skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ask HN: How to Sell an App?
I have an AI App (available on iOS, Android, and web) that I would like to sell as I cannot work on it anymore due to personal reasons (I am/was both the founder and only developer). Is there like an Ebay for apps? Furthermore, how should I define the price?
What's unique here is that those terms are not transliterations of English terms. Which is what happens in most European languages.

I'm guessing that apart from increased phonetic distance what also matters is the size of the language, i.e. the number of speakers. With more speakers it's more likely that someone will create a neat native term for a new concept that spreads successfully, instead of adopting a foreign one.
Poland Wants to Host NATO Nukes to Counter Russia – The Drive
> Relativity does tell us the speed of time - it's the speed of light.

I forget the name of the book, but it was trying to convey intuitions about relativity (first special, then general).

It’s very easy to make the mistake of trying to understand space and time first, concepts we think we intuit, but in relativity these are somewhat higher-level concepts. Instead, start with what the most fundamental part of the theory and go from there: the speed of light is constant. Accept that first. It’s the comfort zone. You can always return safely to this point.

So, when moving to space and time, the book explained it like this: everything moves at the speed of light, at all times. It’s just that instead of x,y,z – we add t, time, as well. So for an object that’s still, all it’s movement is through the time dimension. Conversely, an object that moves incredibly fast, like a photon, already “used” it’s speed in the spatial dimensions, so it doesn’t “age” in terms of time.

This is just special relativity, but I liked this approach. It’s basically embracing the theory first instead of trying to shoehorn it into the world we have so many misconceptions about.
I disagree fully. Putting a made up number is not brave, just... foolish.

A number always includes "precision": if I say 60% chance, I am suggesting that it's between 55% and 65% (or 50%-70%, depending on how you read significant digits). If I say 63%, it signals that I am pretty certain it's in the 62.5%-63.5% range.

Sure, even this is sometimes not enough (60% can also be more precise at 59.5%-60.5%), but how many significant digits you use gives you a default error bar too!

When we use words like probable and improbable, we have very large error bars. And yes, they are not symmetric, and that's fine too.

The article is right that we use this type of language because we don't know actual probabilities, but that's exactly why we don't put numbers on them.

There is nothing brave in saying "70-80%" instead of "probable" when that probability is 70%±50% (iow, we might be totally wrong that this is probable; obviously, can't go higher than 1 :).
Assuming you know the domain that usually gives you the result you’re looking for, I would just search <IMAGE ID> site:name.domain
Show HN: Project S.A.T.U.R.D.A.Y. – open-source, self hosted, J.A.R.V.I.S.
Welcome to Project S.A.T.U.R.D.A.Y. This is a project that allows anyone to easily build their own self-hosted J.A.R.V.I.S-like voice assistant. In my mind vocal computing is the future of human-computer interaction and by open sourcing this code I hope to expedite us on that path.

I have had a blast working on this so far and I'm excited to continue to build with it. It uses whisper.cpp [1], Coqui TTS [2] and OpenAI [3] to do speech-to-text, text-to-text and text-to-speech inference all 100% locally (except for text-to-text). In the future I plan to swap out OpenAI for llama.cpp [4]. It is built on top of WebRTC as the media transmission layer which will allow this technology to be deployed anywhere as it does not rely on any native or 3rd party APIs.

The purpose of this project is to be a toolbox for vocal computing. It provides high-level abstractions for dealing with speech-to-text, text-to-text and text-to-speech tasks. The tools remain decoupled from underlying AI models allowing for quick and easy upgrades when new technology is realeased. The main demo for this project is a J.A.R.V.I.S-like assistant however this is meant to be used for a wide variety of use cases.

