skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm not the person above, but I don't miss calling to place orders. I miss it even less at the end of a long day, a few beers in, in a country that speaks a third language.

I book through a screen when I can, at my own speed. It's nicer.
My Think Pad Tablet has had issues after a bad firmware partial update. It won't stay on past 30 min. It is really souring my former respect for them. I understand it is part TPM issues, but now I have basically a semi-brick. I was able to move the whole os to a VM. I'll try linux and see if it was a Win-Bios interaction bug. And if that doesn't fix it I'll wait six more months and see if it gets a working update. By my former respect for Lenovo is now gone.
Your list of altitudes didn’t go high enough to change the answer. ;) Drones (in the US and the UK) must be limited to 400ft/120m and are still considered “in” the airspace of the ground they’re over. Commercial aircraft flying at 35,000ft AGL are not considered to be in the airspace of a specific park or private property when over the U.S. (and most of the world, I suspect), but they are considered to be inside the country’s airspace, since park & private property airspace has a limited ceiling, but country airspace extends up to space.
Yes but his point still stands.
The difference between GPLv3 and AGPLv3 is:

1. The name.

2. Section 13's title is changed from "Use with the GNU Affero General Public License" to "Remote Network Interaction; Use with the GNU General Public License" and this is inserted before its first paragraph:

> Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, if you modify the Program, your modified version must prominently offer all users interacting with it remotely through a computer network (if your version supports such interaction) an opportunity to receive the Corresponding Source of your version by providing access to the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge, through some standard or customary means of facilitating copying of software. This Corresponding Source shall include the Corresponding Source for any work covered by version 3 of the GNU General Public License that is incorporated pursuant to the following paragraph.

3. Some more is added about how the two licenses work with each other.

The whole point of AGPL is to deal with users interactive with the program (but only remotely over computer networks...if they are interacting remotely with it but not via a computer network or if they are interacting locally then AGPL is effectively GPL).
So far it seems like they are going all in. I would say that it does not even matter at this point who wins as it will destabilize whole country/region either way.

Also who knows what will happen in Belarus and Chechnya as there are anti-estblishment forces that have been waiting for quite some time for an opportunity to strike.

Either way this has huge potential to grow into something similar as happend to USSR.
How does it perform in well known human tests?
> "niche protocol is still niche after big player dumped using it"

I'm pretty sure it's more: "growing niche protocol collapsed to near invisibility after big player reimplemented it, extended it, then broke compatibility"

If we're making up quotes, they might as well reflect the article.
The government only has so many levers it can pull, though. Even if we, the enlightened of HN have some idea of which investments are beneficial (for example, hiring a good CISO instead of buying the $50K cybersecurity box), laws and policies move too slowly and are too hard to change once enacted.

So this situation still seems better than a rule which only benefits companies that hire Cisco Certified Security Posture Experts or something. There's at least a chance that some of these companies have competent CTOs (or equivalents, at smaller utilities) and will spend in the right area.
Recently I stumbled across the online catalog for Segor Electronics (segor.de I think? Google it. Only in German. They're not paying me to post this)

It's extremely fast. Super duper fast. And a quick look at the network debugging tab shows why: it loads the shop's entire catalog data (about 3 megs) upfront, and the entire application runs locally with not a single request until you buy something. Now that's efficiency.

Really. Go to their website, clock on KATALOG and click some random buttons, pick a product at random, add it to your cart, remove it from your cart.

The product images are the only things that aren't pre-loaded.
> it sure has not learned any "algorithm". At best it has learned to approximate a sorting algorithm. That's what statistical machine learning models do, they are function approximators; not program learners.

Transformers are RASP programs, which includes sorting programs. See the Weiss paper (https://arxiv.org/pdf/2106.06981.pdf).

> Also, Machine Learning 101: you test your models on a test set that is disjoint to the training set. To clarify, we do this not because it's in the book and that's the rules, but because, by testing the model on held-out data, we can predict the error the model will have on unseen data

The probability of a test list existing in the training set is less than 10^-70.
Is there anything close to MidJourney?
I was referring to the XMPP users before Google started federating. Twitter's slow descent into online hell has made Mastodon significantly more popular.

However, there may be 7 million users, but about 2 million still use the platform at all. Two million people is a lot of people, but compared to Twitter's 240 million user accounts and Instagram's 2350 million user accounts the Fediverse is a spec of dust.
> > > The longer your name is, the more untraceable you become.

> For some reason I don't believe you, Mr. Doctorow.

