skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Are you not going to try and draw any line at all to protect free speech rights in this scenario? [...] Remember that the 1st Amendment does still apply to minors. We typically allow more government intervention into their lives than we do into the lives of adults, but the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that children have constitutional rights.

Yes, children have constitutional rights. Also, ironically, the US Government has ruled that these rights can be reasonably curtailed at public schools even though they are US Government funded. An example just a day ago, a judge ruled that a student could be disciplined for wearing a "There are two genders" T-Shirt. I'm not saying that's right or wrong - but that statement was just ruled to be not free expression on school grounds. First Amendment need not apply on school grounds, that's already established.

> What if they banned any text that referred positively to a religion, are we allowed to call that government overreach?

Do we arguably not do that now? I am sure that any books endorsing Osama Bin Laden's extremist interpretation of Islam is not welcome on shelves.

> So the question is not whether or not it's always wrong to censor material from a school library. Like you've said, there are types of content that pretty much everyone agrees should be censored from a school library. But that's not what we're asking; we're asking if its crossing a line for the government to censor this content.

There is, I believe, a major distinction you are forgetting. The First Amendment protects the student's right to speak - but does it actually protect the school's right to say whatever they wish to the students? Where do you assume that it works vice-versa? Schools can, and do, implement restrictions on vice-versa speech all the time. If a teacher starts, or attempts to start, a sexual relationship with an 18-year-old female student, he will almost certainly be fired and often legally investigated even if it was technically legal. If a teacher makes sexist jokes in class, the First Amendment won't protect him even if he was employed by the government, literally working on publicly-owned ground.

> Is it acceptable for a government to censor material based on (what you yourself describe as) explicitly religious criteria? That doesn't ring any 1st Amendment-related alarms for you?

To be fair, the First Amendment has always legally had an exception for obscenity from a judicial perspective. There was also the "Miller Test," which is still technically legally binding, declaring obscenity to not be legally protected. Nowadays, what is considered obscenity is very narrow - but it used to be far more broad and our earlier presidents and Founding Fathers saw no problem with that. Free Speech was intended by them to promote progress and intelligent discussion, not to promote what they would have viewed as debauchery, so they saw no conflict. This is also why laws making it a misdemeanor (at a minimum) to knowingly distribute pornography to a minor are still legal and binding right now.
You can hear the original recording at the 3:00 mark, including an earlier attempt.
That is my point. The Internet is like a direct tap into the more primitive emotions of humans, linking them up across the world.
As if the bums don't just jump the gate every time.
Miss Excel If Miss Excel Had a Beard and Did Google Sheets
Yep. Late 70s is when the major shift happened: no more lead paint, no asbestos, electrical with a ground, Romex wire instead of that dangerous cloth crap, and ductwork for basic HVAC (furnaces at least.)

The only major advancements beyond the late 70s-80s are energy efficiency-related.
I’m happy with teachers disciplining teachers and doctors disciplining doctors, for what it’s worth?
When the constitution was written, some states allowed abortion and some banned it.

It makes sense therefore that there was no non-enumerated right to abortion, and states did have the right to ban it.

The 1973 decision was most definitively legislating from behind the bench.

It will probably only be banned after both the right and the left get burned by this type of legislating enough times.
The latest figures point to 1/3 of people in the world will die due to cancer, and the statistics always have been close to that. Where are you getting the 50% figure from?
I don't think this much weight loss comes from running.

It comes from diet.

Running would be part of the equation, but a smaller part.
That’s a good analogy. And it’s right.
Z-builds were possible until BEARS launched in 2018-2019ish
I'm confused where the concept of a single expert making policy entered the discussion.
Hmm, I was initially talking about assimilation, but as you mentioned heterogeneity ( as opposed to a cultural monolith ), I realized that the two are related in this instance. In a very practical sense, US 'melting pot' was something of a myth. Yes, people from all over the world were coming and parts of their cultures were assimilated, but the general expectation was that the immigrants adjust to the way of life in US -- not the other way around.
If you wait until a problem affects YOU to take action, it'll be too late [video]
It's the same situation with medical licensing boards allowing doctors to tell their patients that their illness is caused by alien DNA and demon sperm.

The near total lack of accountability and oversight erodes the public's trust in critical institutions that our society depends on to stay functional. It destabilizes our nation. Corruption spreads when it isn't kept in check. The longer this goes on, the more difficult it will be to correct, and however long that takes, it'll take much longer before trust is restored.
It feels like a common paradox.

Why should lawyers discipline lawyers? Why should cops discipline cops? Why should lobbyists advise legislators? Why should banks help to shape financial regulations? Why should corporate aircraft engineers participate in the aircraft certification process?