In the coming months I plan to continue to build (hopefully with some of you) on top of this project in order to refine the abstraction level and better understand the kinds of tools required. I hope to build a community of like-minded individuals who want to see J.A.R.V.I.S finally come to life! If you are interested in vocal computing come join the Discord server and build with us! Hope to see you there :)

Video demo: https://youtu.be/xqEQSw2Wq54

[1] whisper.cpp: https://github.com/ggerganov/whisper.cpp

[2] Coqui TTS: https://github.com/coqui-ai/TTS

[3] OpenAI: https://openai.com/

[4] llama.cpp: https://github.com/ggerganov/llama.cpp
Can you elaborate? How does this lead to a leap second bug? Would a string really say "60" as the number of seconds, somehow, due to leap seconds?
That trick requires a very rare butterfly or something, which is another way of saying that it doesn't work while there are still 99.9% unaffected areas. It only works when most habitats have been ruined already, thereby making the species very rare.
Nobody was talking about "social evil". But it's plainly the root of much economic inequality, which is the topic.

Separate questions:

(1) Should we accept some level of economic inequality in society?

(2) Are the wealthy more "deserving" of their wealth than the non-wealthy?

It's perfectly consistent to answer (1) Yes and (2) No to those questions.

Capitalism is an economic system, not an ethical system. The "invisible hand of the market" is not God handing out rewards and punishment, though some people seem to believe that.
The first thing I thought too, second thing was "wow, people love notes"
In this instance, it would be more than "look and feel" and more "would a person assume this project is done by the original Factorio developers" — are they misleading the audience. They copied much of the UI from the Factorio site for instance — so if they wanted you could make the argument the intent is to mislead.
I am a big fan of Chromebooks. Cheap, good security, and Linux container support can be very handy to have.

I have a big investment in Apple gear and a few Linux laptops, but I often travel with and otherwise enjoy using my cheap little Lenovo Chromebook.

I really appreciate what both Google and Apple do for security. If a Chromebook fails a system checksum while booting, it refreshes the OS. Apple provides the very nice Lockdown mode on iOS and iPadOS which I always have enabled.

I no longer really trust my Linux laptops, security wise. I keep no private information on them, just public open source stuff I work on. I keep no personal info on my Linux laptops.
You're confusing two unrelated situations.

Companies that dramatically underpay are often out of touch. So naturally they expect more effort than their already out of touch compensation would indicate.

But in companies with competitive comp, you almost certainly will be expected to meet a higher bar after negotiating a higher salary.

Once you argue for a higher salary than "the other guy" the implication is you can deliver more value. People don't just forget that on your start date.
I've skimmed through the Landau books and while they are technically excellent, they lack a sense of feeling and motivation which makes it hard to self study from. It felt like a slog across random topics with no application
Not very significant. Linux gamers represent 1.5% of the market share, 40% of them are steam deck users, which use AMD components. But the steam deck is closer to a game console, people don't really chose the hardware and OS, they buy a pre-built system, and who care what's inside if it can play games well. It is more hackable than a Nintendo, but hackers are, I think, a minority.

If you remove the steam decks, AMD market share goes down to 50%, similar to their Windows counterparts.
This video helped me understand more about what is going on with this project: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ld87FNygymw

Polycentric is another post-Scuttlebot app with a slightly different take on message replication.
I think this is because of a misalignment that is even common in plenty of other subjects as well. You know how once you've gained expertise in something that it is difficult to explain because it is so obvious? Kinda what is happening in education. Let me explain.

The reason a lot of the theoretical basis is taught is because you need to get the skills to learn why things work, when to use them, when they fail, when not to use them, and __most importantly__ their limitations. The problem is, most of this isn't explained explicitly. Maybe just this process happening for a few decades and momentum. Or that teaching isn't a priority and so no one tries to fix it. (there are exceptions to this. You've all probably met professors that are outstanding and make boring things seem fascinating)

But what you're talking about is part of this "when to use, what to use" part. It is also why those classes are so boring, because they aren't properly motivated. But it is also why we're running into so many problems: because evaluation is fucking hard. You see models perform really well on research papers but not in the real world but you'll also see researchers evaluating papers purely on singular benchmarks. "In reality" you're forced to come to terms with the limitations of the limitations of datasets, as datasets are just proxies and what you are about is the actual generalization. But if we're not discussing and evaluating on actual generalization in research then we get this dichotomy.

