take the usual boring curriculum with choreful exercises, and try to "make it more fun" by half-heartedly sprinkling in some colors, characters and cheesy stories, it will backfire spectacularly - kids will see you're just trying to trick them, and not even putting much effort into it.

The right way is the reverse: you need to make something honestly, inherently fun, but design it so that it educates users/players as a side effect. Take Kerbal Space Program: it's not designed to be an educational game, but it's fun, and models real-world physics well enough that you get 12 years old researching and understanding the math of orbital mechanics, all because they'd like to do better than "point roughly half-turn ahead of the Moon and go full throttle", and they'd like to not run out of fuel on the way. Or, look how Minecraft is tricking kids into learning electronics, boolean logic, low-level programming, etc.

(I'd mention Factorio, but I think it's a wash - any gains society gets from the game educating kids are cancelled out by the amount of productivity loss the mere exposure to this game inflicts on software devs.)

(EDIT: or, remember Colobot? A very simple third-person perspective game that had you find and refine resources to build robots, which then you used to kill some big bugs. The twist being, instead of controlling the robots like in a shooter, you had an option to program them in a Java-like DSL, inside the game. It was a great way to organically learn programming. The IP owners later made a "fork" of the game, Ceebot, that was pretty much the same, except it focused on teaching you to program robots instead of having fun exploring and shooting stuff. Predictably, that simple change of focus made the game flop.)

It doesn't even have to be a game: leave a kid in front of Google Earth, and they'll learn geography much faster and much more thoroughly than they would from a globe or a book. Not because the software is better at teaching, but because the kid is just messing around with a virutal model of Earth, and learning stuff along the way.

Etc. Etd.

I think it's a tough sell to adults, particularly parents and educators - that if you want to motivate kids to learn, you need to... stop trying to motivate them to learn. Give them something that's honestly fun, involving or benefiting from real-life knowledge and skills, but actually trying to teach them - and then trust that they'll pick that knowledge up on their own.
Note that that FAQ is from the "Legacy" docs site, and was written right after hooks were announced in 2018.

The current docs site at https://react.dev teaches only hooks + function components as the standard approach.
And a Reagan Republican on top of that.
Cool site! You might consider deleting the cookie notice?

I run a similar site (dateful.com) and I promise the EU regulators don't come after sites like ours. :)
That's not the kind of software I work on, but if you go to a classroom, you'll probably see that when students are practicing via a "video game," they still get all the elements of instruction that we did when we were kids, with the addition of immediate feedback and better teacher awareness. When I was in school, kids would work on paper without getting any feedback until the teacher wandered by their desk to look over their shoulder, which could be the whole class period if the teacher spent time with other students first. Teachers would have to be pretty sharp and active to notice during class time that half the class was struggling with a certain kind of question; they might catch on later when they graded assignments, or they might not. I saw a teacher glance over a screen of updating results and within minutes interrupt practice to reteach an idea. Again, not my software, but I wouldn't dismiss the value of it without seeing it in action.

Teachers these days aren't that different from decades ago. I'm sure there are plenty of bad and lazy teachers, just like when I was a kid, but the ones who drive the adoption of software are engaged, hard-working, and interested in results.
Any reason RLHF isn't just a band-aid on "not having enough data?"
I don't see the current model as a single model, but as several models interrelating.

In software, there are at least three models I can think of immediately: code, configuration and user data.

Why do I separate configuration? Isn't configuration just code or data? I don't think it is. It is data _about_ a particular system, as opposed to a particular user.

Why the distinction here? The code of a system can be designed, developed, and tested against a set of supported configurations. At that point, the system might only run under one configuration at a time, but can be trusted from a requirements perspective to operate under other configurations without needing to go through the whole software development lifecycle again.

Why not just store this in user data, then? Different requirements. Three off the top of my head: configuration data wants much better change management than most user data does. That management wants to be exportable and importable. It wants different access controls.

Historically, configuration data change management has been done in SCM, such as git. The reason why git isn't a big deal in development is because it is not a point of particularly high friction relative to the other parts of the software development lifecycle. It is a _much_ bigger point of friction in configuration changes.

Hence, three models.

We can argue about whether or not configuration changes _ought_ to go through the full cycle, because I am wrong to trust _any_ change to a system with anything less. My practical experience suggests that most of the time, the damage done is less than the cost of enforcing a strict lifecycle on everything.
It will be interesting when we have AI doing RLHF to other AIs based on itself being RLHF'd and having an iterative AI model reinforcement...

But we talk of 'hallucinations' but what we wont get is AI malfeasense identified by AI RLHF trickery/lying?
> I wonder why all the content creators use TrueNAS.

Because they're content creators, not ZFS tuners. It's plug and play. It makes it easy to have some redundancy and do backups.
When we deal with algorithms involving numbers, we are interested in actual numbers, not in their numeral representation. It would be absurd to compare unary and binary addition relative to the same numeral length. We are ultimately interested in numbers, not numerals. Adding one million to one million is simply much faster for binary addition than for unary addition, even if unary addition has better complexity relative to its own encoding than binary addition has to its encoding. We are interested in complexity relative to the numerical value, not in the length of their respective encodings.

Edit: By the way, as the Wikipedia piece notices, the binary addition algorithm is O(log(n)) in time _relative to the value_, while unary addition is presumably O(n) relative to the value (just writing the numeral out alone takes O(n) steps). So the time complexity is in fact better. Probably the same holds for space complexity. Moreover, only in this case makes a comparison even sense, since we are comparing the same values in both cases, while for the numeral case we would be comparing the lengths of two different types of numerals, apples to oranges.
Developer tools to create spatial experiences for Apple Vision Pro
I guess yet another minus for F# at Microsoft. Really funny how they manage it.
Pretty sure oracle have made a habit of going after security researchers who use responsible disclosure pathways also.
For an example of how it can go wrong: I know for a fact that the competitive math class I teach makes a couple of standardized test measures go down-- especially "procedural knowledge". I know this because I've compared changes in performance to similar control students not taking the courses.

I also know that it has a big positive impact on performance overall. And our students do pretty well in comp and a lot reach state championships.

If I were strictly evaluated on standardized test outcomes, I would be asked to figure out how to pull those procedural knowledge scores up.
Kodak & Ilford sell regular selenium toners, and https://stores.photoformulary.com/toners/ for more exotic stuff
> We moan so much here (perhaps rightfully so) about lack of public transit and reasonable infrastructure to get around

Funny thing is that Canada used to have that public transit infrastructure, from big cities even into tiny little towns. The country was built on it!

We eventually ripped it up because it turns out people liked driving cars more. And I posit that they still do. If the will was there, it could be rebuilt, but it turns out moaning is a lot easier.