skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Last time something similar to this was posted, somebody recommended [0] "The Sound Machine" [1], a short story by Road Dahl. If you have thirty minutes to spare, you won't regret reading it.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35403491

[1] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1949/09/17/the-sound-mach...
Source? (the story does sound plausible, but having a source would be helpful)
Maybe it was a gift from a close friend.

Can't be gouging up the gift. The friend would get upset.

Maybe a powerful friend. A patron.

Gotta keep the gift nice to stay in good graces.

Maybe it was part of his costume. Something to wag and fondle at aristocratic gatherings.

Appearances are important.
It's why the standard for negligence is "known or should have known" i.e. the person has enough experience or education to have known better. It's probably harder to prove than it sounds.
OP posted dozens of Reddit related articles in the last week, I'd say OP is reasonably informed.
GDI+ was slower due to the alpha transparency than GDI in NT4.
These emails and related will be used for the upcoming wrongful death lawsuits to show negligence.
Now you have a strong statistical dependency between Xc and Xp the lack of which was required for your proof to show that the algorithm is unable to learn Xp. BTW it was already there because you already had `term-in-Xc()`.
What do you doubt?

Private investors are private funding.

And of course they are raising cash, they have literally have the most advanced rocket and satellites projects in development at the same time.

I can't find when CALLISTO is supposed to fly, some information says its 2022 but yeah I don't think they will make that. Starship isn't really in a race with CALLISTO so its kind of irrelevant.
I think this is only partially true. Generally,

Risk = probability x severity.

From that link, they characterized the severity (death) but not the probability. Saying "you may die" is different from saying "your have a 50% chance of dying." My guess is nobody had a good estimate for the probability so nobody could have accurately communicated the risk.
Yeah, mechanical failure was not a major problem with subs...until someone started gluing dissimilar materials together to make one!
I'm more concerned about the fact that we're about to start pitching: like, we've had introductions and we've got one-pagers out there circulating, and angels/VCs are asking to meet, and I think if we get in front of investors and say "It'll be nine months until the free version is ready for open release, and three or more months after that for the paid version," we're going to blow those pitches. VCs aren't commodified, and there are a few where we could get great commercial partnerships that I don't want to blow, so I'd like to get opinions on whether I'm in error and we're not going to get doors slammed in our faces when we tell them we plan to launch the free version first and the paid version later, or he's in error and we are.
If you ever do anything "risky" you'll fill out a similar form. Go look into skydiver liability forms, they also mention the possibility of death or injury. I suspect most people embarking on expensive & risky adventures are used to these and based on previous adventures being alright just sign the paperwork without reading or thinking about it deeply.
This happened after the manager already demonstrated a track record of 100% for picking candidates that turned out to be good. This happened in situations were the "hire" count was the majority.

I do also agree with you that "only one person gets to decide" is a bad idea in general (and is usually a red flag for someone trying to be a dictator).
> You don't need to turn off Windows Defender, you need to disable the file system filters entirely.

> You can't do this for your boot volume

How would this help with firing up all the built-in OS apps (Explorer, Notepad, etc.) being tested in the video?
>75W a hour

Just 75W.
Anyone know what the Linux equivalent of this would be?
> I'd hope he thought it had less than a 1% failure rate.

1% is horrible. You'd hope for robust systems where individual failures are mitigated by support systems. And even then, five nines doesn't feel so great when the cost could be so severe.

> I just can't fathom people would pay $250k for a miserable time and a decent shot at death.

That poor kid didn't even want to go. He was terrified of the thing and was going to make his dad happy for father's day.
I sign waivers that mention the risk of "serious injury or death" for my kids to play little league. People just see it as legalese.
If you issue a GET to a child porn website, that is a crime. Intent, action, and outcome are all considered in legal matters, much in the same way that using a gun to hunt often is legal while shooting someone is rarely legal. An action doesn't end where you conveniently want it.

Aaron Schwartz was doing some pretty blatant and cheeky piracy, and the AG either wanted to make an example out of him or coerce a plea, and he chose to end his life under such pressure. It's an abhorrent event, and deserves criticism, but embellishing and outright lying about the reality is doing him no favors.
A bet gone wrong.. Many innovations started off in a similar manner, ignoring or challenging the status quo..

That said, it's mighty spectacular and sad the way he was proven wrong.

rip.
I'd blame it on the CTO, for not knowing or caring what HR is up to.
We all know what happened as programmers. there's layers and layers of abstraction.
The more I think about the RedHat source code restrictions, the more I think this could be the reason. RedHat has mostly tolerated the free rebuilds, but now that one of them is encroaching into providing paid support (RedHat’s bread and butter), that’s a step too far and it could have poisoned the well for everyone.
In court, good lawyers think of themselves as "officers of the court" — to use a sometimes-forgotten phrase — who are working not just for their clients but also for the judge, to help the judge (and the judge's law clerks) to get it right, with rulings that will stand up on appeal if it comes to that.