There's definitely more efficient (tractable) posterior estimators that work at large scale but just a lot of stuff isn't really known unless you're in that niche yourself. Statistics is often taught from the reference of "here's a bunch of tools and when to use them" rather than "here's the problems, our assumptions, and the main tool we use to solve them. It looks different in different settings, but they are actually the same thing." So it is kinda problematic, but then again, to get there requires a lot more work and most people aren't going to bother with things like metric theory. So a middle ground approach is taken and it gets jumbled.
Try to use yandex instead, it is order of magnitude ahead of google when it comes to image search. Edit: sorry I was convinced you are searching by image, not image id.
Fibers is probably used more in the Guile community these days

https://github.com/wingo/fibers
I can't code in anything, and I'm using Emacs since a couple of years, know some basic Elisp, and have recently started doing Common Lisp. Still baby steps, but it's really very fun, and I don't find it so hard.

Doing the book "Gentle Introduction to Symbolic Computation" at the moment, it's lovely.

So that's all I wanted to say - there's no courage required. Just doing. Emacs is a joy, and there's no rush on these things.
How does it work logistically? Do you have a chest freezer in your garage?
Redhat should have stopped rebuilders seven years ago, when many large enterprises signed up site-wide contracts with Oracle. Maybe, they want to keep the EL ecosystem grow, then cut it off.
The first source (which you're citing for the volume number) warns against making this sort of volume estimate and inferring differences between men and women hunting, in part because of the small sample size of women hunters and because women tended to hunt in pooled/group settings.

The pooled/group setting difference is something that the original paper also calls out.
I realized that you are assuming we can properly attribute carbon with a carbon tax. I think this would be a hard problem for the IRS and they would be much better able to associate wealth to folks using a wealth tax. You have to directly tax what you want to discourage. Indirect almost never works unless you have a strong understanding of the system.
Thank you for sharing this! I don't know how I'd missed this resource until now. Brilliant stuff, cheers, I'll be going through some of these tutorials.
Flameshot is the thing I was looking for! I'll dive into the source code to see if I can find my way around and learn anything.
If you choose to only talk to like-minded people, that is your right, as it should be. And might well be one of the reasons most people aren't on Twitter, and many who are subscribe to extensive block lists.
> especially since it seems like Musk is angling to run for president

Elon Musk is not eligible to become president as he's not a "natural born citizen" to the USA.
> The remodelling process was a lot of fun, but next time we should really ask for the original Factorio models to preserve what’s left of our sanity.

Some tools are a lot better-- Substance 3D for texturing, for example, especially if you can get their auto UVing to make something acceptable-- but fundamentally most straight-up 3D modelling tools are roughly what they were a while ago. The screenshot of their model seems to have tight topology, too, so I'll bet it was pretty labor intensive.
I use https://www.pingproxies.com/isp which is like $3/IP/month and unlimited bandwidth (I assume if you used a ridiculous amount they might charge you). Luminati pricing is extortionate. I have no idea how anyone doing anything at scale can afford $10/GB. I haven't investigated but I don't know if Twitter limits are per account or per IP.
It’s weird all of these fringe legal theories are coming out now in response to “AI”, which isn’t much more than a fancy search engine.

No one was asking those questions when the backbone of any modern tech company was, ironically, thousands of copy/pasted lines of code from StackOverflow and any other references that come up in a Google search. The number of SDE’s I know who can write code without a web browser is vanishingly small.
Aquiered taste plays a role
Ah.

Finally, things are starting to get serious.

I am ready to get proofs of "beyond-human" size, and correct.

I wonder how they will "attach" the formal solver to the neural net and how they will train it before submitting real conjectures.

