skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
They tried this with orchestra auditions by doing them behind a curtain but they didn't end up with the "right" mix. As of yet they haven't figure out how people's auditory senses are racist.
It means it's up to the courts to decide on a case by case basis.
But race discrimination should (in theory) be illegal regardless of federal funding status. So if it's already illegal, and the assertion is that universities don't have the right to minimize homogeneity in their classes (presumably along legal, non-racial axes), then taking that logic to the extreme, why should admissions offices have any discretion at all? Should every university that accepts federal funding be required to follow a standardized rubric when evaluating applicants?

Standardized metrics are one of the constraints that made affirmative action a problem in the first place, because when evaluations are limited to standardized metrics like test scores and GPA, the top universities have enough applicants to fill their class a dozen times. So they need to discriminate on some attributes. Maybe one alternative is a standardized baseline and a lottery system for the remaining spots. But when you're at the point of removing discretion from the process, and imposing government designed rubrics on every school, the process starts to look a bit Soviet...
Gnome introduced a hard-dependency on systemd (and later denied it / claimed it had been an accident) in what looked very much like a deliberate move to force distros to ship systemd.
Consider a codebase where all variables are consistently named with single letters and all values are string-typed for consistency.

Somebody comes along and creates a new, isolated piece of functionality using words for variable names and using the languages type system for numeric values and structures. It works well.

It certainly looks like this inconsistency would make it easier to work with this code in the future. Any conversion functions introduced that deal with the consistent string types and the new inconsistent types will help new developers understand both types of code.
> Lifting one group up is almost always at the expense of other groups, which is isomorphic to punishment.

Not necessarily. Life is not a zero sum game.

Who is hurt by better funding for schools in poor neighbourhoods? Who is hurt by training cops to not shoot first and ask questions later? Who is hurt by encouraging home ownership by black people?
As a general heuristic, I’ve found that people who create policies in a specialized field of expertise tend to think through those policies a whole lot more than internet commentators like myself do.

Especially when those policies will obviously piss off a bunch of people, I can either assume those people who spend decades thinking about X don’t know what they’re doing, or I can say “hey, I probably know way less than they do.” That doesn’t mean I don’t inquire/don’t question, but I think jumping from an unattributed off-hand remark in a CBS article to “FAA is dumb and they’d have let me die on the tarmac” deserves some skepticism too.

I am genuinely curious about what exactly this policy is, why it exists, and how they handle cases like yours. I don’t think “assume the people who investigate aviation incidents aren’t aware there might be medicine onboard” is a good starting point for that type of inquiry.
I love that we can't have a discussion about brains without a very poor computer science analogy.
I mean that was just a plain scam. They didnt deliver most of the package which included a Forbes feature. all they delivered were 100k followers bots for like $100. and they got paid $50k.

just a pretty dumb scam. they could have delivered half of them real followers plus a real Forbes feature for less than $15.000, providing a $35k profit, but this agency is a scam, not a real agency.
15% of the company was let go unfortunately
Taxing FOOD is always regressive.
SS64 Command line reference
My point is that we (those of us who support WFH, because I am one of them) do not come to this debate from a position of strength. Our argument always seems to rely on anecdotal evidence and trying to string together reasons like you did here which literally means nothing to senior leaders who want RTO. They hold all the cards and can choose any reason they want to justify it and you are bound to their whims of where your place of work is located if you want to continue receiving a paycheck from them. The uphill battle is ours.

Office layout studies do not get us there because organizations will redesign if they perceive that the office layout is a problem. Sick building studies do not help because they already have legal obligations to provide good environmental quality in their workspaces and most comply. Frankly even your active shooter and security concerns do not help because I bet there are plenty of statistics that can be gathered that will show that a person is much more likely to encounter violence within their homes than at the office. Sunk cost fallacy is only real if the only reason they want RTO is because of RE investments.

Some companies might lose good people, but my suspicion is that this will even out over time. As more companies RTO the remote jobs openings will slow down a bit and soon you could find a that remote gigs become less and less available and harder to find, you will see people that quit because of RTO softening their stance on in office if it becomes difficult to find well paying remote gigs.

To be in a position of real strength on this issue, we need real reputable studies that show a measurable and significant increases in productivity to the organization if workers are remote. That is literally the only reason that has a hope of convincing an organization hell bent on RTO to change. It has to be a significant increase—-eye opening levels. Tiny net improvements don’t matter, because most leadership will convince themselves that they can manage up small levels of net productivity differences.

Until that day we are going to be fighting an uphill battle against a more powerful enemy with an insufficient arsenal.
I may be missing something but how do you get your specific client_config deployed to your car? The quickstart says, "Share with Tesla" - do you like send them an email asking nicely?
From my comment.