Because they are subject matter experts. Who else is better placed and better suited to do it, and who else would charge less for the service?
How to quickly setup a VPN saas co?

There are plenty of adults who want to access these sites but will never upload a govt ID to one.

I could do some promos for VPNs, should I affiliate with one? Create a new service? Whitelabel from another service?
I already imagine other ways to increase revenue while doing it.
As per the OP, it's a "Ben Franklin" instrument--he famously left money in his will, not to be used for 200 years, to demonstrate the power of compound interest. So imagine buying $10k of these CDs and leaving them to your alma mater or your children's grandchildren.
Would be interesting to see sugar linked to cancer too. Alcohol already has been (with a much stronger link than aspartame).
Sorry for not replying earlier, but I am really grateful for you providing those links. I had not known that the iq-job perf had been challenged and it means I need to adjust my priors when looking at candidates.
I switched from a S10e to a zenfone 9 and the screen feels smaller while the body feels larger, mainly due to the thickness and rectangular profile. The 10 is the same size as the 9
Since C11 there is _Alignas(sizeof T), forcing one of the proposed meanings for alignment, and _Alignof(T), which queries actual (i.e. natural, per another meaning) alignment. But, yeah, the argument upthread seems more about the implicit meaning of natural than anything else.
My take on copyrights and AI models...

Taking copyrighted material and using it to train a model is not a copyright infringement - it is sufficiently transformative and has a different use than the original images.

Note that AI models can be used for different things. A model trained to identify objects in an image has never had uproar about the output of "squirrel" showing up in the output text.

The model also, as a purely mathematical transformation on the original source material does not get a copyright. If it needs to be protected, trade secrets are the tools to use to protect it. A model is no more copyright worthy than tanking an image and applying `gray = .299 red + .587 green + .114 blue` to it.

The output of a model is ineligible for copyright protection (in the US - and most other places).

The output of a model may fall into being a derivative work of the original content used to train the model.

It is up to the human, with agency in asking the model to generate certain output to be responsible for verifying that it does not infringe upon other works if it is published.

Note that the responsibility of the human publishing the work is not anything new with an AI model. It is the same responsibility if they were to copy something from Stack Overflow or commission a random person on Fiverr... its just that those we've overlooked for a long time - but it is similarly quite possible for the material on those sources to be copyrighted by and/or licensed to some other entity and the human doing the copying into the final product is responsible for any copyright infringements.

Saying "I copied this from Stack Overflow" or "I found this on the web" as a defense is just as good as "Copilot generated this for me" or "Stable diffusion generated this when I asked for a mouse wearing red pants" and represents a similar dereliction on part of the person publishing this content.
Those numbers have been about the same in the last two decades. The numbers have always been that high.
This is a misperception. There are a few hotspots that make the news regularly, but most people in America don’t face “constant danger and violence”.
On the 32-Character Zodiac Cipher
It's pretty amazing to me that there are any open source models that have crossed that threshold - especially given that prior to the Llama release in March there were hardly any open source models that felt like they could catch up with GPT-3 at all.

If you're looking for an incentive to make this happen in open source, how about the team behind MPT-30B just getting acquired for $1.3 billion.

There are a LOT of well-funded groups trying to make an impact in open source models right now.
>Despite this, I'm having trouble applying for jobs. I usually don't meet any of the requirements, as I don't have actual work experience that the job description expects. And when I do apply, I get rejected before an interview.

This is normal, keep going you're on the right track. Apply everywhere, don't stop if you don't meet the requirements. But, do some research into the role and company. Show in your cover letter that you've put in lots of effort and try to convince them you're a good fit for the role.
Also it mostly benefits legacies.

Legacy female +black with subpar SAT scores (despite having enough money for SAT prep) is a perfect candidate in Harvard’s eyes
Diving Deep into the Abyss of Cybersecurity: A Voyage Through VX-Underground
IMO this is going up the spectrum from runtime checking to static checking, and it becomes more and more useful when you are writing libraries for mass consumption or working in large codebases with a lot of developers. I wish I had stuff like this at my last job, so much boilerplate to basically guarantee similar stuff statically would be replaced by a few one liner 'ensure' clauses.

I think we will see this feature added to production languages in 3-20 years, hopefully sooner. I think Eiffel had this feature too with their program by contract feature?

It's basically baking in more and more parts of unit tests into the language itself, and a one liner 'ensures' clause is way more concise and stronger of a test than a unit test you have to run separately or an assert that does checks at runtime.