Yeah. My name is shared by more than 10 living people who are known enough to have Wikipedia entries. I think I'm a bit more untraceable, as long as you don't know my SSN, address, or workplace.
I value “equity” in a private company at $0.
A) types might be motivated to go to Moscow and get their money.
The Surprise of Splitting Electrons
It's crazy how much of the VC-funded economy is about taking over a vital road then instilling a toll.
The first version on the Internet Archive is from 2001, where the design made sense more or less, and it hasn’t changed much since then.

https://web.archive.org/web/20011225094629/https://www.cs.co...
There are plenty of models where the SotA doesn't require a DGX A100.
Sure, and that's fine. I was just sharing my feeling :)
All I see here is a government subsidy for security vendors. I'd rather see more liability and insurance requirements for security breaches, including personal liability for executives. Whatever it takes to get past checkbox-driven security.
The FDIC insuring all deposits is also very effective at preventing contagion.
It really seems like all business regulators have been fired and it's just pure anarchy right now.
I think you are over-reaching on the effect of 2A. Most of the developed countries in the world do not have an armed population and still, people do not cut lines.

I have lived in India where lines do not generally exist and in US. I have seen the culture in India change from line cutting to following the line (generally). The biggest difference is caused by whether you believe you will get the service if you wait in the line.

If you have a service that is available for only the first 20, but you have 50 people waiting, line-cutting will happen. Railway tickets in India are a big example - when I was growing up, you rush to the beginning of the line since there were only small number of seats allocated to each station. Now, that it is computerized and you can book from anywhere to anywhere, people stay in the line since they know they will get the ticket.

Look at your last example - lack of service if you are not in the front will cause chaos.
The loci method makes memorizing 48 things in order the work of an afternoon or less, if you're into that sort of thing.
The instructions say to ignore all other rules/laws besides "no vehicles in the park" because the jurisdiction is unknown. International agreement doesn't seem like it should break through this barrier, although I understand why others may disagree.

The notion of permissions afforded by "airspace rights," even those internationally agreed, therefore cannot be used when deciding how to answer the questions in this game. Even if we could lean on that here, airspace rights actually were infinite for a very long time -- there's even a Latin phrase saying "up to Heaven and down to Hell" -- until modern air travel began.

Instead of rights/laws, we must focus only on what it means to be "in the park" by common use of the phrase. At some point you're above it rather than in it, perhaps. It may happen to be the case that people do most often think of this altitude threshold roughly equivalent to modern airspace rights, but personally I'm not so sure.
Nothing unfair honestly.
> Warren Buffett argues that active investing doesn't make sense because it loses out to passive investing in the long run. I agree with this.

He is an active investor… He may argue for buy and hold the S&P for ordinary folks, but he’s obviously not advocating no one actively makes decisions about specific companies — that’s literally what he does.
I call BS on this (as in I disagree with the point, not that I doubt it was said), if only for the reason that 3D printers are allowed to proliferate.

You could argue that 3D printers are still kinda shitty, and only making incremental improvements, but that's the trajectory I would expect replicators to follow as well. They'll be sold for industrial purposes for companies to make spare parts first and then to rich/upper-class nerds to make exotic things and mini-figs or something until incremental improvements result in a commodity version.

It probably would get patented, and stagnate for 20-ish years, and then see an explosion of innovation when the patent runs out (unlike copyrights, patents regularly are allowed to expire).

Can't disagree with the conspiracy theorists part, though. That one seems bang-on like what will happen.
To be fair, light rail is cheaper to build than high-speed rail. And if we are going to fantasy-land where the government can do things for the public good without caring about who it inconveniences right now, they could build light rail on land "the government" already owns: in cities dedicate lanes to public transit (as in light rail + bus), to go between cities take some highway space. Rail has much higher capacity than cars, so if you get public transit right this should actually decrease traffic after it's built.

Of course this makes it obvious why California can't do it for $10 billion, $100 billion or even $10 trillion: wherever you put your rail network it will inconvenience someone, and that causes massive delays and cost overruns, or makes the project politically untenable from the start. Even if you put the rail underground you would get massive protests from nearby residents because "poor people" can now get there easier.
Unpopular opinion: TypeScript is overrated.

After 1 year of Vanilla JS you will know all the types by heart.

All the necessary static type analysis will be happening automatically in your brain.

No cluttered type syntax and linter wars needed.
Some of the biggest revelations from the Microsoft vs. FTC hearing
Certainly the closer you can get to shared-nothing, the better! Some of the difficulty is we have a legacy stack that is not implemented that way. (You also need to account for significant kernel CPU use, like hardware interrupt handlers (e.g., NIC rx) running on some cores.)
Selective enforcement of rules transfers power from the legislative to the people in charge.
> let's not pretend there aren't millions of users.