> HTTP/2 reduces the problem with multiplexing but it still doesn't go away

Even multiplexed you hit initial TCP window limits + all the response header overhead.

And many cases you have dependencies - need the first HTML content to issue the JS request to issue the Auth request to issue the API call to issue the dependent API call...
as someone who's going through the Google hiring pipeline right now (as a candidate), I just wanted to say thanks for these nice words of encouragement / rational thinking about all of this.

the process (this isn't Google's fault) feels quite a bit like a semi-objective judgement about my competency and worth (both as a professional... and individual). sure, I know I "shouldn't" think like that, but it's overall very very tough.

thanks for a clear headed view on it all.
Well, there's procmail[0], and there's Sieve[1]. I've used both and was satisfied.

There are solutions that work on remote IMAP accounts, shuffling messages into folders. However I've never used one of these.

0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procmail
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sieve_(mail_filtering_language...
Here's hoping someone writes a youtube-dl extractor for that site soon. Haven't gotten around to doing it myself, despite manually downloading a bunch of videos using Firefox's network tab.
It hasn't been signed by Governor Kotek yet.

https://www.koin.com/news/oregon/what-do-people-think-gov-ko...
Yeah that's like saying "sandwiches are just ground up wheat, plus a ton of delicious filling to make them taste good"
It reminds me of people needing to do a "clean room implementation" without ever seeing similar code. I feel like a human being who read a bunch of code and then wrote something similar without copy/paste or looking at the training data should be protected, and therefore an AI should too.
> The only good reason to use packed structures is when you need to map some memory (e.g. hardware registers exposed to memory) bit by bit to a structure.

Another common reason is when two CPUs of different architecture need to access the same structure in memory. E.g. you have a RiscV and an Arm64 processor in the same system, sharing memory. Or you read structured binary data from disk and need to specify an exact layout.
> Some people just need more help to get where they're going, and some of us will be just fine using the legs we were born to walk with.

This is exactly the issue at play. There's a fundamental difference between _unending_ affirmative action and temporary 'help'. If you believe in equality of outcome then you will never be satisfied and we will always be 'helping' the disadvantaged group achieve various metrics forever. Eventually people deserve the dignity of a level playing field, otherwise you seem to be saying they're incapable of handling a level playing field which would be.. racist (by definition).

Your example of handicaps is disturbing, I know you didn't intend it in a racist way, but read what you wrote from the perspective of an African immigrant. Just because a person is black does not mean they're 'handicapped'!
Call me crazy, but as a highly analytical person that has spent 70% of my waking hours in the last five years working on something technical, my social skills are best when I'm hungover. The logical analytical side of me is diminished and I am much more "normal". I have a much higher rate of success on dates with women when I have a really bad hang over and then a few drinks. It does feel like a lobotomy, and that's fine.

If I am in my normal raw intellect, I will begin going deep on some topic thats outside the range of normal human discourse. It will be hard for me to stop, because of my interest. Alcohol removes that to a large degree.

Edit:

A funny meta observation, the "Peak HN" comment below, and the following conversation, might not have been necessary if I wrote this post very hungover.
Wagner PMC Allegedly Took Down ISP for Russian FSB,MIL
Google Sheets can't be self hosted, so the data must be shared with Google in their scenario.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVFe9ungqtk
The investigation is not the primary reason your told the leave your stuff its to avoid delays in an evacuation. Imagine that the plane was less lucky I fire had started in the front nose cone section. Then people trying to get there bags could jeopardize the safety of the passengers in the front of the plane.
pretty cool, love anything related to C.

might want to add anonymous struct.

also put function pointers inside struct for simple object-oriented-programming in C.

flexible array is handy, you do one malloc for all, but pointers inside struct is more 'flexible', for example you can put a 'void *' and cast it to various data types. for flexible array, the data types must be chosen first.
This is really an excellent text about special relativity. Physicists might consider this too imprecise and informal. But I think it’s exactly right for an introducing. So if you have a 15 year old who is interested in that topic, this might be a start.

I remember that it took me a while to understand that a constant speed of light means that time and space need to adapt so that the physics stays correct. I haven’t seen special relativity explained so clearly.

Not to mention the piece of science history to tell people how messy scientific progress can be.
I used to think that a drunk was someone who would drink to ease a burden of shame. As I got older what changed is I developed compassion for them.
It impairs judgment - of oneself, and of others; for better, or for worse.
Civil rights laws sure, but the constitution generally defines the role of and restrictions on the government.

