skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My parents home lan got caught up in a bot net and their isp was sending emails about it to their isp provided email address.

But it's possible they were just passing on abuse reports from the numerous targeted victims of this botnet who bothered to complain.

The intrusion point was a Linux system with a 3 letter password and ssh exposed on a nonstandard port. So if you're someone who still thinks the bad guys won't find your computer because you changed the port, know that that is very outdated thinking.
yeah - "ignoring" to me means "is ignorant of" means "one second passing means increasing the time by one second". You do by far the most obvious thing when time passes, and you ignore the complexities of reality to continue being maximally obvious.

Doing anything else means handling them by adding custom behavior.
Alcohol is not a terrible poison, it is a social lubricant and mild intoxicant and uninhibitant with negative side-effects if abused.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah_S._Sweat#The_%22whiskey_s...
Looks like it:

>https://bigwav.app/core.js

>ggml-tiny.en.bin, ggml-base.en.bin, ggml-small.en.bin

This uses Gerganov's Whisper models (https://github.com/ggerganov/ggml)
So does all forms of automation. By your logic we should've never invented computers because they took jobs from human computers[0]. Improved technology and automation reduces jobs for people doing things the old way and makes the job easier for everyone else. No job is necessary forever, that's just how the world works.

[0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_(occupation)
This approach is extremely popular. С++ have it with parallel-for like libraries.

It has some downsides. When multiple threads join before allowing to continue it leaves some perf on the table. If you have limited number of threads to hardware concurrency then any thread that reaches join point is typically unavailable to deal with remaining work or other algorithms.

In gamedev with limited concurrency due to hardware it is more beneficial to let every worker thread to participate all the time. Instead of joining back to sequential execution one uses task dependencies. If continuation is done as separate task that is scheduled "when all" of the dependencies are done then there are no threads that unavailable due to waiting. This way if you have multiple parallel algorithms in flight then every thread is available for any task. Instead of me handwaving it here it is probably better to check a presentation from Sean Parent [1]

1. https://sean-parent.stlab.cc/papers-and-presentations/#bette...
I think the idea that people have in terrible teeth in the UK is a bit outdated, but did you look carefully at the study?

The ‘better teeth’ you report is 7 missing teeth on average in the uk vs 7.3 in the US. Both of those numbers seem high to me: you’d need to have all wisdom teeth plus three more removed for example. It made me wonder whether that average was biased by old people[1] with many missing teeth[2], who I think aren’t that relevant to the idea about teeth being bad in one country rather than another.

For the ‘oral health impacts’ measure, which corresponds to a questionnaire, OHIP-14[3], with questions like ‘have you been self-conscious because of your teeth, mouth or dentures?’ The score for the UK is lower than the US here, though I guess the measure is less objective and you can imagine cultural factors would impact the answers (eg maybe people from one country would downplay things more, or if worse teeth are more socially acceptable in the country, people there may be less likely to be embarrassed about their teeth.

I think the kind of ‘bad teeth’ more common in the U.K. is crookedness (eg overlapping incisors or over/underbite) and teeth being more yellow. The paper notes that they weren’t able to measure things like that.

My general impression is that bad teeth in the US (on someone who grew up there) are a pretty strong signal that someone grew up poor, and this is a little less the case for the UK.

[1] the paper claims these are ‘age-standardised’ numbers. I don’t really know what that means but I guess that it means the number is mostly meaningful for comparing the countries rather than what people in those countries are like. For ages 25–44, they report averages of 3.7(UK) vs 4.6, which still looks a bit high to me. There’s about five times the rate of toothless mess in the US for that age group which made me think there might be some small population in the US with many missing teeth that isn’t so large in the UK, but the paper found the same income-based inequality in number of missing teeth

[2] The paper claims to have gotten similar results when excluding the toothless

[3] Slade GD; Derivation and validation of a short-fortn oral health impact profile. Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology 1997; 25; 284-90.
Nope thats not true, Adblockers stop a lot of ad tracking, blocking tracking pixels, scripts, telemetry and so on.
They've worked for me several times over the years when I had sensitivity issues. Takes a month or so to notice and you should be careful not to drink water for a while after you use them.
Unless an instance you want to visit and be a part of got defederated, this is a huge issue.
Depends on what test you mean. Clearly alcohol hasn't stood the test of time enough, as there are lots of studies showing its bad effects.
> I'm sure Chinese citizen could have said exactly the same.

It would stand to reason that this is statistically likely, but I don’t think anyone has any real understanding of how much the people in China believe in / support their current government and its positions. Information is extremely restricted.

> When a lender collapses it's usually very good news for the debtor.

I could see why someone would think this if they’re considering the collateral is something like a house, or a car, or a plot of land — something that is useful in and of itself because it is surrounded by other stable infrastructure. However, in the case we’re talking about here, China is the lender for large scale infrastructure that will stop getting built and eventually decay because the borrowers have no means of finishing or maintaining what was being built. That makes them vulnerable in other ways.