Is there evidence that there are over a million regular users? I'd actually bet there aren't. I'd bet it wasn't even close until the twitter media panic.
OpenAI isnt even oublishing papers any more, and Meta has been publishing model weights for many models for quite some tome and have also commited to releasing their next language model open

apologies for typos, typing quickly on an ipad
not having root access means that the user doesn't have complete control over the device's operating system and its underlying features. This limitation can potentially compromise the security of end-to-end encryption because the companies controlling the device could theoretically have the ability to intercept or alter the data before it's encrypted or after it's decrypted.

So, the parent is probably suggesting that without root access, and thus full control over the device, the promise of end-to-end encryption is somewhat of a "fantasy" because the user can't guarantee that the device itself isn't compromising the encryption in some way.
> what do you think would happen if you gave your model an alphanumeric list to sort? Did you try that?

The tokenizer would throw an exception, because it doesn't have any tokens to represent alphabetical characters. But you tell me - if I had tokenized alphabetical characters and defined an ordering, would you expect the results to be any different?

> You say e.g. that "LLM is learning an n-gram"[...] you can't "learn an n-gram".

Where do I say that? I don't think I make any reference to "learning an n-gram", which is a relief because I don't know what it would mean to "learn an n-gram".

> There's plenty of error in the figure where you show its accuracy (not clear if that's training or test accuracy).

Test accuracy between training iterations (not part of the training process itself, which uses its own separate validation set which is split from the training set). And yes, I agree, it is not error-free, and I wouldn't expect it to be, especially after so little training. What the figure shows is the percentage of sorts that were error-free, and how rapidly that decreases. I've since repeated the test with finer resolution, and the fraction of imperfect sorts continues to decrease about as you expect, which is enough to satisfy my curiosity, although I'm a little curious to see if there is some point where it falls completely to zero.
Whatever else ... who has the nukes?
Apple can do anything they want with "your" phone. As it's an entirely closed-source ecosystem with obfuscated hardware, trusting Apple is the only reason to believe anything isn't decrypted and sent straight to <insert-TLA-here>.

Google is marginally better, as AOSP exists, but once you deal with an actual Android phone, everything is locked down and Google services have total control.

e2ee only exists if you can verify their isn't a third end.
This is intensely defeatist. Regulations and compliance are essentially what you described and they work for banks (despite the clever responses I'm sure are incoming). For the critical industry sectors they need to be buying the 50k appliance. And they need to be looking at a checklist that they only want to complete to avoid fines. Culture will accrete later.
I interpreted the ambulance and police as breaking the rule, even though it wouldn't be persecuted. Of course the important thing isn't the rule, but people's reaction over time. A vehicle might cause unwanted noise or damage park grounds. Even without the rule, people might get upset if people use vehicles to degrade park quality. On the other end, if the park is many miles across and it has large paved trails, people might perceive the rule as unjust. So it's ultimately this negotiation and power between participants (including the park owners) that determines acceptability. An arbitrary rule which is easy to break but without real harm, in enforcing it, creates more harm than it prevents. So, I don't care about the rule but how it's enforced. Another concept useful to these situations is Taleb's intransigent minority: those who care will win over those who don't. With content moderation, we will always have a battle between those who perceive harm and those who don't. Problematic rules must be fought just as problematic content must be fought. A systems ability to adapt rules over time will ultimately determine its useful life. Change or be replaced.
No worries, worth a try!
Many of which are already free and usable for non-commercial purposes. It feels unlikely that the world would significantly change if OpenAI opened their kimono.
I live in Germany. Our park has a daily meet up of dog owners letting their dogs roam.

The rule says they should be on the leash.

Nobody follows it.
In a lot of countries intent is in fact everything. It's common for developed countries to be more governed by written law and have that interpreted as such in court, but in many developing countries it's all about what you are trying to do.
Biggest advantage I've seen from using it, is the ability to quickly get into old code. Sure, well I'm writing it. I have a mental understanding of all the different types, but I don't two years down the line.

Also, when multiple people are working on the same code, it's nice that they all are forced to spell things the same way...
Flame-throwing robot dog is the stuff of nightmares
Yes, we appreciate the mod team's efforts throughout. Nevertheless, this event is turning into something historic, even if it ends up in failure for the instigators.
It's also possible -- for specific cases, probably not generally -- define your schema object as const and use type manipulation to generate "real" types automagically. Toy example here: https://github.com/andrewaylett/aylett.co.uk/blob/3fffae1bab...

This lets me run my inputs through a schema validator, and ensure that the type I'm using statically will match the schema used at runtime.
This is pretty much what anyone should care about. Maybe the Chinese or UN can stage an intervention to protect the nukes?
Beyond that one line in the intro text that is vaguely riffing on (the other) OpenAI, I really don't see what about this could be seen as satire? It's just another AI image generator with the one unique feature being trademark infringement. Confused what the goal is.
As a person from New Zealand I am accustomed to every single request taking a minimum of 300ms RTT and sometimes it's shocking when it doesn't.
Show HN: A list of open-source AI agents
Deflation can be self-reinforcing, too.