The good lawyer's job is not just to advocate the client's position — it's also to do "completed staff work" for the court in the process, even acknowledging any weaknesses in the client's case (which builds credibility).

As we've seen in the ChatGPT case, judges tend to respond badly when they think a lawyer is trying to put one over on them.

And conversely, judges often respond favorably when they perceive that a lawyer is being thorough and intellectually honest, not merely throwing up any bullshit argument that comes to mind. A fond memory from years ago is when a federal judge called me and my opponent — a well-known lawyer in our field — into his chambers to talk about a pending motion that involved an uncertain point of law, which we had extensively briefed. My opponent had not done an especially-great job; my own briefing had acknowledged the weak points in my client's position but also explained why my client should win anyway. The judge said, I don't really know what the answer is here. He then turned to me and said, But I'm more comfortable with your analysis. And he ruled my way – which won the case for my client (a company you might well be a customer of today).
DPO: Direct Preference Optimization
A friend of mine once described World of Warcraft as "spreadsheets in Middle Earth", permanently destroying my ability to play these games. In my mind I thank her for it every day.
Reminds me of some code that I've written which got passed off to other teams who ripped it out because all they saw was the complexity and they didn't recognize what issues it was preventing (Chesterton's Fence).
> While the details of CCS provisioning vary in the different versions of the GPL agreements, the general principle is that CCS need to be provided either (a) along with the binary distributions to those who receive, or (b) to those who request pursuant to a written offer for source.

Since the written offer is apparently mandatory [1], does this mean that a potential way forward (if Red Hat intends to not break the GPL) is for Rocky and Alma to make regular written requests for source?

[1] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html, specifically

> If you commercially distribute binaries not accompanied with source code, the GPL says you must provide a written offer to distribute the source code later. When users non-commercially redistribute the binaries they received from you, they must pass along a copy of this written offer. This means that people who did not get the binaries directly from you can still receive copies of the source code, along with the written offer.

> The reason we require the offer to be valid for any third party is so that people who receive the binaries indirectly in that way can order the source code from you.
No; this is a common misconception I see from people who swallowed the "it's allowed to format your hard drive and blow up your monitor" dodge vs. the electrical engineers who know where terminology like 'undefined behavior' originated in engineering. In practice, it tends to do something subtle and usually right but probably wrong for the simple, practical reason that if it did anything as obviously wrong as "format your hard drive and blow up your monitor," someone would have tripped over it testing the compiler and changed the compiler.

This is why I actually hate using this programming language, because when you hit undefined behavior (which the language makes trivial to do; incrementing a pointer past the allocated memory is a one-line operation that throws no errors) the end-result is usually subtle, wrong, and hard to find later if it isn't actually "close enough to right" because the compiler desperately tries to make a useful program because that's what compilers are for. Hell, if it formatted my hard drive and blew up my monitor, it'd be much easier to figure out where the problem was! Hand-waving this flaw in the design of the programming tool with "oh, it's undefined behavior; you should never have relied on that in the first place" when so many valid statements in the language compile to undefined behavior, as if that is good enough, is building a house on sand.

... and quite frankly, our industry is full of sand houses and we could stand to respond to the amount of undefined behavior in C++ by ceasing to build on that shaky foundation.
Well, wiktionary has several meanings, one of which is close to that:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/democracy

However, other meanings are more specifically about how decisions are made or government officials are chosen. I think wiktionary is correct that all of these are commonly used meanings of the word.
"We don't need to vaccinate against measles because hardly anyone gets measles."
The article presents many reasons why the manufacturer was a danger to health. What do you think of those reasons?

The free market includes regulation. I especially want medicines regulated! What specifically is overly burdensome about these regulations?

Try just sticking to the facts and reason. The exaggerated language is the opposite of convincing - it tells me someone is just engaged in an Internet rant.
Why would you need a mouse when using macOS trackpads? Before switching to MBP (about 10 years ago) I couldn't fathom using trackpad but then after a couple of days of usage I was so hooked up and it _felt_ so natural than I can't imagine using mouse nowadays...
He had actual experts telling him that this thing was unsafe. He fired people who said the thing was unsafe and that it wasn't ready for manned dives.

I would argue it is always unethical to ignore the advice of experts when putting other people's safety on the line.
It is, just controlled in a larger macro sense than what humans are capable of.
Wagner coup in Russia? Wagner declared war on the Russian army
Right. For some reason people have figured out that “noble savage” is racism, but there’s a bit of latency when it comes to “ignoble white man” flavor of racism.
The government could give itself immunity from such lawsuits. But agreed, there should be a set compensation for use of standards in law which in doing so makes them openly and freely available. Unless the copyright holder is Elsevier, in that case they get nothing - screw you Elsevier.
> The vast majority of marine (and aviation) accidents are a result of operator error, not mechanical failure.