The key issue with static verification is making sure it doesn't get in the way of build speeds, execution speeds and binary size.
I'd be willing to overlook a lot for a new Android phone with dimensions similar to the Sony Xperia XZ1 Compact. The market for small Android phones is extremely thin right now. There are only two phones which can run Android 13 and are less than 145 mm tall, and they're both less than a year away from EoL (Pixel 4a and Pixel 5).
> former is more an ethical issue than a criminal one

Isn't addressing (relevant) ethical issues a big part of what disbarment is for? If there's an actual criminal issue, lawyers can still be prosecuted.
To be clear, it's not yet known for certain if the chilling effect of a terminated contract violates the "no further restrictions" clause of the GPL or not. Evidently IBM's lawyers think it doesn't. But it would be good to test it in court first.
And sometimes pointing out the obvious gets you slandered as a racist.
Life isn't fair. Yay, argument over! Not.

Still, I think my as-of-yet unstated point stands. That is, the government should do everything in its power (reasonably speaking) to serve justice to the criminal and support the victim, but that just isn't possible for massive historical grievances. Where there are current issues affecting Jews or whoever else, they should be addressed. Of course, some issues can be resolved with money, while others are more insidious.
> heavy and light bodies do experience the same acceleration, but a heavy body will collide sooner than a light body.

I still don't understand, why would the heavy body collide sooner if they have the same acceleration (and starting at rest)?
What about pytorch?
The revisions are key. It makes the book worth buying.

Many technical books are out of date within a few months of publishing and get no revisions
40% is definitely near 50%
My Peruvian climbing guide turned me onto stevia which doesn't fall into any of your categories. It is really a wholesome plant extract instead of something chemists have invented which leads me to have confidence in its (so far as we know) lack of carcinogenicity.
But it's more fair and you are in control of your own fate: you can always study harder, but you can't improve the degree to which a random stranger likes you.
A typical class at Harvard has 2,500 student admits. Of those, 700 are black or Hispanic. If Harvard did away with legacy admissions, 25 additional Hispanic or black applicants would be admitted, so 725. However, if they did away with affirmative action, 450 would not be admitted, so you would be down to 275. Most of these 425 spots would go to Asian applicants and a chunk would go to white applicants.

http://public.econ.duke.edu/~psarcidi/legacyathlete.pdf
Passengers happen to be surprisingly fragile.
There’s some good discussion downthread already. I want to make a particular observation that your intuition is:

- totally obviously correct in a vacuum with no other factors

- reflective of how most white Americans think of the issue, because their experience of persistent racism is that it’s mostly unnoticeable or trivially ignorable

- what people motivated to reverse AA have reinforced for decades, because they want this to be the predominant intuition even for people with more context

- logically reasonable if you assume advantage barriers generally follow a similar pattern and even then if you assume good faith

- untenable on inspection for the same reason any social democratic institution needs to exist: a thing that’s supposed to be structurally fair intrinsically isn’t, and demands correction to address that

The problem is that an economic axis isn’t the only one involved. Sometimes it isn’t even involved at all. Racism is deeply embedded in American culture and history and outcomes, even when other factors are otherwise favorable. And at least in the US, this is a huge source of conflict among otherwise like minds even on the left.

It would be much better if those with an open mind to “can’t we just level the field” had a more open mind to the various axes of relative and historically intentionally stratified advantage. That applies to race, to sex, to sexuality and gender identity, to disability. And in each, structural inequality is much more particular and involved than access to money/resources.
People at /r/nycrail talk about Byford like King Arthur, someday to return to save the realm.

He returned to the US (for his kids), and is now running Amtrak high-speed rail.
Ah.

Yeah then I guess you're in the land of either waypipe or RDP/VNC/etc.
Vowel.com Is Shutting Down
No I haven't, and "easy" is not a well defined term here. What I said is that it's not a matter of being ready or not, it's a matter of choosing to or not. And lots of companies can and actually did choose to do that at very short order when covid was causing shutdowns, so if you want to make extraordinary claims to the contrary then you'll need to bring a lot of evidence.
I live in the burbs and barely ever take the metro into DC
Discrimination goes away when you stop discriminating, perpetuating it doesn't stop it.

It's like you're saying you hit me, hitting is wrong, so I'm going to hit you back ... and you think that will end hitting for good. Er, if it's wrong, stop doing it.
This would be a good measure for your own site, and you could get back to Google to say your results are garbage.

But you would have nothing to retort if they tell you you're an outlier, or your specific niche has bad actors that skew the results and they'll look into banning one or two of them (and come back to us again when they get replaced, we'll again clear a few token users)
My parent comment explicitly said that AA is harmful, and I see it like how people abstractly state that communism is harmful to the social fabric or something. Now give a relevant empirical example. Even a scientific study would suffice. Stop playing lazy abstract word games unbefitting of STEM experts. And please carefully reread the upthread remakes before joining replying, Naasking.
I work at a FAANG company on a project from a recent acquisition. The "narrative" of the startup was much like this article describes; a few rock stars knew everything and delivered sweet features everybody loved. Well, now those rock stars are gone, and we're left to pick up the large tech debt tab left over from their free-wheeling days of fast features and relatively poor documentation, code health, and testing.