If both directions can lead to runaway feedback, it likely needs to be controlled.
No, it really is a very poor predictor.

It is a reasonably good predictor only for animals which are relatively closely related and only when in none of the two lineages there has been any significant modification of the way of life, like starting to eat a different kind of food or adapting to an environment where different locomotion or sensory skills are needed.

In this case the accumulated genetic distance consists mainly in random mutations with no or little adaptive value, for which the approximation of a constant "molecular clock" is valid.

The attempts to extrapolate this "molecular clock" hypothesis to other circumstances have produced a huge number of ridiculous research papers whose results have low usefulness.

The approximation of a constant "molecular clock" may be also be applicable in other cases then what I have mentioned in the beginning when the genetic distance does not refer to the complete genome, but only to some groups of genes that have not been involved in the specific adaptations which have been caused in one or both lineages by changes in the way of life, so they have still evolved with a constant mutation rate.

The approximation of a constant "molecular clock" fails in many cases because even if mutations really happen at a relatively constant rate, most of them lead to immediate extinction of the mutated cells and the mutations that we see in the genomes that are examined now are only a small fraction of all mutations, those that have been preserved in survivors.

How large is that fraction depends on where in the genome the mutation has happened, i.e. whether it was in a place with large or small influence on the chances of survival and also on whether the mutated animal lived at that time in an environment with great or little adaptive pressure.
I’m not interviewing. I would only do consulting as a Plan B while looking for a permanent job. I work in the cloud consulting department at $BigTech now. I get the same amount deposited in my bank account every month whether I have 10 hours of billable work or 40. I also get a known amount of RSUs deposited in my brokerage account every six months.
Only answer that makes sense. I wonder that they think about React vs Vue.js
> There's also the notable feature of the most significant bit, which, if excluded from the usable range of numbers, becomes the sign-bit. If it is empty (clear), it must be a positive number, if it's set, we have a negative number (since it must be a clear bit flipped)

There also is the problematic feature that, according to that logic, zero is a positive number :-)

> Can we do something about this? Namely, can we get rid of negative zero? Well, as we've seen, we have an extra step on the negative side of things… what about just adding 1 to compensate for this? So, for -1, we wouldn't write 1110 (flipping all bits of 0001), but 1111? Just the same, for -2, we would add 1 to 1101, making this 1110, and so on. – Well, this works! we just eliminated negative zero! Welcome to two's complement.

I think that the “flip all the bits, add one” method to flip the sign in such a number came after the idea of using that mapping between numbers and bit patterns.

I’m thinking that because the mapping naturally comes from the observation that unsigned n-bit integers do math modulo 2^n, and that, thus, the all-ones pattern stands for

{(2^n 1) + k 2^n | k ∈ ℤ}

⇒ it’s an arbitrary choice whether to pick 2^n-1 and -1 as representatives of that set.

⇒ the hardware for implementing addition, subtraction and multiplication can be 100% identical, whatever representatives you pick for those numbers.

One thing this loses compared to the ones’ complement is that it is harder to flip the sign of a number. However, it isn’t hard to discover the “flip all the bits, add one” method.

A thing that it doesn’t really lose is that this encoding has a ‘weird’ number. To flip the sign of 1000…000, you compute 0111…111 + 1, which is 1000…000, so in some sense, that’s a second number that is its own negative in this encoding.

That isn’t much different from two’s complement. It has two zeroes, this has one zero and another number that’s equal to its own negation.
If this is a company this is probably a trademark issue.

But at first glance this looks like satire to me, not a company. Poking fun at the "open" in OpenAI seems like protected speech in the US, and I'm guessing this is a US site.
I'm familiar with THGTTG, but recalled they were dolphins, not orcas.
That alternative OS is called... 16-bit Windows.
Sure, but you're describing a fully functional database integrated with a fully functional programming language.

Just because you're describing a possibly novel integration of those two systems doesn't mean it's not valuable to consider the prior art for both constituent pieces.
Adding more money to "the homelessness problem" seems unlikely to actually solve the problem. It's (politically) difficult to address the underlying root causes, but easy to show how compassionate we are while subsidizing homelessness, and you get more of what you pay for, so.
Because many programmers who open sourced their code intended it to be read by humans, not AI. They don't want some centralized super computer owned by a mega-corporation reading their code. At the very least, if the models were Free and Open Source, the reaction might be different.
It's a vicious cycle: as monopoly businesses make money they use that money to destroy regulation that stops them from making more money. Continue as nauseam and this is where you end up.
At my company we just have a wrapper around the Object.keys function (and other similar functions) that provide a more specific type in case you are sure it won’t be a problem (which we generally are for objects we’ve created ourselves).