Could that be because the vast majority of mechanical designs go through processes designed to validate them and catch flaws?

They also use SpaceX as an example. SpaceX ran a large number of unmanned launches to prove out the design before putting people on board. Several of those ended in loss of the vehicle and the data from that was used to refine.
> C agrees that in principle an integer, a pointer and a floating point value are in fact different kinds of thing.

Sure, but that's kiddie-pool, 1970s-level stuff compared to modern type systems.

No business in their right minds is saying, in 2023, let's develop a new system in C. If they are, it's because they have people stuck decades in the past who are arguing for it.

(Edit: or, of course, they need to integrate with a C system, the number of which "is too damn high".
Literally unusable as a laptop. ~128 KB memory, no display, no networking, probably no storage either. Even USB would be a stretch. iCE40 FPGAs only have 20-30 I/O pins, and they're all too slow to communicate with modern DRAM, an LCD, an Ethernet PHY, SATA, or PCIe.

It'd certainly be possible to build a computing device around one (or, more likely, several) iCE40 FPGAs, but it would have very little in common with the Framework.
It's time for a ruling like this to apply to construction related codes. You need code books such as IBC, IRC, IECC, NFPA, ANSI in multiple year editions (depending on jurisdiction) and then whole new batches of books when jurisdictions adopt new codes.

Then, the IBC allows you to claim fire ratings if you match an Underwriter's Laboratory tested assembly (for example, a fire-rated wall) which buying PDFs from UL is another additional expense.

Point being, there's a rabbit hole of paywalled technical standards in construction.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/missing-titanic-submarine-ocean...
Lots of space companies have different opinions on 3d printing. Relativity Space uses it a lot. Firefly doesn't as much. 3d printing is just one way of combining parts there are others.

> 3d printing isn't that problematic, as you can just have several printers.

The faster you want to manufacture the more printers you need. Its ok for most engine plant but for SpaceX Raptor manufacturing line, it would be challenging.
Read that also, can't remember where.
The sad thing is he's taking risks for no benefit. It's not like what he's doing is going to increase the body of knowledge or rescue some puppies trapped at the bottom of the sea. He's just taking stupid risks to run an expensive amusement park ride.
You're an IC, not a /Manager$/ - right?

Cynical quip: Ask that you be scaled up to 40+ hours/week in meetings, so you don't feel guilty about never having enough time to do any serious engineering work.

More realistic: Ask if people at your level could be blank-exempted from meetings on Tuesdays & Thursdays - to let you focus on engineering and get serious stuff done at least on those two days.
> I just can't fathom people would pay $250k for a miserable time and a decent shot at death.

Rich folks pay upward of 70k for Everest expedition, where local personal Sherpas babysit them from basecamp/Kathmandu all the way to the top with oxygen, unless SHTF in some form. That's 2+ months of more or less suffering, living above 5000-6000m long term ain't fun for most. Metabolism goes to hell, wounds heal slower, body is clearly struggling and so is mind. I did experience empty mindness above 6k myself and you just focus on getting goals done asap and survival.

Everest has some 2-3% fatality rate, consistently. I'd say it may not be the exactly same crowd but similar mindset that gets attracted to these things.
It takes longer than a few milliseconds to say "Uh-oh", probably.
Also: Russia accuses Wagner chief of urging 'armed mutiny'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-66005256
I agree with the CEO generally but taking a submarine to the bottom of the ocean is not the right domain for this message.
Just enough time to hear the "Bu" from "Buzz"
Chris Voss talks about this in his book "Never Split the Difference".

He advocates for teams of people handling a negotiation with the most experienced negotiator just observing.

The reason: it's incredibly difficult to be process, crafting and delivering responses in real time. If your primary goal is to observe the other side, that should be your sole focus. It's also incredibly valuable to have that observation hence why you should negotiate in teams (or at least pairs).
more to the point, taking safety warnings as a personal insult is a red flag for literally dangerous narcissism
It’s High Time to Prepare for Russia’s Collapse (January 2023)
I remember seeing in the news that it is possible they released the ballast before the implosion, according to the findings, and they may have done that because of a warning
End Times by Peter Turchin review – can we predict the collapse of societies?
> OceanGate’s submersibles are the only known vessels to use real-time (RTM) hull health monitoring. With this RTM system, we can determine if the hull is compromised well before situations become life-threatening, and safely return to the surface. This innovative safety system is not currently covered by any classing agency.

> No other submersible currently utilizes real-time monitoring to monitor hull health during a dive. We want to know why. Classed subs are only required to undergo depth validation every three years, whereas our RTM system validates the integrity of the hull on each and every dive.