I get why this happened. A startup has to deliver features now if they want to get acquired. It's a completely different mentality from the one we have now: no worries about funding, and we want to do things right in a way that will be robust long-term. Realistically, this is how it was always going to go down.

But I can't say that this is ideal. You don't want a couple rock stars carrying your project if you also want that project to be around in 10 years and can't guarantee that all your rock stars will be dedicated for life. You need somebody else to be able to pick up the torch. You want "commodification" (although I don't think it's a very accurate term; it's actually hard to get this right, not easy, but the alternative is much worse over time).
> Monk Fruit has also been linked to cancer.

Do you have a citation for that? Google search is telling me the exact opposite, that it seems to reduce cancer growth.
May not be fair but its Constitutional unlike Affirmative Action.
It is continuously formed by the decay of Thorium and Uranium.
In my case, the third party I'd most be interested in sharing with is my local home assistant instance.

(zero points for anyone pedantically pointing out that this is technically first party sharing)
You can invent a lot of things in written Japanese using textspeak and other alphabets.

Spoken Japanese you can't break the rules because everyone else instantly becomes unable to understand you. They barely use local accents/dialects in media because of this.
The claim you're making here is that there are studies that present strong evidence that aspartame causes brain cancer, but that they've been suppressed this long because otherwise there'd be no artificial sweeteners, a concern we're saying IARC would have had, and that as a result, in 2023, the only way we can move aspartame into Group 2B --- the possible carcinogens nobody takes seriously --- is an observational study in France showing a barely significant increase in cancer rates.
According to Wikipedia at least (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per-_and_polyfluoroalkyl_sub...), it looks like 3M had a $10b settlement around PFASs, which seems like a pretty big chunk of their $50b company, given how many different products they have. Do you have a source for how much they made off of just PFASs?
You can have an LLM be entirely deterministic. This is by design how they work. Having the randomness added to their response is a choice.
I’ve started using a plantuml extension for it recently, helps embed architectural diagrams in the docs.
Falcon was trained by a research think tank, and this is going to happen more and more as AI compute gets cheaper and the frameworks get better. We aren't going to be stuck with overpriced A100s running early PyTorch eager mode code for long.

High quality "open" data is an tricky problem, but the community has already come up with some impressive datasets for finetunes, like the roleplaying collection used for Chronos and Pygmalion. I think this is going to get better too, epecially if cheap models can "distill" lower quality human datasets.
I'm highly skeptical that people are just going to leave the secret sauce out in the open for anyone to directly compete with them, feels a bit too idealistic to me.

If you look at Mosaic, their value, their secret sauce, is the infrastructure. The model, to say it cynically, was marketing. Now it's true it can be marketing and help push open source forward at the same time.

More of a separate point, but I also think models are going to be fairly quickly commoditized on a couple years timescale, so the infrastructure to train a model or serve a model, or the thing built on the model is the value, but right now models are still the value because they're so new and we haven't finished (in fact we're really only starting) the race to the bottom.
Yes you would now that I told you. Glad to have been able to help, you're welcome.
Indeed. From Wikipedia : "A sample of the pure element has never been assembled, because any macroscopic specimen would be immediately vaporized by the heat of its radioactivity."
Ok. I'm maybe not following your point.

Do you think the FAA's policy is a problem?
meanwhile /r/videos has turned into a profanity required subreddit
I guess it depends on where you’re starting at and what else you’re doing, like a diet.

26 over three months does sound like a lot but not impossible. Anecdotally, I broke my leg and had surgery in January and gained 20 lbs over 9 weeks of being on crutches. I’ve been slowly getting back to being active and running again. But also have been strict with my diet at the same time. I’m down 7 lbs just this month. I don't see why I won't continue that or make even more progress next month.
> Suppose the war in Ukraine ends today. Time skips forward a year with no change from the present. A committee recommends reparations for the Ukrainians affected. Do you do it or not?

Is it the same if you wait five or six generations instead of a year?
There was an initial shift to paying more attention to the bottom line. After that I don’t see a shift other than he’s taking care of business as he has a right to do.

Doesn’t indicate worry, just action, not that there would be anything wrong with having concerns, aka worry.
I don't think it's wise to cut every possible corner and consider only what saves the most money.

What we want is something that works for the people being served. Subject matter experts are great for input, but just because foxes are experts in chickens, being so intimately familiar with their ins and outs, that doesn't mean that they should run the hen house. We need other stakeholders involved too. The people who depend on those systems need to be represented. The people those institutions serve. The people who will be impacted by them.