I think the answer must be that Harvard has government contracts or something (as others responded to me).
As a non-American, I think watching season 4 of The Wire, which has an education and politics focus, was both eye opening and profound. Highlighted the profound gap between US and where I grew up on a number of issues.
it seems to be missing a PATH or something. eg airport is buried in /System/Library/Private Frameworks... I can't just type in airport and have it run. I'm using bash from brew, in case that makes a difference.
They need to sell something, if people believe sugar is bad, sweeteners are bad, even disposable plastic bottles are bad, what's left?

Edit to add something more concrete, we already have the "sugar tax" in the UK, to avoid it soft drinks went mostly sugar free or reduced sugar substantially, and replaced it with sweeteners.

And now: https://www.thegrocer.co.uk/artificial-sweeteners-to-face-go...

Simultaneously: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/deposit-return-scheme-for...
Ok. Did they propose a different way to combat systemic racism?
Just like bust stop graffiti too, I guess. Your point being, besides gratuitous whataboutism?
> struggling to understand

> Armchair physicist here

I've started and aborted a couple of ELI-n where n < ~ 24, and I'm not sure this one is especially satisfying either, but I think my previous attempts were just confusing and went beyond your implied question.

Causality in a sandwich wave spacetime is weird. All the null geodesics from a point can eventually refocus on some future point in the afterzone. We can take that simple fact (from Penrose initially) and contrive a sandwich wave spacetime that shows off the Bondi&Pirani words that confused you.

If you do an isotropic pulse of light in the beforezone, as expected (beforezone being just the flat spacetime of special relativity) it flies outwards in an expanding spherical shell. In a flat spacetime without a sandwich wave, you'd never see any of it again in the absence of a reflection. However, in the sandwich spacetime the gravitational wave can roll over you (and this expanding shell of light) such that in the afterzone all the light that you flashed out isotropically, eventually lands all at once on your eyeball, no mirrors required.

Moreover, the null geodesics out of multiple different points can all be refocused on just one future point. So you can fire off dozens, millions of isotropic flashes in the beforezone, and fry your eyeball (in the future, in the afterzone) to a crissssp.

Going further, one can set up a sandwich spacetime so that the light from every event in the beforezone lands on one point in the afterzone, or on a succession of time-ordered points. In this way, an observer in the afterzone can in finite time receive light from every light-emission in the beforezone, even if the beforezone is infinite.

Finally, I am using "light" loosely; to keep the sandwich spacetime flat except for the wavezone, instead of light we need massless test particles that feel gravitation only passively. They don't exert an active influence on the gravitational wave or on the focal point in the afterzone, even if there is an awful lot of them. More technically, we need the stress-energy tensor to be 0 everywhere in the whole (vacuum) sandwich spacetime, otherwise we will have a lot of work[1] exploring the contrived spacetime's insensitivity to perturbations from matter (which generates curvature after all, and a heavy enough amount can distort the wavezone). Matter here includes light.

- --

[1] there is a literature in that area, with Mustafa Halilsoy being fairly prominent in studies of (matter) waves including standard electromagnetism interacting with the sandwich (gravitational) wave, which in turn invited thoughts about (non-sandwich) gravitational waves interacting with the sandwich wave, which is also in the literature. I'm not likely to ELI any of that here though.
I agree with you; however, the federal government is of course a government actor and cannot continue to give funding to these schools if they continue to use affirmative action. Without the funding, the school essentially closes its doors or offers severely curtailed services.
IME, separating I/O in the code works because it literally is separate -- it usually happens at the boundaries of the application. It rarely makes any sense to connect two code components (running in the same process) with a disk-backed information path. And where it does make sense -- well, your I/O code moves deeper inside the application.

The "boundary" argument works even better where it's about network I/O or video output, because applications are even less likely to connect code modules using such types of data.

Other than that I don't buy much into that I/O vs "pure" at all, it's pretty much an arbitrary categorization since there really isn't much of a difference between writing to disk or memory. I think the idea that writing to memory is somehow purer comes mostly from Haskell and similar languages that somewhat enforce immutability at the language level. Given that it is still an artificial categorization I don't take this too seriously. The one benefit I see is that it often does improve clarity of architecture to have mostly construct-consume-discard data access patterns without any mutability after construction. Oh, and potentially you can handle errors from disk I/O, while you cannot really handle errors from memory I/O.
The thing I find most sad about articles like this is that it doesn't seem to actually address any of the reasons that it got this way, it blames individuals within the field not a series of MBA graduates telling you what the spec is and hiring 50 people to hit an arbitrary deadline for a software project moving in the wrong direction FAST.

It's a false dichotomy to say you only have rock stars and as this person smugly tip toes around "normal people" when in reality you don't need rock stars anymore to make good software and let's be honest... Most rock stars didn't make good software they just make it in a time when software was generally even more crap than it is now.