The scary part: true conjectures which cannot be axiomatically solved.
I'm seeing an uptick of public interest in UFOs in my channels. I'm guessing it was sparked by Tucker Carlson talking about UFO coverups during one of his recent Twitter shows.
There was once the Salmon protocol for enabling replies and comments swimming upstream. Salmon was part of the OStatus protocol which evolved into ActivityPub today.
> People with high-paying careers rarely choose to radically reduce their work hours after achieving financial security.

Do you have any data to support that? I'd actually expect them to fully retire in their fourties or fifties, once they no longer need more money.
Google has lots of smart employees, why can't they just "fix" search?
They're basically saying that social inequality is not the sum total of rich people having made good decisions and poor people having made poor decisions. As an individual, it is possible to make savvy decisions that raise your circumstances; however, as a society-level phenomenon, it's incorrect to say that poor people are only poor because they screwed up. As an extreme hypothetical, consider a system where

1) Your annual income is determined by making one specific, arbitrary decision

2) It is possible to be observant enough to make the decision intelligently, but most are not able to perceive the clue clearly and must guess; this is reflected in an outcome distribution that skews towards a preponderance of incorrect answers

3) Making the decision correctly nets you $1 mil; incorrectly, $1,000

4) There are no other opportunities to make money

The inequality present in this system is largely a function of the magnitude of the spoils/demerits for being correct/incorrect, not the distribution of correct/incorrect answers.
Entropy is very much "real" and it exists outside of our mind. The resolution to Maxwell's demon is that knowledge of every particle's state is not free, you need to increase the system's entropy by obtaining knowledge more than you can ever eliminate by opening chamber doors.

If it only existed in our minds and not in physical reality that would mean it would be possible to construct a device that decreases global entropy on average.
Kindness starts by not immediately assuming the motivations of others to be malicious, and to understand why someone else would perform their actions. Here, it's very clear from how all paths are laid out that sending messages to you early even if you won't act on them is only ever a net-benefit if you remove your ego from the equation. Soothing fragile minds and compromise aren't the same thing.
Google's Search is dying because of Thousands of self-inflicted cuts.
A couple of years ago there were about 3 or clearly marked ads on the first page, followed by generally useful results.
Right now, I don't have the patience to scroll past the ads which are almost indistinguishable from useful links.
The human body is so amazing... It evolved to ship ready-made replacement parts to ensure the product would complete its deployment (reaching puberty and reproducing for a decade or two).
That certainly helps in eliminating some hard-to-control-for variables (like how much work time you will really have, as in what things will pop up that need urgent attention), and it also gives you "error bars" by default (4 days means 3-5 days), but lots of projects involve a bunch of unknowns, making them impossible to estimate with any sort of precision before you actually dive into them.

As with anything, estimations should be iteratively improved, but usually nobody bothers ;)
You could say that google started it. They ate everyone's lunch by including what people were looking for in a box at the top of the search results. Of course sites will respond in kind.
I always have a feeling they could get surprisingly far by having one person doing random searches, then tagging all the obvious spam to be deindexed. But Google is very adamant about never hiring a person to do a job well, if AI can be trained to do the same job badly
He probably just accepts any call he gets from media.
The dotcom boom happened just fine even though open source adoption by businesses was pretty limited at the time. Big tech can afford to pay for software or build their own because they're big; they just like using FOSS because it saves them money.
"these people" i mean yeah if you are going to reason with an imaginary monolith, then yes you will find it impossible
* Context: const and compile-time constants

Constructs fully determined at compile time have some benefits.
But const in C is weaker than constexpr that C++ has.

As prog-fh summarizes on
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/66144082/why-does-gcc-cl...

> "The const means « I swear that I won't change the value of this variable » (or the compiler will remind me!). But it does not mean that it could not change by another mean I don't see in this compilation unit; thus this is not exactly a constant."