Completely, completely bizarro in my opinion. I'll take the hull that is proven to actually withstand the pressures it was designed for over some system that gives me a heads up before I get crushed to death.

Related question for those more knowledgeable. I always thought the primary benefit of carbon fiber was tensile strength. I don't even understand how it could sufficiently resist the compressive pressures at the bottom of the ocean - it is a fiber after all. Edit: After seeing the comments below about James Cameron, apparently I'm not alone. From James Cameron's Wikipedia page: "He was also critical of the use of carbon-fiber composite in the company’s Titan submersible, stating that the material has “no strength in external compression” when withstanding the pressure in deep sea environments."
> The idea that it's impossible to write good, solid programs in any given language is ridiculous.

The data disagrees. There's plenty of evidence that the severity of bugs and the number and severity of security bugs is far higher in languages like C or C++ than in memory-safe languages.

> Only if you're writing bad programs.

This is precisely the "just trust me bro" mentality I was referring to.

"I write good programs, I swear!"

But you're human, and you really don't. You make mistakes. Empirically, you make roughly as many mistakes per line as
programmers in other languages, but the consequences of those mistakes are worse.

You can argue with me all you want, but you're essentially arguing with reality. C has survived for legacy reasons, but almost everyone is desperate for a better, more robust alternative.

Just so you know where I'm coming from - I learned C in the early 80s, not long after learning Fortran. I later started using C++ because it seemed to offer some benefits. But now - more than forty years later, when there are so many better alternatives for any given problem except one which requires legacy integration - it's astonishing to me that people are still staunchly defending C.

It reminds me of what Max Planck said about physics:

> “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”
If we're using renewables, we need seasonal shifting, so cycle life doesn't matter at one cycle per year.

You could build nuclear to supply your winter power, but then you're overbuilt for summer and don't need any renewable. Or you could store heat directly in the ground like that Alberta pilot project, heat collectors on the roofs all summer drive the heat underground, pump it back out all winter.

Or our current plan, pretend to be "green" by spending money on solar while increasing coal usage and no feasible plan to replace space heating.
It looks as if one can book passage on the "50 Let Pobedy" ... but this is not exactly the best time for people outside the russosphere to do so.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Let_Pobedy#Arctic_tourism
Yes. You’ll get inverter clipping, but the area under the curve in a clipped production is still better than a “thin hill” production.
https://unboundsolar.com/blog/oversizing-pv-arrays
Yeah, this is also my issue. You get a "take-home" after a short 15 minute intro call where some HR person basically just repeat what's on their homepage and job listing and where you repeat what's on your CV (I have a theory that HR people can't read, all observed evidence points in that direction anyway) and then you're given an 8 hour take-home. Sometimes you don't even get the intro call and just an email.

Even just a "hey, we're genuinely interested and you made it to the shortlist" or something to that effect would just make a world of difference. Now I have no idea if I'm on any sort of shortlist or if they're just shotgunning this to everyone. I tried asking a few times, but I always got such vagueries in return that I might as well not have asked, so I stopped bothering.

Would also help if people made the tests at least a little bit interesting. Now it's either "do this boring CRUD thing you've done 1000 times already" or "solve several NP-hard problems that have been subject of Turing awards within an hour".

The last time I spent quite a bit of time on one of these things because it was interesting, and even put the result on GitHub (with no mention that it was for a take-home test, it "just" looks like any other project, also slightly modified to fit my needs). Then again, what's "interesting" for one person is "boring" for another.
https://fortune.com/2023/06/21/titan-titanic-missing-sub-dav...
A downside for sure, but one that, at least in this specific example, has limited downsides. If you can button it up into a safe abstraction that you can share with others, then I don't really see what the huge problem is. The fact that you might need to write `unsafe` inside of a well optimized data structure isn't a weakness of Rust, it's the entire point: you use it to encapsulate an unsafe core within a safe interface. The standard library is full of these things.

Now if you're trying to do something that you can't button up into a safe abstraction for others to use, then that's a different story.
> Lochridge had alleged major safety issues: there had been almost no unmanned testing of the craft; the alarm system would only sound off “milliseconds” before an implosion

https://www.forbes.com/sites/katherinehamilton/2023/06/21/oc...
You bring up a good point in that false negatives could never be tracked.

E.g. if the manager in this story said "no" and that person wasn't hired, how would you know she was correct?

I will say that there was a non-zero number of "she said 'no', person was hired anyway and it turned out to not be good". As sister/cousin threads have pointed out: this might be a self fulfilling prophecy.
The craft survived several launches - that proved it can do it.

Whether it can do it reliably / survive fatigue accross repeated cycles is a different question. Imagine we'll find out as the investigation progresses.