You want to stop suffering among us plebs? Don't advocate for goofy rockstar developer propaganda, advocate for healthy work life balance and reasonable deadlines for things that truly don't matter. Stop letting sales and marketing write your software and stop taking opinions about systems design from your project managers and "technical leads" when they do not work in these systems day to day.

If you treat engineers well and respect them before a client who will drop you the moment a new product fits their need then yes you will lose clients from time to time but if you focus on making good software and happy people then you will attract stable clients who do the same and maybe the stock holders at the top don't get the ridiculous return per year that they expect out of more shameless companies but at least you have a half decent chance of sleeping at night...

I am well aware that we live in a world where this will be borderline impossible but the first step to solving a problem is admitting it
> So you can't use KDE to write a program that links against the proprietary QT libraries.

The way I read it that's fine, it's the other way around that's forbidden - you're not allowed to use the commercial-licensed version to work on KDE.
This is true but somewhat misleading. The nth busy beaver numbers are known for n <= 4. It's within the bounds of possibility that we will some day learn the nth busy beaver numbers for n <= 10. (What we can say is that the parent's loop will never terminate for any known definition of "ever" that pertains to the physical universe.)
But what empirical historical example of "outcome equity" has proven as harmful in scale and magnitude as slavery or other oppressive, authoritarian social orders? How much of this concern is founded in actual history? Even one example would help ground such a hypothetical concern.
The original Hebrew word is רָדָה (radah), you can see all the other times it is used in the Bible here, which should aid in understanding its meaning and potential nuance: https://biblehub.com/hebrew/strongs_7287.htm
This smacks of (and I don't mean this in an unkind way) of pulling the ladder up after you use it.

Yeah, maybe you didn't need the extra help, but I'm pretty sure there are still a LOT of people with your background that did/do.
yeah you can be perfectly happy and just really enjoy a beer. If dosed & timed properly it amplifies happiness & relaxation.

Problem after too much the body just craves more.
I believe the AI generates a watermark because so many examples contained it.

Imagine taking a really dumb gig worker, showing him 10000 images, some of them with watermarks, and then telling him "draw a red car, kinda like the kind of images you saw". There's a decent chance you'll get a red car that looks nothing like any cars with the data set (original work), and yet he'll paint a memorable watermark on top because so many examples contained it, you said "kinda like the kind of images you saw", and he doesn't understand that the watermark isn't meant to be part of the picture. I believe that's whats happening.
Not quite--I assume sandwich fillings are food. Doritos are coated w flavor powder.
Somehow I knew that this question would come up, questioning the "progress" makes me a heretic.

So last 2-3 months I subscribed to ChatGPT4 (and much longer to Copilot), worked through most of the HN threads on tips and reviews, posts I could find on "prompt engineering" and have hundreds of sessions with ChatGPT4. So, I still might have missed something, but I think I have a rather good idea of what's going on.

1. It's rather good with understanding what I want. I can dump pretty much anything into it and give it certain rules (things we described years ago as "Google fu" until Google SERP became useless) and it will make something out of it.

2. It's a nice rubberduck to discuss things and get a broad overview on certain topics.

3. It's amazingly stupid, even if I ask it for its confidence, on the validity of its answers. It's like talking to a 8-year-old know-it-all: You have to fact check everything. If I confront it with the error, it even reacts like a 8-year old.

4. Initial responses for intentionally broad topics (summed up with "give me ansible yaml to deploy wireguard to N servers") are often times not working at all and after an hour of query-response you're better off reading ansible docs.

5. Initial responses for intentionally special topics (summed up with "what's the fastest algorithm to sort this given x, y, z and bla will never be A") it frequently comes up with good, sometimes surprisingly creative solutions.

All in all: Why oh why would I trade in correctness with a significant error rate ("hallucination" is a word from SV marketing hell) and debugging bullshit answers. Since debugging things is already a big drag in programming, I need things I can trust to build more things on top of them. If I can't trust 100% the "command" an LLM is generating, I'll never directly let it execute its code.
Don’t know much about astatine except it’s the rarest naturally occurring element and Tom Lehrer sang about it.

https://youtu.be/AcS3NOQnsQM
Drinking slows down my brain and reduces the number of threads running in parallel. Sometimes very useful to enable normal-passing interaction in social environments. Or just to be able to focus. Lots of people with ADHD drink to achieve a more single threaded experience.

Edit to add: I don't meant to encourage drinking as a tool for managing ADHD. It works but it's a blunt and dangerous tool. If you're at that point, you'll absolutely love the results you get from the healthier strategies: Understanding yourself; developing a suite of tools that don't involve a slippery slope; and curating your social and physical environment carefully.