One example of invalid C:

const int mysize = 2;
const int myarray[mysize];

gcc: error: variably modified ‘myarray’ at file scope

clang: warning: variable length array folded to constant array as an extension [-Wgnu-folding-constant]
const int myarray[mysize];

* Good news: C can do compile time constant structs and array with deep self-references.

Yes, in C you can define and fully declare complex data structures that are accepted as compile-time constants, including pointers to parts of itself.

See "self-contained, statically allocated, totally const data structure with backward and forward references (pointers)?" for a previous example at https://stackoverflow.com/questions/47037701/can-c-syntax-de...

-----------------

I used this for a game on a retro machine where such a data structure avoids code which would have been several times (perhaps 10 times) bigger: https://github.com/cpcitor/color-flood-for-amstrad-cpc/blob/...

Here's another take showing two variants: where overall construct is an array then a struct: https://gist.github.com/fidergo-stephane-gourichon/792c194e1...
One of the applications I used to use on a daily was Google Reader. Then one day, they just shut it down for no apparent reason, and that was that. They don't seem to be focused on customer satisfaction. Hard to understand.
It isn't a real problem. Blender supports only little-endian targets and the code byte swaps data files as needed. I guess someone could port it to AIX, z/OS, or Linux/zSeries, but that's unlikely at best.
Mastodon instances tend to have admins who are if anything pretty loud and argumentative about what their mod policies are. If that matters to you, you can easily find instances that make a point of being open about what they block. A whole lot of people don't care about the how or why as long as they're not subjected to content they don't want to see, and that's their choice.
As of 2006 (when I left the legal tech world), the transition to Word was already well underway. Law firms hated it, but like everywhere else it was becoming The Way. And before Word, there were no "obscure" versions of WordPerfect; it was very widely used, in and out of the legal industry.

Everyone loved WordPerfect because of its ability to tune the final output. Formatting requirements for some court filings are very specific. Back in the day, it was like "12 point Courier, double spaced, no more than 50 pages in length" for appellate briefs (that's from memory, may not match the actual situation at the time) and it was important that an electronically transmitted document look alike on every machine, something that's virtually impossible to guarantee with Word.

This was in the day before print-to-PDF drivers were available, and no one was going to buy Adobe Acrobat licenses for every attorney, paralegal, secretary and word processor in the firm. Wordperfect was well-loved for a reason.
It is a sad state of affairs that in general, the humanities have less robust knowledge about the world, yet make more noise than scientists, who have more constructive knowledge, but are not understood by the general public.

The net effect is that the public is almost always terribly misinformed.
That Russian would conclude that Ukraine is mostly fake.

If they have the social and political awareness of a 12 year-old, perhaps.

Nobody actually talks in Ukrainian around them.

Absolutely not true for (and a very weird thing to say about) Kyiv.

In Odesa/Kharkiv Russian is clearly dominant, but it's not like you'll never hear Ukrainian spoken.
You may be interested to know that the Ceylon language has this (or had something very similar, I’ve not actually used it myself)
I think the most unintuitive even unsettling aspect of entropy is that the entropy of black holes is proportional to their surface area, not their volume [0]. That is only briefly mentioned in the video and not discussed any further.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_principle#Black_ho...
An unconditional one is but selectivity and reversibility is the key. Nothing makes that unachievable, just more complicated.

Teeth growth is a good target for such experimentation. Given its relatively easily operable nature allowing convenient observation of progress and intervention if needed.

We already can accelerate the regrowth of fingernails after losing one. This is the next easiest target if you ask me.
Lemmy's down ATM
>AMD represents everything wholesome and good about computing

Must be an opinion of someone who has never had to deal with AMD customer support.
My understanding is that the purpose of biters is to prevent you from building too big too fast and also as a resource sink to get rid of excess iron. There is a FFF they wrote about it and Katherine of Sky has a great video about why you should bet biters IIRC because she was against them when they got buffed as well but changed her tune. I can't seem to find either though.