Keep in mind, too, that those places where the infrastructure will stop being maintained are also places that make or mine or otherwise export components that are part of a global supply chain.

You don’t have to love America’s values like I do to be biased towards the US being the driving influence in these nations.
Doesn't this also happen from just eating?
For now, sure. But consider the earth as a system and not a place where humans live for their one lifetime. Burning more fuel means converting long buried organic material into material that exists on the surface. The fact there are issues with this is that the processes to deal with this great excess haven’t yet organically evolved on their own, but given time taking advantage of the excess carbon in the atmosphere and a more energetic earth from greenhouse effect should see things like rapid evolution of microbial photosynthetic life, even extending to favor rapid evolution of macroscopic photosynthetic life as well.
> Our research does not reject the notion that individual behavior and decision-making may directly relate to upward economic mobility. Instead, we narrowly conclude that biased decision-making does not alone explain a significant proportion of population-level economic inequality

Interesting. It's not cognitive biases of some innate sort.

It seems important to me that society should apply boosts to people who can demonstrate ability through some trainable measure that is advantaged by intelligence until they hit some threshold.
> The USA’s problem is mostly due to income inequality

The post specifically refutes this: Europeans live longer than Europeans at all income levels.
I've been down this rabbit hole, to the level of reading disassembled bytecode to optimize preformance. Elisp is alright for what it is, but Emacs itself contains so many hacks and subsystems at the C level that elisp isn't allowed the comprehensive level of access that it would need to make m̶e̶ ̶h̶a̶p̶p̶y̶ highly performant extensions.

To be clear, these limitations in reasonable package scope come with positive trade-offs in the broader ecosystem such as promoting stability, inter-operability within emacs, and the insulatory disuse of FFI. I just feel like Emacs promised me I could do anything with elisp, and then denied me the low-level control that a lisp like Guile or Common Lisp is capable of. Helix does this better by not h̶a̶v̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶e̶x̶t̶e̶n̶s̶i̶o̶n̶s̶ making any promises.
This is only true if you live in a handful of North America and West European countries.
I can confirm that PhD students still do drugs and party
Excluding curl ... | sh, neither bash nor cron tend to run random code from the Internet on their own. A git repo, on the other hand, is almost always some random code you got from the Internet. You also don't expect using git itself to inspect a random repo to execute arbitrary code from that repo.
That response almost comes off as a non-sequitor, and the only somewhat reasonable interpretation I can parse out of it is that he purposefully has no succession plan as a middle-finger to anybody who might want to use Nim after he's gone, because apparently they're all products of a clownworld he wants no part of.

That's a really bad reading, but it's the only one that makes any sort of sense.
that makes a lotta sense even to my ignorant mind. so everyone got login'd prompted since companies make the most money data gatherin or what have you, plus reducing bots, stuff like that, it all makes individual sense and then amounts to search engines not working good anymore. Plus real blogs or websites with real human writing get buried or never shown because of bot or that SEO thing I tried to understand?

I'm just trying to wrap my head around it but I think I'm making sense of it now and it's kinda like that race to the bottom I see sometimes mentioned here? Do I got it right?
They need to stop trying to so heavily curate what users are allowed to see in their searches. Since 2020, Google's attempts to operate as the internet's ideological censor have had a noticeable negative impact on the quality of their search results.
Archive: <https://archive.is/V0P9Z>
If I want to be a moderator, sure, some of those specifics matter because they're the "levers" I'll be operating (if they exist).

As a participant, one doesn't need to know any of that before choosing a new platform; the evidence for that is all the previous times one has participated on a platform without that knowledge (or without knowledge of how the specifics have changed over time). To a participant, the outcome is what matters, i.e. one's own participation does not feel constrained while also having the rest of the content seeming mostly devoid of spam and other undesirables.
You may want to read The Tyranny of Structurelessness [1] by feminist Jo Freeman. She explains in detail what happens when you abolish formal hierarchies. Spoiler: informal hierarchies replace them (which you do not recognize as hierarchies, but which nevertheless exist).

Psychopaths and sociopaths will always exist (barring some totalitarian mass genetic engineering project). They will always be looking to pry open the cracks in society and find an advantage. The benefit of formal power structures is not that they prevent tyranny (they don’t) but that they make it legible. A legible tyranny at least stands a chance of being held to account.

[1] https://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm
Just make sure to not call it n.
Show HN: In the next hour I will
Being a lazy college student I was having trouble keeping myself accountable on short tasks so I built a tool to fix that! Would love to have you give it a try & hear your feedback!

https://inthenexthouriwill.vercel.app/
The filter is not perfect but it does eliminate the worst offenders. For example, if something has been consumed for a really long time, then by definition it doesn't cause the sudden death of the consumer.
There had been working ternary computers made in the USSR[1] 60 years ago, though, as far as I know, they still had binary memory (2 ferrite bits were used to store each "trit") and that was quite a waste.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Setun
Every time I bring it up, people object to it, and nobody seems interested in proposing it to the Standards body.

So what is my motivation in this, if I'm unwilling to make the effort to do a formal proposal?

I know a lot about C, having implemented a C compiler from soup to nuts, and spent much of my career working with it. I have lot of experience with it, and with array overflows, both of my own doing and debugging other peoples' code.

Very high on my list of reasons to do D was fixing that problem. I (along with Jan Knepper) developed the D array scheme. It works. It works great. It nails the problem so thoroughly that buffer overflow problems in D are very rare, because there just is little to no reason to use pointers to arrays in D. (I.e. buffer overflow problems in D happen when you don't use arrays.)

Interestingly, it actually speeds up your code. How is that magic possible? It's because 0-terminated strings need to be constantly scanned to find the length, and arrays just know their length. It reduces memory consumption too! Because you can slice any string - not necessary to reallocate it.

I've seen other extensions to C to solve the array overflow problem. They're all terrible, which is why one has to bludgeon people into using them.

My proposal is simple, works, efficient, and people take to it like a duck to water.

This problem also can only be solved at the Standards level, otherwise people will not use it.

Writing an official proposal is a significant time sink, and I have enough to do working on D.
I don't get this. The Mojave desert 81,000km² according to some random page on the net. How can 20,000 panels make a dent in that? Are they building in some crucial sectors? I imagine they're building in the zones that have steady sunshine all day.
I just can’t understand someone who turns a relatively benign question into a political position rant.

It literally makes no sense unless he has mental health issues.
Correct.

Building roads to nowhere, airports that are almost not used, ports and trains that aren't used aren't beneficial. It could be usefull if a minimal of due diligence was done though, but there hasn't as far as I'm aware.

Additionally, when the local people are not hired as workers, but Chinese people are. The value of infrastructure projects and funneling back money to the local workers is greatly deminished.

Instead, infrastructure money goes straight back to the Chinese ( instead of the locals), while the country itselve has to pay the money back to the Chinese.

So China passes by the cash register 2 times.
The details are immaterial. Who stores the data at rest? If it's distributed, you have a cesspool of spam and nonsense. If it's controlled by a central authority, it's subject to the whims of that authority. If you choose a federated hub (a la Mastodon), you're stuck in your echo chamber or an empty room.

The protocol doesn't matter. Right now, those are the only three options (minus crypto) given our current technology. Without going into the technical feasibility of your solution of federated identity with distributed storage or deciding who becomes a moderator or how to avoid a bad actor spinning up thousands of servers to create millions of fake users to spam or any of the other problems, the issue is social: people choose to be in the place where the moderation is most agreeable to them, which will become the natural partition for how the users divide themselves. Whoever those moderators are responsible to (how do you get "fired"? who decides?) ultimately answers the question of centralized, federated, or distributed, and decides the implications and downsides of that approach.
I can tolerate different viewpoints on branch names and codes of conduct, but this is just an unhinged way to respond. I feel bad for everyone who has contributed to Nim and now has to live with this stain on their project
We are distrupting ecosystems but you cant destroy ecosystems. The most urbanized or polluted place on earth is still an ecosystem. It takes time for an abundance of species to emerge that can take advantage of this ecosystem, but it will emerge. Consider the rock dove, evolved to roost in the very specific environment of a rock cliff. Today, however, ecosystems have changed, cities are more or less giant artificial rock cliffs, and pigeon populations are massive in cities as a result.
The physics of light is relatively simple. Blender wants to look photorealistic, so cycles (a branched path tracer, commonly known as a ray tracer) almost perfectly models how light works. That means these emergent properties just work.

It wouldn't work under a rasteriser (Blender has one, called Eevee) as those operate using a complex series of approximations of reality that are more difficult to create but run far faster. But because Cycles (slower, but more realistic) operates by mimicking how light works this kind of thing is entirely possible.
I realy don't understand how they've gotten where they did in your first link. They claim that:

"Data from RCTs showed no consistent effects of nonnutritive sweeteners on other measures of body composition and reported no further secondary outcomes"

So let's look at the RCTs.

1. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26708700/

"NNS beverages were superior for weight loss and weight maintenance in a population consisting of regular users of NNS beverages who either maintained or discontinued consumption of these beverages and consumed water during a structured weight loss program. These results suggest that NNS beverages can be an effective tool for weight loss and maintenance within the context of a weight management program."

OK, so this found a significant benefit to NNS.

2. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26537940/

This study finds that water is superior to to NNS, but does not compare to sugar consumption, which means you can't really draw the broader conclusion that NNS are ineffective in general; they're just less effective than water alone.

3. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22301929/

OK this one is annoying because the abstract lumps water and diet beverages together, so we can't just read their conclusion. The full text is available, fortunately:

"All interventions groups showed statistically significant weight losses by 6 mo, but there were no differences between groups."

(In other words, both the diet beverage group and the water group lost about the same amount of weight.)

4. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22205311/

This study is a somewhat odd inclusion, because they're actually examining the reverse question (do sucrose sweetened drinks increase fat storage?), but anyway:

"Daily intake of SSSDs for 6 mo increases ectopic fat accumulation and lipids compared with milk, diet cola, and water. Thus, daily intake of SSSDs is likely to enhance the risk of cardiovascular and metabolic diseases."

The full text is not available for free, but it shows a massive difference in fat storage between sugar and diet drinks (and a much larger difference, in fact, than between sugar drinks and water)

5. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14693305/

"Patients took capsules containing 500 mg stevioside powder or placebo 3 times daily for 2 years."

What on Earth? Why is this study included?

6. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16775813/

"The volunteers selected in this phase were randomly assigned to receive either capsules containing placebo during 24 weeks or crude stevioside 3.75 mg/kg/day (7 weeks), 7.5 mg/kg/day (11 weeks) and 15.0 mg/kg/day (6 weeks)."

Again. Including these trials with the others is simply bizarre.

7. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9022524/

"The aspartame group lost significantly more weight overall (P = 0.028) and regained significantly less weight during maintenance and follow-up (P = 0.046) than did the no-aspartame group."

(I recommend reading the whole abstract; this one is nuanced, but it still shows a significant benefit for the aspartame group).

So what is going on with the systematic review? Why did it come to the exact opposite conclusion of all of its relevant RCTs?
These terms are often referred to as 黑话. Just fancier jargons.
> API hallucination

This term is better than anything I was able to come up with.

The ability of LLMs to make up convincing looking bullshit is remarkable.

I'll share a funny (because it's just so dead wrong) thing I had:
I was asking about a problem SnakeYAML (popular JVM YAML lib) and it suddenly started adding Jackson (JSON Object Mapper for JVM) annotations, insisting those would work. (Spoiler alert: no)
Plagiarism is a different thing.

If you hold a trademark in the US on ezInvoice, you’d contact an IP lawyer and they’d likely send them a notice and if necessary, sue them for violating your trademark.

If you don’t hold the trademark, you’re pretty much out of luck.
Show HN: Random Color Palette Generator
Why is C not an object-oriented language?
They broke it intentionally for money.

The second they paid people to game their search engine (ie adsense), the entire thing was on the road to uselessness. There always would have been that incentive, but Google turbocharged it, with $33B of incentive in 2022.
Not a lawyer but if EZInvoice not your trademark then not much you can do.
Russia is very successful in the Ukraine war against NATO ...

I don't see how one can even begin to arrive at such an assessment, considering the basic chain of events since Feb 24, 2022.
What ever happened to that demonstration he announced a while ago? Did it go according to plan?
First, I want to say I am not defending Reddit's actions over the past several months or anything Steve Huffman has done during that time. That's not what I am arguing here at all.

What I am arguing is that Reddit did have an established doctrine around subreddits. That doctrine was to give as much autonomy (and free speech) as possible to people who create subreddits. And that was intentional, not a result of lack of planning.

Until now, this has been backed up by their actions over a long timespan. There were many subreddits that Reddit allowed to exist that are almost inconceivable today and only banned after enduring long campaigns of immense public pressure. When they did ban them they changed site guidelines to reflect new rules.

I think overall, the additional content guidelines that were hammered out through this process are fair. I think content guidelines that ban content that may not be illegal but are harmful makes sense. Things like "No non consensual pornography" (aka revenge porn) and "No advocating violence towards groups of people" (no organized racism) are very reasonable.

But it also allowed for subreddits to be created that Reddit as an organization would never have thought of or been able to nourish to a point they became very large. I really think that's what Reddit's secret sauce is and has been.

Gigantic subreddits like r/IAmA, r/todayilearned, r/wholesomememes came from users and grew organically. Yes, this approach has had downsides such as the emergence of powermods and the creation of bad subreddits like r/jailbait and r/fatpeoplehate.

Because of the numerous issues I outlined above, I'm not sure Reddit would have been successfully able to implement or outline a process for keeping the magic of subreddits and a fair system that scales for removing mods and they had no incentive to try. They're going to have to try now though, because I don't think there is any coming back from this.
I can code code in C, Python, and Java. But I don't have courage to learn Lisp.
Flagged; hard paywall.

From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html

> Are paywalls ok?

>It's ok to post stories from sites with paywalls that have workarounds.